Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NEWSROOM

Saying Farewell to Michael Jackson; America's 'Other' Drug Problem; Michael Jackson's Will; Governor Sanford on the Ropes; 'Newsweek' Correspondent Held in Iran

Aired July 1, 2009 - 15:00   ET

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


(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: Is there such a thing as being too honest, like calling your mistress your soul mate?

GOV. MARK SANFORD (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: ... which started out as a dear, dear friend from Argentina.

SANCHEZ: How is that going over with Governor Sanford's staff? How about his wife?

What's making news on your national conversation for Wednesday, July 1, 2009, begins right now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: And hello again, everybody. I am Rick Sanchez.

Got a lot of moving parts that are going on right now. But let me -- let me get you started with what we call the next generation of news, because this really is a conversation. It is not a speech. And it is your turn to get involved.

In fact, which are going to need you, as we get through all this information coming in to us. The public farewell to Michael Jackson, let's start there. You had better believe that this won't be your typical celebrity funeral. Think maybe Princess Diana. Think head of state, because they could be analogous in this case.

Now, the pictures you are looking at now, three hours from Los Angeles, way out in the mountains, but that's the main gate right there to Jackson's Neverland Ranch. Now, from what we understand or at least in this picture that you are looking at now, things are calm.

It may not be so calm if you were actually looking at a live picture right now, because media hordes, members of live trucks, as we often call them, those who show up to get their shot in place before something happens, are actually lining the road leading there in case -- now, this is the tricky part about this explanation -- in case there actually is a memorial service there.

The location for the service has not been etched in stone. You had heard reports yesterday that it was going to happen Friday and that it was probably going to happen at the Neverland Ranch. Now, we understand that that may change. And we are going to take you through all this information, because, literally, it is coming into us as we are bringing it to you.

But there is something else I have got to tell you about, another business that needed to be settled today, this having to do with his estate is, his money, and the custody of his children and the piece of paper that nobody was sure even existed, the will.

In fact, shoot me here, if you can. I want to show you what we are talking about here. This is it. Look at these initials over here. You see that? You see that, "M.J."? "Michael Jackson," "Michael Jackson," "Michael Jackson." He has signed off on this will or supposed will as we know it.

There is his signature. It is the last piece of information that has come to us.

Back to me, if we can.

Susan Roesgen has been following the story all throughout.

Susan, is this the will? And what does it reveal?

SUSAN ROESGEN, GENERAL ASSIGNMENT CORRESPONDENT: Well, we believe it is the will. We believe it is an actual will that Michael Jackson wrote back in 2002. And, really, Rick, it -- it leaves out more than it tells you.

It is short and sweet for everybody but one person, Michael Jackson's former wife. Michael Jackson says in here specifically, and I am reading here: "I have intentionally omitted to provide for my former wife Deborah Rowe Jackson." So, she is out apparently, cut out of this.

Who is in? His mother. He says that he nominates his mother, Katherine Jackson, to get custody of his three children. And if she can't do it, Rick, if she should die before him or be now unable or unwilling to carry out the duties of guardian, he wanted Diana Ross to be his children's guardian. We haven't had any public comment from her yet on what she thinks about that.

But, Rick, here is the $500 million question. At the time that this will was written, the executors write in hire that Michael Jackson's estate is believed to be in excess of $500 million. In fact, they say in the will that they are not even sure how much is in there, just more than $500 million.

And all of that, all of that, Rick, is supposed to go to something that they call in this will the Michael Jackson trust. However, we don't have the Michael Jackson trust documents. Those have not been filed. So, we are not sure really how it is all going to shake out.

We expect, of course, that most of his assets, if not all, would go to the children. But some could go to charity. He gave a lot to charity and again apparently nothing to ex-wife and the mother of two of his children, Deborah Rowe Jackson -- Rick.

SANCHEZ: But there are so many reports going around, some of them confirmed, some of them unconfirmed, about the mother's apparent ability, or who had said something about being with Michael Jackson in the past or not being with Michael Jackson, that she was the mother or that she had given over the rights of the mother, that -- for example, I had also heard yesterday that Michael Jackson, in fact, never adopted these children.

And then there is the birth certificates that come into play. Now, the reason I mentioned all those things is to ask you this. If this will is proven to be legitimate, does it supersede all those other things that I just mentioned?

ROESGEN: Supersede perhaps, but that doesn't mean there is not going to be a court fight, Rick. Listen, there is somebody else in this picture now.

Did you know that Michael Jackson had a secret wife? At least one secret wife now has come forward. She is now contesting the will. Her name is Nona Paris Lola Ankhesenamun Jackson. Apparently, Jackson watchers are familiar with her because she said in the past that she was Michael Jackson's secret wife, his great love. And she says she is the mother of his three children, and she wants custody.

So, I guess what I'm saying, Rick, is, frivolous or not, credible or not, these claims are going to start coming up, probably too many to keep count of, in the next few days.

SANCHEZ: That was one mouthful that you just gave us moments ago. Who was that? And that's the first time I have heard of this.

So, I am going to ask you for my benefit and maybe for the benefit of some of the viewers out there, tell us again who she is and what she says she is.

ROESGEN: OK. It's a long name. Here we go, Nona Paris Lola Ankhesenamun Jackson -- it's like Tutankhamen, an Egyptian name -- Jackson, N.P.L.A. Jackson vs. Michael Jackson.

She has filed this, an ex parte filing, which means that the other person doesn't have to appeal, which in this case of course he can't, Michael Jackson is deceased. And she is saying in these court papers that she was his secret wife, that she's from London, that she's an African-American Jew living in Britain, and that she was the secret wife of Michael Jackson and the secret mother of his three children and she wants custody.

(CROSSTALK)

ROESGEN: Again, Rick, that's just one. There's probably going to be many, many more people coming forward to contest the will.

SANCHEZ: But there -- I am only asking because I imagine you have probably thought about the same thing. Is there anything that documents this story that she is putting out there or is she just one of the many people who may come out of the woodwork and say that they had some kind of tie, some kind of link to Michael Jackson?

ROESGEN: Well, believe it or not, in years past, she had made two attempts in court, and both were thrown out.

But, in 2006, a judge told her, hey, come back with some more evidence. I will hear some more evidence. If you have got it, bring it back. So, we will see what she has got to give.

Rick, in all this, I think one thing to keep in mind is, Michael Jackson himself and his frame of mind in 2002, we can't know what it was then. But you mentioned, is there going to be a memorial service in Neverland?

SANCHEZ: Yes.

ROESGEN: What's happening here behind me where the family is in Encino? What are they deciding to do? What's going to happen?

In this will, Michael Jackson did not say what he wanted to have happened to his body, and he didn't say what kind of funeral he would like to have. And perhaps if he had that would have solved a lot of the logistical struggles that are going on right now, thinking, will it be in Neverland, 150 miles from here? Will it be here? Will there be 30 cars in a motorcade? Will the whole world descend on this because rural area around Neverland Ranch? We just don't know yet.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

By the way, before we let our viewers go, let's go ahead and give them -- show them this one what appears to be a very crucial part of this. Can you go in a little tighter on this so they can see it? Angie, can you see that?

All right, "If any of my children are minors at the time of my death, I nominate my mother, Katherine Jackson, as guardian of the persons and estates of such minor children. If Katherine Jackson fails to survive me or is unable or unwilling to act as a guardian, I nominate Diana Ross, Diana Ross, as guardian and persons and estate of such minor children."

Interesting that he put Diana Ross above Joe Jackson, his father. A lot of interesting developments coming out of this story. And we are so happy we had Susan Roesgen to take us through some of these new details she just shared with us.

Susan, we will be checking back. Thanks again.

All right, this is every publicist's worst nightmare. South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford just might be too honest. How else to explain calling your mistress your soul mate?

And then again Michael Jackson fans will get a chance to say farewell. But we're going to have the details on what seems to be a changing scenario right now. Will it be in L.A. or will it be at Neverland? We are sorting through that for you. We will be right back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: You heard right here while in fact I was gone and Ali Velshi was at the helm comments made by Joe Jackson about a record company and giving interviews while being asked questions about his son. That has not sat well with many of our viewers.

In fact, let me take you to the Twitter board if we possibly can. It's part of the story that really has become a part of the national conversation.

"Don't think it is the least surprising Joe Jackson is not in the will. Why should he be? He was an ogre in life and now in death" -- part of the conversation that we're getting from so many people who are watching this story.

ConHake says: "The M.J." -- just beneath that, Johnny -- "The M.J. circus needs to get some more tents."

And we continue on, someone saying, they are glad to see me here.

And this one says: "Enough Michael Jackson, Diana Ross. Be a newsman. What about health care, Lieutenant Dan, people being killed in Iraq?"

This is interesting that so many viewers now watching the story about Michael Jackson are reacting to some of the other stories that are going on. We do have this one, though, on MySpace as well. Let's go to that before we close.

"Anyone who knows what happened with Charlie "Yardbird" Parker can see what is happening with M.J. Yes, there are going to be wives and G.F.s coming out of the woodwork claiming to be in line for the will."

And as they do, we will follow them, if legitimate.

All right, let's talk about this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: People were crying out and people were crying out in pain.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Pushing, shoving and pepper spray? It is a Democratic candidate who says this is politically motivated, what happened to her. This is a crazy story that could have a cop in big trouble. We are going to take you through what he did or is alleged to have done.

And what are the people who live around the Neverland Ranch saying about masses coming their way for a public viewing? You are about to find out. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) SANCHEZ: All right. As we welcome you back, I want you once again take a look at this peaceful and quiet scene or at least the way it looks there right now, the front gate and the flowery memorial to Michael Jackson and his Neverland Ranch in Los Olivos, California.

It's a bit unclear today though as to whether the ranch will be the setting for a public viewing or some other type of remembrance service. It was tentatively set for Friday. There is new information coming in now. And it really is turning in to a bit of a who knows.

"The Los Angeles Times" is reporting now that the public remembrance might not happen there at the Neverland Ranch after all. We are getting information now that it will most likely now happen at the Staples Center in L.A. and not at the Neverland Ranch, which is really strange, when you consider that there are already people, according to many reports, heading toward the Neverland Ranch and people even getting campsites there because they want to be there before the throngs show up.

This ranch, by the way, is more than 100 miles from L.A. It is a bit of a trek. It is on some very narrow mountain roads to Santa Barbara County. Can you imagine thousands on top of thousands of fans making the trip, not to mention the well-heeled residents who live there who are not happy about the idea of having those folks there to begin with?

Bottom line is the Michael Jackson service, exactly where and when, not known right now. The latest information we have is that the information about it being at the Neverland Ranch may now have changed and that it might be taking place at the Staples Center Friday.

We have reporters, as you might imagine, in California asking a lot of questions of both the family and officials there, none of which seem to have made up their minds yet as to how exactly this is going to take place. As soon as we have any of these answers nailed down, we will share them with you.

All right, let me stop right now and ask you a very serious question. Do you really think that Michael Jackson is the only person who may have been addicted to prescription drugs? This is important for a lot of Americans, because it is something that often gets ignored. We think about alcoholism and elicit drug abuse, but what about this?

Well, you are going to be hearing from somebody who knows exactly what Jackson may have been going through, because he has been there, himself.

Stay with us. That's coming forth.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hey, Rick, this is Dawn (ph) from Atlanta. Welcome back.

One question: Why doesn't the Jackson family have the funeral in downtown L.A.? Couldn't the city and state use the funds it would generate? And, also, it would be more convenient for those who wanted to attend.

Thank you. Bye.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: It's up 77. There is the Big Board. We will continue to watch it for you.

Welcome back. I am Rick Sanchez here in the world headquarters of CNN.

If you think for one minute that Michael Jackson's alleged addiction to painkillers and sleeping pills is confined to us just superstars, like Michael Jackson and maybe some others in Hollywood, well, let me share something with you. You are wrong.

The Office of National Drug Control Policy says prescription medications are the second most commonly abused category of drugs in the United States. This is important.

I want you to meet somebody right now. You see this fellow right here? His name is Ramsy Darwish. He is a recovering drug addict who got hooked on pain pills for years after a car accident. We are also going to have backing him up Dr. Kent Robertshaw. He's joining us from New York City. He's a psychiatrist and an addiction treatment specialist.

It's interesting. I don't believe that this gets talked about enough in the United States, because we hear about drug addicts, the kinds that do cocaine or heroin, elicit drugs, whatever that might be. And we hear about alcoholics. But we don't seem to put these people in the similar category.

And I want to talk about that.

Ramsy, let's start with you. These stories, confirmed or unconfirmed, about Michael Jackson, being at times desperate for painkillers and sleeping pills, we have heard it throughout his career. But now some are coming out perhaps more dramatized. Does it ring true to you after what you experienced?

RAMSY DARWISH, RECOVERING DRUG ADDICT: Absolutely.

Once you become addicted to like pain pills and that sort of thing, it is really a necessity that you need on a daily basis. It's -- your life basically resolves around the prescription drug. You wouldn't want to -- you're not active with people or aren't really motivated enough to go out into society.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: But here is what most of us wouldn't understand who maybe haven't experienced something like this.

DARWISH: Right.

SANCHEZ: If it was given to you for a specific reason by a doctor and it said there for headaches or for your operation or for pain, when the pain or the operation is dealt with and it goes away, why are you still taking them?

DARWISH: Well, I think that some people may have past issues or...

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: Why did you take them?

DARWISH: Well, prior to taking prescription drugs, I also smoked marijuana and did that sort of thing, even before that. And then, once I took the pain pills, it was actually for a pain that I had, but it helped me deal with more than just the pain.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: Like what? What could -- obviously, it is altering your state to a point where you are not really yourself. Why did you keep taking them? What was it doing for you that was so attractive?

DARWISH: Well, it helps you deal with certain pains, like, if a person goes through emotional pains younger in life. From what I understand, a lot of people do go through abuse issues or that sort of thing. And when you take a pain pill or any kind of narcotic or drug in that case...

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: So, let me just stop you, because I just heard you say, when you take a painkiller or any other kind of narcotic.

To you, this was no different than doing a drug, the kind of drug you find in alleys, or getting drunk, right?

DARWISH: Right, right.

SANCHEZ: You are using it for that purpose?

DARWISH: Right.

There is always an underlying issue most of the time that I could tell you from the people I was involved with that did the same things that I did. There is always -- there is always a root cause to it, whether it is an emotional thing or a physical thing or something.

SANCHEZ: That's amazing. And, you know, we really thank you for sharing the story. I don't think there is enough people out there who are talking about this.

Doctor, I want to bring you in. How prevalent is this? DR. KENT ROBERTSHAW, ADDICTION SPECIALIST: Well, as your report says, it's the number-two misused substance in America, after alcohol. So, it's rampant. It includes painkillers, tranquilizers, ADHD medications like Ritalin. They are all being misused by kids in high school and college. And we run into problems all the time.

SANCHEZ: Are we becoming more and more a drug-induced society, and why?

ROBERTSHAW: Well, I think, in the last 10 years, if we are talking about pain medication, there has definitely been a pendulum that's been swinging towards given chronic narcotics.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

ROBERTSHAW: Now, again, these medications are really no different than heroin. OxyContin, Democrat, they're in the same category as heroin.

They're highly euphoric. They are very amusable. And people now give them for chronic pain in a way they didn't in the past. And once people are on these medications, they become physically dependent on them. So, it's very hard to come on. And then it is also less effective.

And, yes, they do cause a certain euphoria that is very gratifying, that some people take more and more to get the more of the euphoric feeling.

SANCHEZ: But hold on a minute. Here is what is different about this I think. And either one of you who wants to jump in. We do countless stories on people who are busted for drugs, even something like marijuana. We do countless stories on people who are busted for alcohol-related crimes.

But we really rarely do stories on people who are busted for this. And yet, I am hearing both of you say, there is no differences between this and that. Why?

DARWISH: Well, I mean, what I would say is, one is legal, a prescription, and one is not. Just like the doctor just said, I mean, from what I have seen with people like, for example, OxyContin, let's just use that as an example.

People addicted to that, what I have seen from the people that I was involved with is a lot of people will turn to heroin or other street drugs, just because it is cheaper than the prescription drug. But I would have to say probably why you don't hear about it much is because people are legitimately prescribed it for some sort of reason.

SANCHEZ: It starts out with a legitimate prescription, but I imagine toward the middle or somewhere toward the end, there has got to be other ways of getting these drugs. Or are there doctors out there who are giving this to their patients knowing that they are hooked?

And isn't that a bad thing, Doctor?

ROBERTSHAW: Well, I think that that's really where there needs to be education, because I think there is a feeling just because the doctor is prescribing the medication, it is being prescribed appropriately for a certain amount of pain that the person is having.

Now, again, people can be very manipulative or not even realize how much they really enjoy the mood-altering effect of it, so that they want more and more. So, again, the idea that just because a doctor is prescribing it means the person is not running into trouble with the prescription is why we don't hear much about it.

SANCHEZ: What are the signs? I am thinking that there are people who are watching us right now who probably know someone in their family who has been perhaps involved in something like this or has been looking really different, glazy-eyed.

In fact, I have kind of had some experience with this in my own family and it was a pretty negative result in the end. How can we help others to help family members? Because I know it is a very sensitive issue. And for most families, it is very much a secret, isn't it?

ROBERTSHAW: Yes, I think that -- again that there must have been a whole group of people around Michael Jackson who may have had concerns who didn't say anything, that it is very important I think if you see a change in behavior or if people are isolating, they are not their normal behavior, and to just not certainly take their word that they are being prescribed these meds by a doctor and it must be OK, to have a certain awareness that there are many doctors that...

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: But is it obvious? I mean, would you be able to look at somebody a couple of times and say, that guy is on something?

ROBERTSHAW: Oh, absolutely not.

I think that the truth is that there's a lot of -- I think of Rush Limbaugh. There's people who are functioning sometimes at a very high level, and Kitty Dukakis being another one that comes to mind that was highly addicted and yet you find out afterward when they -- after they were functioning, that they were abusing substances.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: But you should confront -- your advice, medical advice, would be, if you can determine that it is true that they are hooked on this stuff, both of you, I imagine, would say, confront them, do something about them before it is too late?

DARWISH: Right, just like my family did.

SANCHEZ: Good for them.

My thanks to both of you for talking to us about this. I think this is a really important story that we are going to continue to follow up on. Thanks again.

DARWISH: Thank you.

ROBERTSHAW: You are welcome.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JENNY SANFORD, WIFE OF SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR MARK SANFORD: His career is not a concern of mine. He's going to have to worry about that. I'm worried about my family and the character of my children.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: What a story this is. That's Jenny Sanford, who is married so South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, who says that his mistress is his -- You ready? -- soul mate. How do you think that is going over with the Mrs.? We will report.

Also, the Michael Jackson will, we have got the details. Don Lemon is going to be joining me live next for the update on that. Stay with us. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back.

We've been talking about the big story coming out just a few hours ago. You expected that today, there would be some confirmation of this will, 2002 will from Michael Jackson. I have it over here somewhere.

Johnny (ph), can you shoot it from there? Want to walk around?

All right. While you walk around, I'll stay on this camera. Here it is, because Don Lemon is going to be joining us now to take us through this.

And I think the significant part of the story is, not so much that the will is out, because we reported yesterday that it might be out, but that it has been confirmed by the courts in Los Angeles County.

Here it is.

Are you looking at it now, Johnny (ph)?

All right. There's Michael Jackson's signature right there. There is really the most important part of the story.

"If any of my children are minors at the time of my death, I nominate my mother, Katherine Jackson, as guardian of the persons and estates of such minor children. If Katherine Jackson fails to survive me or is unable or unwilling to act as a guardian, I nominate Diana Ross as guardian of the persons and estates of such minor children."

And there you see Michael Jackson's signature, as so confirmed today by officials in Los Angeles.

Let's go now to Don Lemon, who is joining us with more on this story.

Don, what are you finding out?

DON LEMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think it's interesting, Rick, I do have to say. The whole Diana Ross thing is interesting.

Here's the most important part. This is the most important part of this will. John Branca and John McClain are executors of Michael Jackson's will. His assets, every single thing he owns, even his earnings and perpetuity, are owned by these guys.

SANCHEZ: And why is that important? Aren't they just lawyers? Isn't that normal?

LEMON: No. No. They get everything. They get to decide everything.

It doesn't mean that his mom is going to get the money, anyone in his family, that the children get the money. They get to decide where the money goes.

They can reinvest his money. They can reinvest his investments. They can do whatever they want with it. That's why that is the most important thing in this will.

Because everyone -- it had been reported that Michael Jackson -- the will said that Michael Jackson's mom would get some of the money, that his children would get some of the money, and it would go to certain charities. That will doesn't say, from what I have, any of that. It says that John Branca and John McClain and Barry Siegel, who was there as well, who is also in the entertainment business -- Barry Siegel bowed out back in 2003.

I'm just going to read that one thing. This is what it says.

It says, "I appoint John Branca, John McClain and Barry Siegel as co-executors of this will. In the event of any of their deaths, resignations, inability, failure or refusal to serve as a co-executor, the other shall serve and no replacement need be named."

On to the next one.

"I hereby give me executors full power and authority at any time or times to sell, lease, mortgage, pledge, exchange or otherwise dispose of the property, whether real or personal, comprising my estate, upon such terms as my executors shall deem best."

And then the next paragraph is the one that you were reading. It goes on to talk about the children.

And he says, "I nominate Katherine Jackson and I nominate Diana Ross as the guardian of the persons and estates and such minor children" if she can't do it. Go ahead, Rick. Sorry about that.

SANCHEZ: Well, no, no. This is extremely significant, because, look, I'm not a lawyer, and I was looking at this document and saying, if he is giving all custody -- if he's giving all rights to his mother of his children as guardian of the persons and estates of such minor children, I was figuring that she would be in control.

But you raise an interesting question here about John Branca, John McClain and Barry Siegel, three people who most of us -- at least I can say I have never heard of. Who are these people?

LEMON: John Branca is a very well-known entertainment attorney here in Los Angeles. He handles a lot of very famous people, a lot of very wealthy people. John McClain is also a very well-known long-time music executive and friend of Michael Jackson. John Branca was Michael Jackson's attorney from 1986 to 2006.

Barry Siegel is also a very big entertainment person here in California. But again, in 2003, Barry Siegel -- and this is just coming across. This is New information. I have another piece of information...

SANCHEZ: Go ahead. Go ahead.

LEMON: ... saying that Barry Siegel bowed out and he left the administration of the will, the execution of the will, to Branca and to McClain.

The other bit of New here, you know, a lot of people have been reporting about these crazies, these people coming forward. You know the woman that says she is Michael Jackson's wife and these kids...

SANCHEZ: Right.

LEMON: Forget about that. You know, this is -- I have her paperwork here. Throw that out. The court has thrown that out twice, Rick.

You and I can go to court and say we are Michael Jackson's husband, or what have you, and they would have to look it up. And they would have to treat it as if it's legitimate. It's not. It has been thrown out of court twice.

Forget about that. You're going to have crazies coming forward.

SANCHEZ: It's understandable. Like I said earlier, people will be coming out of the woodwork.

But I want one to go back to this...

LEMON: One more.

SANCHEZ: Go ahead.

LEMON: One more New thing I want to tell you about. There was an ex parte hearing held just after this will was filed. And this was by John Branca's and John McClain's attorney, saying, they wanted to take over right away, right at this instant. They wanted to take Katherine Jackson and move her out and say they were in control of the administration of Michael Jackson's assets, property, will, or what have you.

The judge said cool your jets. Slow your roll here, because there is a hearing on July 6th, on Monday, and we're going to decide all of that. So, in the interim, there is a weekend coming up on us, so just cool out and we'll figure this all out on July 6th at this hearing, Rick. Go ahead.

SANCHEZ: No, I'm just marveling at the information that you're sharing with us, because I know that I have a will. I have to tell you, I haven't read it recently. I don't know how it reads.

I know that it was set up by my accountant. And I think most Americans who have wills are probably not that familiar with how exactly it's laid out or what the verbiage is.

But it seems what we're tussling, you and I, with here is the possibility that this will really gives control of Michael Jackson's estate not to any one specific person and his family, but to these three attorneys, or aides of his in the past, which really is a pretty remarkable revelation. Is it not?

LEMON: Yes, it is. But also, I have what is called a living will; right? And so it states who I want it to go to and then where I want it to go next, whatever. Mine is my mother. You know, she can do no wrong, so she gets everything. But you have to have that language in there.

But if you have an executor -- whoever you have as the executor of your will gets to decide where your money goes, unless you have some other language in there saying that you're going to execute this, but I would like this to go to some other place or to some other person. Also, it depends on the relationship that those attorneys have with the Jackson family.

They may end up deciding, this money is not ours. We want to give Katherine Jackson...

SANCHEZ: That's exactly right.

LEMON: And how does it look to have these guys fighting with an 80-year-old woman? It's not good business.

SANCHEZ: All right. Here's the final and I think maybe the most important question. And if you answer it in the negative, that certainly is OK.

Has anyone talked to these guys yet since this will came out and asked them any questions about them being named as such on this document? LEMON: John Branca released a statement yesterday to "LARRY KING LIVE." I'm not exactly sure. I think it said something about they were sorry about it and what they were going to do. I'm not exactly sure...

SANCHEZ: But not since this was made official?

LEMON: No.

SANCHEZ: Go get them.

LEMON: No, no. We are. We're trying. I have calls in. You know how it is.

But we spoke to Londell McMillan, who's the attorney for the Jackson family. He said that Branca and those guys were on vacation, didn't know, came back, and that's how, all of a sudden, this will showed up and came to light.

So we're working on it, Rick. We're going to get them.

SANCHEZ: Don Lemon on it, as usual.

LEMON: Thank you, sir.

SANCHEZ: Doing a great job.

Thank you.

LEMON: Thank you, sir.

SANCHEZ: We'll keep checking back. If you learn anything, just call Angie in the control room and we'll get you on. All right?

LEMON: Will do. Thanks, Rick.

SANCHEZ: Thanks.

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford just might be too honest. Really, think about that, too honest. How else do you explain calling your mistress your soul mate for all the world, including your wife, to hear?

And this is an amazing story. It's a plane that's called from the sky. It's killed everyone except -- and this is part of the story that people are really tying around -- it's a teenage girl who survived. She says she never felt a thing.

That's next. Stay with us.

I'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: We've got some breaking news coming into us now. Boy, it seems that we have been reporting on so many deaths of late of famous people, and now here is another one.

We have just learned that Karl Malden has died.

There's Karl Malden, 1912-2009.

If you've watched television or gone to the movies in the last 30, 40 years, there's no doubt you remember him from American Express commercials; from "A Streetcar Named Desire," one of the most famous movies ever made; from "On the Waterfront," which he was also in; and in the television series for many years, "The Streets of San Francisco."

There he is, Karl Malden, with the strong, gritty accent, and that Larry Csonka nose of his. Dies just moments ago. We got the information.

Born in 1912. He starred in the TV series "Streets of San Francisco."

A 13-year-old, a French girl, is being touted as the sole survivor in Tuesday's jet crash off Comoros Island. The father of Bahia Bakari (ph) says that his daughter "didn't feel a thing" as the plane and the 150 people aboard plummeted into the Indian Ocean.

What a story. The teen suffered a broken collarbone and a few scrapes, but is otherwise OK. Rescuers say she is more than OK, calling her survival an absolute miracle.

She could barely swim and was found hours after the crash clinging to floating wreck debris. The only person to have survived this violent plane crash.

It may take more than a miracle though to save the governor of South Carolina's quickly sinking political career after fessing up to an illicit affair. And why would he call his girlfriend his soul mate? How do you fix that?

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: This story is just a head shaker. Add U.S. Senator Jim DeMint now to the ranks of those in South Carolina who are leaning on Republican Mark Sanford, the governor there, to get gone from the mansion, the governor's mansion.

That chorus of voices has only grown louder since yesterday, when The Associated Press reported remarks by Sanford that suggests that he is still in love with his Argentine mistress. There she is on the left.

In love with his mistress. In fact, he calls her his soul mate. But he wants to try and save his marriage to the wife of his four boys, he went on to say, after calling his mistress his soul mate.

Oh, my goodness. In an Associated Press interview, Sanford also admitted this: he's crossed the line with several other women. No response yet from Jenny Sanford, who at least report had not been seen at the beach house where she had been holed up since before the scandal broke. Jenny Sanford, of course, is the governor's wife.

Since the governor's latest remarks, his dwindling support among South Carolina Republicans has only eroded further. We have been checking.

More than half of the state senate's GOP caucus now is on record as wanting him out of there. And today, DeMint says that Sanford needs to do the right thing.

This is odd. It seems to me that in the wake of this documented deception, Governor Sanford is trying to come clean, he's trying to be truthful, but he only seems to be making matters worse.

Joining me now from Ashland, Wisconsin, Rachel Campos-Duffy, who has written a story for AOL's ParentDish.com on this. And from Washington, Joanne Bamberger, of PunditMom blog.

Ladies, thanks so much for being with us.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: I had this conversation with Angie Massie (ph), my producer, earlier, and she and I were actually arguing about this, because I said, "Well, isn't this what women are always telling men to do, to be just completely honest with their feelings?"

I mean, here you've got a guy who's being completely honest with his feelings. It ain't working so well, is it?

(CROSSTALK)

JOANNE BAMBERGER, PUNDITMOM BLOG: He doesn't have to be completely honest with the entire world about it.

RACHEL CAMPOS-DUFFY, AOL PARENTDISH.COM: I don't think he is trying to make things better. I think he is trying to get cut loose.

I think he wants her to leave -- to let him leave, because there is absolutely no fathomable reason why he would say disclose this information, except that he is having a really horrible midlife crisis and just wants to go to Buenos Aires.

SANCHEZ: Do you think that's what he's doing, Joanne? Do you think he's really just -- like, in a secret way, he doesn't want this job anymore and he just wants to go to be with what's her name in Argentina.

BAMBERGER: You know, only he's going to know that for sure. But, you know, given the fact that he has been, up until a week ago, said that he was going to be a GOP nominee, hopefully, for the presidency, I have a hard time believing that. But it is really hard to explain.

I mean, the thing that I'm glad to see is that his wife is not doing the "standing by her man" sort of thing, for lack of a better term, and that she's trying to set an example not only for her sons, but to stand up for herself and say, you know, I have my dignity and I am not going to stand there while he does this.

SANCHEZ: Well, forget the politics of this. If something like this happened in my relationship, with my wife, you guys would be seeing me in chunks. I mean, I can't imagine you being able in any way to overcome something like this in a relationship after saying something like this about your girlfriend, but then saying in another breath that you want to be able to make up to your wife.

Is that even possible?

CAMPOS-DUFFY: It's not possible. It makes absolutely no sense.

This guy is having a horrible midlife crisis. He wants Jenny to let him go. But the heartbreaking thing about it -- you know, I'm a mom of five, I really feel for this woman, because the real victims are these children.

And what he's doing, dragging this out, putting it more in public, giving more salacious details, all of this is so immature and so ungubernatorial, if you will. All of this is really...

(CROSSTALK)

BAMBERGER: You know, I don't disagree with Rachel. I don't disagree with Rachel on any of those things.

I think sort of the thing we should be thinking about is, isn't this exactly why the whole family values thing shouldn't really be part of the political discussion? You know, none of us should be, you know, subjected to listening to, you know, the governor of South Carolina and his wife have to deal with this.

SANCHEZ: Well, it sure has bitten a few people in the behind of late. And we'll be continuing to follow it.

Ladies, I'm going to let you go, but I want to thank you for being with us, because there's some breaking news that's coming in to us right now out of Iran.

We understand that we have some information now, and you may have seen just a sneak peek of this at the beginning of this newscast, that there is a "Newsweek" correspondent who has allegedly been detained by the Iranians several weeks ago, but they are now saying -- again, allegedly -- that he has confessed. That he has confessed. To what?

We have Reza here, our own correspondent, who just returned from Tehran. He's going to be joining us to take us through this conversation. It is a most interesting story that certainly could have some very important foreign implications.

Stay with us. We'll be right back with that.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: All right. Well, we're kind of working our way through this information that's coming in to us right now.

Welcome back. This is the breaking news.

We've been holding on to this for the safety and security of one of our own colleagues. This is information coming out of Iran right now. It's a development that adds a real twist to what's going on in Iran.

It involves a "Newsweek" magazine correspondent who allegedly has just given a confession. His name is Maziar Bahari. He's a Canadian/Iranian journalist who was said to have been picked up in night raids by Iranian guards a couple of weeks ago.

Iranians are saying now that he's given a confession from his jail cell.

Reza Sayah is a veteran CNN reporter fresh from Tehran. He's joining me now.

Just take us through the first part, because there's an interview you and I are going to watch together. What are they saying that he said?

REZA SAYAH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, first of all, we should tell you that after election day, according to human rights groups, a number of people went missing. Among them, journalists.

One of the most prominent journalists is Maziar Bahari, award- winning filmmaker, reporter for "Newsweek." Yesterday, according to a state-run news agency, he allegedly confessed.

SANCHEZ: Confessed to what?

SAYAH: Here's what he said, that "There is a possibility that Western governments try to hire Western reporters to spy for them." But he went on to say, "But because of the effective work of Iran's intelligence agencies, those possibilities decreased." He also said, allegedly said, that some of his work was designed to create "difficulty."

SANCHEZ: So, they're basically saying that he is saying that Western news outlets like ourselves, "The New York Times," may have instigated some of these so-called riots that we saw.

Let me hold you now, because I want to ask "Newsweek" about that. This is their guy, their story.

And this is Mr. Dickey now, who I talked to just moments ago about this. He's the head of their bureau in the Middle East, Chris Dickey.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: Joining us now is Chris Dickey. He's the mideast bureau chief for "Newsweek."

Chris, thanks so much for being with us.

CHRISTOPHER DICKEY, MIDEAST REGIONAL EDITOR, "NEWSWEEK": Well, thank you, Rick.

SANCHEZ: What's your reaction to this report?

Well, look, it's preposterous. Maziar Bahari has been held in Jail since June 21st. He hasn't been able to talk to a lawyer, he hasn't been able to talk to his family. The kinds of things that he is alleged to have said in this statement are, on their face, preposterous, and we want him to be released as soon as possible, and we hope that that's what the Iranian government will decide to do.

SANCHEZ: We're trying to get our hands around whether or not he even has said this. I mean, according to some of the reports we're seeing, he said it in a news conference at the jail.

Do you buy that?

DICKEY: What news conference at the jail? We don't know anything about the circumstances. We don't know any reporters who were there.

It supposedly is videotape. They run a picture showing him being vide videotaped, in which his actual face is out of focus. You just see his face on the little screen. And we don't even know what he looked like when he was actually talking, if he said any of this.

So, I think we're looking at a situation where we just have to dismiss this whole thing out of hand and say it's time to release Maziar Bahari. He's a very good reporter, he's a very good documentary filmmaker, and he's not the kind of person that they should have in jail.

SANCHEZ: Does it sound to you like -- well, I'm almost hearing you say that this thing is being orchestrated by either the Iranian government or somebody inside the Iranian government.

Is that what you're saying?

DICKEY: Well, look, we can't know who's doing what. They're not talking to our lawyer in the sense that they're not letting Maziar talk to our lawyer in Tehran. They're not letting him talk to his family. They're not letting him talk to us.

We can't get his version of events. So, if we don't know what he's saying, then how can we judge anything that comes out of basically a state-controlled news agency?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: All right, Reza. Let me bring you back into this.

It seems like he's saying that they can't confirm that he's even made this confession, or that this so-called news conference that I've been reading about all day actually even took place.

What can you tell us about that?

SAYAH: Well, we simply don't know. This is all according to a state-run news agency.

What we can confirm is that this is a technique that the Iranian government has used before. You'll recall Haleh Esfandiari, the Iranian/American academic back in July of 2007. She went on state-run TV in Iran, in a televised alleged confession, saying she was part of a plot to overthrow the government. She was released, she came back to Washington, D.C.

SANCHEZ: But what do they say that he said? I mean, I know it's probably in Farsi; right?

SAYAH: It is.

SANCHEZ: What do they say that he said? Is it that? I mean, that U.S. Western media was trying to instigate this situation with these riots and protests that we saw?

SAYAH: That they were part of a plot to create "difficulties." But it's very interesting that in the alleged confession, he gives credit to the Iranian intelligence agency, saying if it weren't for the intelligence agencies, they would be able to be effective, but they basically stopped him.

SANCHEZ: You were there while this was going on. I'm sure you ran into him and many other colleagues who were working for either "The New York Times" or -- did you see, just to be fair, any signs that journalists were going beyond what we're supposed to do to document a story, in any way instigating any of these things?

SAYAH: Absolutely not. Journalists, including Maziar, were working under tremendous pressure.

The Iranian government, in a variety of ways, tries to pressure, tries to guide reporters to do this story, to do that story. It came to a point where they prevented us from covering and broadcasting images, you know, from these rallies.

And this was a concerted systemic effort to get their own message out. At some point, they realized that the pictures and the information that was going out was not favorable to the Islamic Republic of Iran, and clearly all indications are that they did a crackdown on journalists.

SANCHEZ: So, let's suppose that there is some truth to this, and that he has made a statement -- they're calling it a confession -- similar to this. Would that be a statement which was coerced or forced by the government? And, if so, how? SAYAH: We would be guessing when it comes to Maziar's situation. But, again, I go back to what has happened in the past. This is a technique that the government has used before to discredit, to intimidate journalists. Again Haleh Esfandiari, the Iranian academic, she came out just a few weeks after a televised alleged confession, she retracted everything that she said. That's what we're certain of.

SANCHEZ: So, if he said it -- so, given that example you just gave us, if he said it, he said it because he had to say it, not because he means it.

SAYAH: Based on the past and based on what people like Chris Dickey, who knows Maziar, it is very likely that he was coerced.

SANCHEZ: That makes -- no, I know.

SAYAH: But we can't know for certain until he comes out.

SANCHEZ: We're using you here not only as a correspondent, but, in many ways, as an expert, because you've been there.

Thanks so much for doing it for us.

SAYAH: Sure.

SANCHEZ: All right. Let's give it over to Wolf Blitzer, following this story and many others now.

Suzanne Malveaux sitting in for Wolf, in fact, in "THE SITUATION ROOM."