Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

A Look at Today's Major Legal Cases

Aired January 08, 2004 - 14:37   ET

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

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


MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: The Scott Peterson murder trial just one of the high-profile case on our docket today. In Michael Jackson's child molestation case, a judge must decide on the issue of media access. The prosecution wants a gag order while several news organizations want court documents unsealed.
We'll discuss both of those cases with our guest. Wendy Murphy is a former prosecutor and Mickey Sherman is a criminal defense attorney. They're both joining us from Boston. Let's talk about the change of venue for Mr. Peterson. Wendy, you first. You surprised?

WENDY MURPHY, FRM. PROSECUTOR: Well, Miles, I don't think I would say I'm surprised. Lots of people thought there was a very good chance the case would be moved because it really is almost unprecedented in terms of the amount of publicity and the incredible degree of compassion and sympathy that everybody feels, especially for Laci Peterson. She's just -- there really isn't I think a more compassionate victim out there. She was pregnant and beautiful.

So I think the tougher issue was whether there is anywhere in the country you could move a trial where people wouldn't be feeling such strong emotions for Laci Peterson. I thought there was at least a good chance the judge would say it really doesn't matter where we send this case.

One of the observations I want to make is we don't know where the trial is going to land. Mark Geragos may be happy today but sad tomorrow because if this judge doesn't send the case to L.A., and that's where Mark Geragos wants this case to go.

If this case doesn't go to L.A., if it goes to, for example, San Francisco, Mark Geragos may like that potential jury pool even less. And I'm not sure this was such a great victory for the defense. We have to wait and see where the case goes before we can assess that.

O'BRIEN: Mickey, let's talk about the possibility of this going to L.A. Mark Geragos would prefer that aside from the fact it's about a mile away from his office. Are there other reasons?

MICKEY SHERMAN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I think it's a victory under any circumstances here.

I get to the same conclusion the judge does, but I would go by a different route. The judge said there is too much publicity. They've got to go to Mars to find a place where they have not deluged with publicity. The problem with Modesto is you have the community almost as victims. These people were out hunting, searching, looking hand in hand covering fields, lakes looking for Laci Peterson. So these people were collectively in shock.

And to ask these same folks to be fair and judge Scott Peterson was just not right. I think this judge had the wisdom and courage to make that decision and not listen to the lawyers talk him out of it. I think L.A. would be an appropriate venue.

O'BRIEN: Wendy, who are the perfect jurors from the defense's standpoint on this case?

MURPHY: Well, look. One of the ugly secrets of the defense bar that people don't like to talk about is that the best jury for any defendant is a dumb jury.

I'm not going to say that the most dumb jurors are in L.A. County, but it's not a mystery that Mark Geragos wants this case moved to L.A., not just out of Stanislaus County, not just away from the people Mickey just described, but into a population where the education level is low, where the sophistication level is low.

If you've got a really strong case against you, and this is a very strong case, Mark Geragos' best hope is to be able to do his dog and pony show...

(CROSSTALK)

O'BRIEN: ... you're talking about is kind of shades of O.J. here. then. Right?

MURPHY: Absolutely.

O'BRIEN: All right, Mickey, go ahead.

SHERMAN: I totally disagree. First of all, the state's case is not that great. And also, we don't even know. We're just looking on the outside guessing as to what they really have.

But I'm tell you, the defense does not -- all the defense attorneys generally do not use a one-size fits all to pick dummies on the jury. We're not willing to sell prospective jurors that short. As often as possible we want the most intelligent jury we can find so they can judge the state's case as well as anybody else.

O'BRIEN: All right, let's talk for a moment about Michael Jackson before we lose all our time. Wendy, in this case, for Michael Jackson, is the media his friend or his foe?

MURPHY: I think it's six of one, half dozen of the other. But I'll tell you this much. Michael Jackson knows that he can command the attention of the media with a snap of his fingers which means he has the power to influence of potential jury pool any time he wants to. So he certainly doesn't want to turn the cameras off. Unfortunately, he performs horribly every time he gets in front of a camera, whether he's lying or looking like a nutcake or sounding like a pedophile. It's not doing him any great service.

There is no doubt about it. He wants to use the media so he can manipulate the potential jury pool. and the prosecutor doesn't have that same amount of flexibility and freedom. So there is no surprise to me here that the prosecution wants to shut the cameras down, the defense team wants to keep them up.

O'BRIEN: It's interesting though. You would think that the defense team would want to shut the cameras off here, Mickey, given what Wendy was just talking about, his performance on TV. He seems to have not done himself very well before the cameras. Has he?

SHERMAN: No. But Michael Jackson dances to a different drum. A very, very...

O'BRIEN: No kidding.

SHERMAN: ... very, very different drum. So once you accept that, then the question is, so what do they have against him? This is somebody who's never been shy, who has been able to kind of wear his weirdness on his sleeve. And we've all enjoyed it until it looks like he's done harm to kids.

But I think he's better off with us looking at the camera so we can see how good the state's case is or is not.

O'BRIEN: Final quick thought. Quickly, Mickey, for Martha Stewart, dumb jury or smart jury better?

SHERMAN: I think you want a smart jury. You don't want people who say the fat cat should suffer.

O'BRIEN: Wendy? Dumb jury or smart jury for Martha Stewart? Or just a well-dressed jury?

MURPHY: They want a jury that appreciates the fact that Martha Stewart may well be the whipping girl and the prosecutor may be disproportionately going after her for reasons that are unfair because you want a jury...

O'BRIEN: So dumb or smart?

MURPHY: Politically sophisticated enough to see that the state might be doing more than it should against her.

O'BRIEN: You started this. Dumb or smart? All right. Wendy Murphy, Mickey Sherman. We don't mean anything personal against anybody who serves on a jury out there.

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







Aired January 8, 2004 - 14:37   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: The Scott Peterson murder trial just one of the high-profile case on our docket today. In Michael Jackson's child molestation case, a judge must decide on the issue of media access. The prosecution wants a gag order while several news organizations want court documents unsealed.
We'll discuss both of those cases with our guest. Wendy Murphy is a former prosecutor and Mickey Sherman is a criminal defense attorney. They're both joining us from Boston. Let's talk about the change of venue for Mr. Peterson. Wendy, you first. You surprised?

WENDY MURPHY, FRM. PROSECUTOR: Well, Miles, I don't think I would say I'm surprised. Lots of people thought there was a very good chance the case would be moved because it really is almost unprecedented in terms of the amount of publicity and the incredible degree of compassion and sympathy that everybody feels, especially for Laci Peterson. She's just -- there really isn't I think a more compassionate victim out there. She was pregnant and beautiful.

So I think the tougher issue was whether there is anywhere in the country you could move a trial where people wouldn't be feeling such strong emotions for Laci Peterson. I thought there was at least a good chance the judge would say it really doesn't matter where we send this case.

One of the observations I want to make is we don't know where the trial is going to land. Mark Geragos may be happy today but sad tomorrow because if this judge doesn't send the case to L.A., and that's where Mark Geragos wants this case to go.

If this case doesn't go to L.A., if it goes to, for example, San Francisco, Mark Geragos may like that potential jury pool even less. And I'm not sure this was such a great victory for the defense. We have to wait and see where the case goes before we can assess that.

O'BRIEN: Mickey, let's talk about the possibility of this going to L.A. Mark Geragos would prefer that aside from the fact it's about a mile away from his office. Are there other reasons?

MICKEY SHERMAN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I think it's a victory under any circumstances here.

I get to the same conclusion the judge does, but I would go by a different route. The judge said there is too much publicity. They've got to go to Mars to find a place where they have not deluged with publicity. The problem with Modesto is you have the community almost as victims. These people were out hunting, searching, looking hand in hand covering fields, lakes looking for Laci Peterson. So these people were collectively in shock.

And to ask these same folks to be fair and judge Scott Peterson was just not right. I think this judge had the wisdom and courage to make that decision and not listen to the lawyers talk him out of it. I think L.A. would be an appropriate venue.

O'BRIEN: Wendy, who are the perfect jurors from the defense's standpoint on this case?

MURPHY: Well, look. One of the ugly secrets of the defense bar that people don't like to talk about is that the best jury for any defendant is a dumb jury.

I'm not going to say that the most dumb jurors are in L.A. County, but it's not a mystery that Mark Geragos wants this case moved to L.A., not just out of Stanislaus County, not just away from the people Mickey just described, but into a population where the education level is low, where the sophistication level is low.

If you've got a really strong case against you, and this is a very strong case, Mark Geragos' best hope is to be able to do his dog and pony show...

(CROSSTALK)

O'BRIEN: ... you're talking about is kind of shades of O.J. here. then. Right?

MURPHY: Absolutely.

O'BRIEN: All right, Mickey, go ahead.

SHERMAN: I totally disagree. First of all, the state's case is not that great. And also, we don't even know. We're just looking on the outside guessing as to what they really have.

But I'm tell you, the defense does not -- all the defense attorneys generally do not use a one-size fits all to pick dummies on the jury. We're not willing to sell prospective jurors that short. As often as possible we want the most intelligent jury we can find so they can judge the state's case as well as anybody else.

O'BRIEN: All right, let's talk for a moment about Michael Jackson before we lose all our time. Wendy, in this case, for Michael Jackson, is the media his friend or his foe?

MURPHY: I think it's six of one, half dozen of the other. But I'll tell you this much. Michael Jackson knows that he can command the attention of the media with a snap of his fingers which means he has the power to influence of potential jury pool any time he wants to. So he certainly doesn't want to turn the cameras off. Unfortunately, he performs horribly every time he gets in front of a camera, whether he's lying or looking like a nutcake or sounding like a pedophile. It's not doing him any great service.

There is no doubt about it. He wants to use the media so he can manipulate the potential jury pool. and the prosecutor doesn't have that same amount of flexibility and freedom. So there is no surprise to me here that the prosecution wants to shut the cameras down, the defense team wants to keep them up.

O'BRIEN: It's interesting though. You would think that the defense team would want to shut the cameras off here, Mickey, given what Wendy was just talking about, his performance on TV. He seems to have not done himself very well before the cameras. Has he?

SHERMAN: No. But Michael Jackson dances to a different drum. A very, very...

O'BRIEN: No kidding.

SHERMAN: ... very, very different drum. So once you accept that, then the question is, so what do they have against him? This is somebody who's never been shy, who has been able to kind of wear his weirdness on his sleeve. And we've all enjoyed it until it looks like he's done harm to kids.

But I think he's better off with us looking at the camera so we can see how good the state's case is or is not.

O'BRIEN: Final quick thought. Quickly, Mickey, for Martha Stewart, dumb jury or smart jury better?

SHERMAN: I think you want a smart jury. You don't want people who say the fat cat should suffer.

O'BRIEN: Wendy? Dumb jury or smart jury for Martha Stewart? Or just a well-dressed jury?

MURPHY: They want a jury that appreciates the fact that Martha Stewart may well be the whipping girl and the prosecutor may be disproportionately going after her for reasons that are unfair because you want a jury...

O'BRIEN: So dumb or smart?

MURPHY: Politically sophisticated enough to see that the state might be doing more than it should against her.

O'BRIEN: You started this. Dumb or smart? All right. Wendy Murphy, Mickey Sherman. We don't mean anything personal against anybody who serves on a jury out there.

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