Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Trouble in Neverland
Aired January 15, 2004 - 09:19 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.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: In California tomorrow, Michael Jackson's going to face criminal arraignment on charges that he sexually molested a boy. Yesterday, attorneys on both sides were fighting over a gag order. Court documents were filed by the defense to oppose, while prosecutors supported it. With us from Los Angeles this morning to help sort out the fine points in this case is CNN's senior legal analyst Jeff Toobin.
Hey, Jeff, we miss you here in New York, because it's cold and miserable, and we like to share the misery.
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SR. LEGAL ANALYST: Seventy and sunny today. How's the weather there, Soledad?
O'BRIEN: We're so happy for you, Jeff, as always.
TOOBIN: I bet you are.
O'BRIEN: Thrilled for you, sad for us.
We've heard a lot coming out about certain aspects of this case. So let's just kind of just tick through all of them. First, this gag order, how critical is it? And it seems this is a real point of contention between the prosecution and the defense.
TOOBIN: You know, gag orders are frequently imposed in high- profile cases, but they really often don't accomplish stopping the media attention. They do stop the press conferences from the lawyers on both sides, but you know, there is so much demand for information about these cases, that we're certainly not going to stop covering the case, and nor will other news organizations. But they do stop some of the grandstanding that goes on sometimes with the open press conferences, and judges, who are generally hostile to that kind of behavior, often like gag orders for just that reason.
O'BRIEN: We've heard more salacious details about the case as well. But to some degree, I guess the question would be, does this move the ball forward, or is it just a matter of more he said, and the other side's going to deny it, and it doesn't legally have much of an impact on the case yet?
TOOBIN: The one thing you can for sure, is that legally, it has absolutely no impact. You know, there are news leaks coming out of various sources, and some may be accurate, some may be not. But except to the extent that it influences potential jurors, this stuff really has no legal impact, and since we are such -- at such an early stage in the Jackson case, where there hasn't been a preliminary scheduled, much less conducted, there's going to be a lot more news coming out, and I think people just need to listen with a skeptical eye as this stuff comes out, and wait for evidence to come out in court.
O'BRIEN: Listen with a skeptical eye, or you mean ear?
(LAUGHTER)
TOOBIN: You know what sorry. It's a little early here on the West Coast.
O'BRIEN: It's that warm temperature affecting your brain.
TOOBIN: It's a little early out here on the West Coast. A little mixed metaphor, you're right?
O'BRIEN: Oh, OK, I get it.
Before we let you go, just one last question for you -- we've heard, again, another leaked report about the mother saying that she actually was fearful about -- for her life, really, when she was at Neverland. And I'm curious to know how this goes to her own credibility, because of course you have a woman who didn't say anything to the child welfare officials in Los Angeles at the time when they were investigating, whose child appears in this documentary that Martin Bashir did, now sort of saying exactly 180 degrees the other side. So does this basically just chip away at any credibility she could have in this case later on down the road.
TOOBIN: It really is an interesting story that cuts both ways, because if the Jackson camp really was trying to keep them quiet, trying to keep the family quiet, trying to control them, that's certainly good for the prosecution.
But the question is, why was she there at all? What was she doing moving to Neverland with her children? Why was she so closely involved with a celebrity who had a mixed record, to say the least, with children? The question of the family's motives and whether there was a financial motive, that's going to be at the heart of the case for the many, many months it will be pending.
O'BRIEN: No question about that. Jeff Toobin, as always, thanks.
TOOBIN: See you tomorrow.
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 15, 2004 - 09:19 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: In California tomorrow, Michael Jackson's going to face criminal arraignment on charges that he sexually molested a boy. Yesterday, attorneys on both sides were fighting over a gag order. Court documents were filed by the defense to oppose, while prosecutors supported it. With us from Los Angeles this morning to help sort out the fine points in this case is CNN's senior legal analyst Jeff Toobin.
Hey, Jeff, we miss you here in New York, because it's cold and miserable, and we like to share the misery.
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SR. LEGAL ANALYST: Seventy and sunny today. How's the weather there, Soledad?
O'BRIEN: We're so happy for you, Jeff, as always.
TOOBIN: I bet you are.
O'BRIEN: Thrilled for you, sad for us.
We've heard a lot coming out about certain aspects of this case. So let's just kind of just tick through all of them. First, this gag order, how critical is it? And it seems this is a real point of contention between the prosecution and the defense.
TOOBIN: You know, gag orders are frequently imposed in high- profile cases, but they really often don't accomplish stopping the media attention. They do stop the press conferences from the lawyers on both sides, but you know, there is so much demand for information about these cases, that we're certainly not going to stop covering the case, and nor will other news organizations. But they do stop some of the grandstanding that goes on sometimes with the open press conferences, and judges, who are generally hostile to that kind of behavior, often like gag orders for just that reason.
O'BRIEN: We've heard more salacious details about the case as well. But to some degree, I guess the question would be, does this move the ball forward, or is it just a matter of more he said, and the other side's going to deny it, and it doesn't legally have much of an impact on the case yet?
TOOBIN: The one thing you can for sure, is that legally, it has absolutely no impact. You know, there are news leaks coming out of various sources, and some may be accurate, some may be not. But except to the extent that it influences potential jurors, this stuff really has no legal impact, and since we are such -- at such an early stage in the Jackson case, where there hasn't been a preliminary scheduled, much less conducted, there's going to be a lot more news coming out, and I think people just need to listen with a skeptical eye as this stuff comes out, and wait for evidence to come out in court.
O'BRIEN: Listen with a skeptical eye, or you mean ear?
(LAUGHTER)
TOOBIN: You know what sorry. It's a little early here on the West Coast.
O'BRIEN: It's that warm temperature affecting your brain.
TOOBIN: It's a little early out here on the West Coast. A little mixed metaphor, you're right?
O'BRIEN: Oh, OK, I get it.
Before we let you go, just one last question for you -- we've heard, again, another leaked report about the mother saying that she actually was fearful about -- for her life, really, when she was at Neverland. And I'm curious to know how this goes to her own credibility, because of course you have a woman who didn't say anything to the child welfare officials in Los Angeles at the time when they were investigating, whose child appears in this documentary that Martin Bashir did, now sort of saying exactly 180 degrees the other side. So does this basically just chip away at any credibility she could have in this case later on down the road.
TOOBIN: It really is an interesting story that cuts both ways, because if the Jackson camp really was trying to keep them quiet, trying to keep the family quiet, trying to control them, that's certainly good for the prosecution.
But the question is, why was she there at all? What was she doing moving to Neverland with her children? Why was she so closely involved with a celebrity who had a mixed record, to say the least, with children? The question of the family's motives and whether there was a financial motive, that's going to be at the heart of the case for the many, many months it will be pending.
O'BRIEN: No question about that. Jeff Toobin, as always, thanks.
TOOBIN: See you tomorrow.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
