Return to Transcripts main page

Piers Morgan Live

New Allegations of Sexual Harassment Against Cain; Murray Guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter

Aired November 07, 2011 - 21:00   ET


PIERS MORGAN, CNN HOST: Tonight, the verdict --


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We the jury in the above-entitled action find the defendant, Conrad Robert Murray guilty of the crime of involuntary manslaughter.

MORGAN: Dr. Conrad Murray guilty in the death of Michael Jackson.

JUDGE MICHAEL PASTOR, LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT: Dr. Murray is remanded to the custody of the Los Angeles sheriff with no bail.

MORGAN: Now the reaction from the family.


MORGAN: And Michael's fans.

But what price will Conrad Murray pay?

Plus new accusations against Herman Cain. What this woman says he did to her.

SHARON BIALEK, ALLEGES CAIN SEXUALLY HARASSED HER: He suddenly reached over and he put his hand on my leg under my skirt and reached for my genitals.

MORGAN: Shocking allegations. I'll talk to her tonight along with her attorney Gloria Allred in their first live primetime interview.


Good evening. We'll have much more tonight on the involuntary manslaughter conviction of Michael Jackson's doctor including my primetime exclusive interview with a member of Conrad Murray's defense team.

But first, political bombshell. The only Herman Cain accuser to go public. Sharon Bialek who worked for the National Restaurant Association for several months in 1997, says Cain made an unwanted sexual advance after their dinner together. The details are shocking. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIALEK: He also grabbed my head and brought it towards his crotch. I was very, very surprised and very shocked. I said, what are you doing? You know I have a boyfriend. This isn't what I came here for. Mr. Cain said, you want a job, right?


MORGAN: Joining me now in their first live interview, Sharon Bialek and her attorney Gloria Allred.

Let me start with you, Sharon Bialek. A very dramatic day today. You were the first of the accusers to go public. What made you do that?

BIALEK: Well, like I said today, Piers, is that I wanted to be able to put a face and a voice to those women out there that didn't want to or could not, for whatever their reasons are -- I wanted to speak about this because it was -- I wanted to tell the truth.

MORGAN: And tell me this. When did you first meet Herman Cain?

BIALEK: I first met Herman in 1994 -- 1997 when I was employed at the Educational Foundation of the National Restaurant Association. Every year they have a show, the NRA show, and it's usually a five-day show. So I had a lot of opportunity to engage in conversations during various events with him.

MORGAN: So you got to know him quite well. And then you were laid off, is that right?

BIALEK: Yes, I was terminated.

MORGAN: And you then made contact with Herman Cain?

BIALEK: Yes. At the urging of my then-boyfriend, he was also with me at these events and thought that Herman thought I was a person that, you know, he respected me and thought that I should seek out Herman to perhaps go to him and find out if I could be employed at another area of the foundation or with the National Restaurant Association state.

MORGAN: And whose idea was it to have dinner?

BIALEK: That was Herman's.

MORGAN: And you went to a restaurant. And did you drink alcohol?

BIALEK: I had a glass of wine, yes.

MORGAN: And did Mr. Cain drink?


MORGAN: I mean, more than one glass? A bottle? I mean, how much did you have together?

BIALEK: I -- you know, I really can't remember. But I'm sure, you know, he probably had two glasses.

MORGAN: Right. And then he was driving the car.

BIALEK: Yes. Because I took a train into town. So I did not have a vehicle.

MORGAN: And how had dinner gone? Did you get on well with Mr. Cain? Was he a gentleman during dinner?

BIALEK: Absolutely, yes. I -- you know, I was telling him my plight, and he seemed concerned, and I trusted him. That's why I went to him. And I thought nothing differently throughout the dinner.

MORGAN: And what did he say to you during dinner? Did he say then that he would be able to help you perhaps get your job back?

BIALEK: He -- not so much during dinner, but he said that he would look into it. That was his quote.

MORGAN: Right. And whose idea was it to then get in the car together?

BIALEK: Well, it was his because I had to get a ride back to the hotel because I didn't have the car.

MORGAN: Right. So you get in the car, and then this advance is made. Were you shocked by what happened?

BIALEK: Very, very much so because, first of all, he had met my boyfriend. He knew I was in a relationship. And to me, that's very sacred, when you're in a relationship to, you know, be true to that person, and secondly, that this is a man that I went to for help. And he -- you know, and the reason I went to him for help is because he's a powerful man within the organization.

I respected him. I looked up to him. And it just -- it just was shocking to me that he would use that power in such a way.

MORGAN: Obviously, the cynics -- and there will be many out there -- will say why have you waited 14 year to come out with these claims? Are you making any money from this? Do you intend to make any money? You're not being paid for this interview. But do you intend to make any money from your revelations?

Piers, that was never my intention from the start. And it is not my intention to do it. I'm all about doing the right thing, about justice being served. And I wanted to do this because those that know me know I don't back down from controversy and things. And I felt I needed to do this for the other women that couldn't or wouldn't. And regardless of what happens -- and I know there is -- you're right, there's going to be a lot of backlash, and I'm going to have to suffer through that. And I'm sure I'm not going to be not portrayed, as you know different things. So I'm willing to handle it. I'm a tough girl.

MORGAN: You have a teenaged child.

BIALEK: Mm-hmm.

MORGAN: Are you concerned about the impact of all this on your child?

BIALEK: Absolutely. He's the love of my life. And the most important thing in the world to me. And -- but you know, on the other hand, I want him to know that his mommy did something good for women, that she stood up for what she believed in. And I think that's a more important lesson to learn that I did something on behalf of women.

Herman Cain, through his campaign team today, has said the allegations are completely false. Quote, "Mr. Cain has never harassed anybody." They're basically calling you a liar.

BIALEK: Mm-hmm. Well, I know what happened and he knows what happened. And it's unfortunate that my whole -- my whole -- one of my whole objectives was to give him the opportunity to come forward, to redeem himself, say, hey, I'm sorry. I did this. It happened. And let's move forward. And it is unfortunate, I'm very disappointed that he didn't take that -- take the lead in this.

MORGAN: Have you at any stage in the last 14 years made any approach to Herman Cain to get some kind of apology from him?

BIALEK: No. Absolutely not.

MORGAN: I mean, after this incident happened in the car, you then asked him to drop you back at the hotel. Was he apologetic in the moment? Was he aware that he had gone too far, if what you say is true?

BIALEK: Well, when you tell someone, you know, this is not why I'm here, please drive me back, and I was very stern and, yes, he knew -- I wouldn't say he was apologetic, but he knew I wasn't happy about what went on. I wasn't in tears or anything. But he knew I was upset by it.

MORGAN: How many other people have known about what happened?

BIALEK: I only told two people.

MORGAN: And who are they?

GLORIA ALLRED, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY: We're not going to name them, Piers, but we are identifying them as we did today as a physician that she was dating who has provided a declaration under penalty of perjury to us, which we have signed. And also a very prominent businessman who has been a longtime friend and mentor of Sharon's, and he has also provided declaration under penalty of perjury to us that she told them shortly thereafter, after the incident, that Mr. Cain had made sexually inappropriate advances to her and conduct, misconduct with her, but she did not provide the detail to them. She was very, very embarrassed and shaken by this situation.

MORGAN: And Gloria, you'll be aware that Herman Cain's campaign has referred to you as an activist celebrity lawyer today. The clear indication being that you're jumping on this for personal fame and all the rest of it. How do you counter that charge?

ALLRED: Well, they didn't describe me the way most people would describe me, which is a women's rights attorney, which I have been for 36 years and we've done more sexual harassment cases in our law firm, in our private law firm, than any other law firm in the country, and won literally hundreds of millions of dollars for victims of sexual harassment.

So -- but however, if they want to attack me, that's fine. Point is when the public decides -- I think the question is really this, Piers. Are they going to believe the word of four women, two of whom made claims of sexual harassment, which resulted in settlement, one who's anonymous and another one who's come forward, that's Sharon, alleging sexual harassment?

Are they going to believe those four women who don't know each other, at least as far as we know, Sharon doesn't know the other three? Or are they going to believe the word of one man, Herman Cain, who has every motive to deny it? And that is really going to be a question for the voters.

MORGAN: Sharon, let me ask you, did you believe that Herman Cain should now stand down as a candidate for the Republican Party nomination?

BIALEK: I believe -- up until this point, I believe that he first needs to apologize and he needs to admit it. And then it's up to him to decide what to do next.

ALLRED: I think it's important, Piers, to know, too, that Sharon is a Republican, she is a registered Republican, she's proud to be a Republican, but nonetheless, she feel that, given what has occurred, that she needed to speak out.

And if all of the allegations by all of the women who have made them of sexual harassment are true, then what we have in Mr. Cain is a serial sexual harasser of women, a man who does not respect the right of women to be able to be employed or seek employment with dignity and not have that employment opportunity interfered with by act of sexual harassment.

MORGAN: Sharon, let me ask you, how did your boyfriend react when you told him at the time what had happened?

BIALEK: He tried to ask me more details, and I said I really don't want to talk about it. And he's a doctor, he's a physician. He loves women, and he loves children. So he respected my wishes. He knew I was upset. He said, you can -- you know, you can tell me if you want to, and I didn't want to, again, because I was too embarrassed. MORGAN: And Sharon, how do you feel emotionally about this? Obviously, you've now propelled yourself into the spotlight. I mean I would imagine you gave that considerable thought. And you -- you know, you're going to be the center of a media firestorm. How is this affecting you emotionally?

BIALEK: To be honest with you, right now I haven't even watched any of the media. I know that in the next two days is when everything's going to all hit the fan, so to speak, and I'm prepared for it. You know, again, I'm a strong woman. I can get through this, and this too shall pass.

I don't like what's going to happen, because I'm sure they're going to try to depict me in all kinds of ways, but that's the media for you.

ALLRED: And I have to say, Piers, that I really admire and commend Sharon's courage. It does take a lot of courage to come forward and know that you're going to be scrutinized on every detail, but as her friends have set in their affidavits to us, they know her to be very honest, very decent, and we're very proud of her, that she has risked all that so that people can know what she alleges is the truth about Herman Cain and at least what the conduct was towards her or the misconduct towards her.

MORGAN: And Sharon, if you don't get the apology that you're seeking from Herman Cain, will you be taking further legal steps against him? Are you considering filing charges against him?

BIALEK: No. I'm not. I have no intention of doing so.

MORGAN: Why not?

BIALEK: Well, first of all, I believe the statute of limitations would have run out by now. And second of all, that wasn't my goal here. My goal was simply to get him to admit the wrongdoing. It wasn't to -- look, I had hoped today had turned out differently, that he would be calling a press conference. And it didn't. And so, you know, I hope -- I hope that I didn't lose anything. I really hope that what I did will enable other women to come forward in similar situations. Unfortunately for Herman, he's still in denial.

MORGAN: We invited Herman Cain on to the show tonight. He declined that offer.

My final question to you, Sharon, is simply, do you think that Herman Cain should become president of the United States?

BIALEK: I don't think we can have anyone in the White House who is unable to tell the truth.

MORGAN: Sharon Bialek, Gloria Allred, thank you both very much.

ALLRED: Thank you, piers.

BIALEK: Thank you. MORGAN: When we come back, the verdict making headlines around the world. Michael Jackson's doctor dramatically found guilty of manslaughter.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We the jury in the above-entitled action, found the defendant Conrad Robert Murray guilty of the crime of involuntary manslaughter.


MORGAN: Dramatic scenes in a Los Angeles courtroom earlier today. The story is making headlines around the world tonight. Michael Jackson's doctor, Conrad Murray, guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

The jury deliberated for up to 10 hours before finding him guilty. And Ted Rowlands was at the courthouse today.

Ted, the most dramatic day of many dramatic days in this trial. Were you surprised by the verdict in the end?

TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Not surprised, Piers, especially when you take into consideration the amount of time that the jury deliberated. It was in that spot where, if they did come to a unanimous decision, which we knew they obviously did because they came to a verdict, and it was only 10 hours of deliberation, likely it was going to be guilty.

That said, you never know what they're going to say. But I wouldn't say that many people were in that courtroom were surprised.

MORGAN: And what was the reaction from Michael Jackson's family? You could hear a few gasps when the verdict was announced. Was that from members of his family?

ROWLANDS: Yes, it was from right behind me. It was Latoya Jackson and Kathy Hilton, they were sitting basically next to each other. And when the verdict was announced, you could hear it over the audio transmission, but I could definitely hear it right behind me and in the courtroom it was very loud.

Other than that, the Jacksons didn't make much in terms of a noticeable reaction right away. There were 17 family members, the most we've seen all day. But a poignant moment came late after the jury had left. David Walgren, the lead prosecutor in the case, gave a hug to Jermaine Jackson and then to Mrs. Jackson. And you could tell that they were very appreciative of their work, the district attorney's work in this case.

MORGAN: Ted, the maximum sentence is four years, and there's also this whole issue of whether he can carry on practicing as a doctor. What are you anticipating will be the outcome here? ROWLANDS: Well, his medical license in each of the states where he practices will have to be dealt with by those medical board. The court of law has no control over that. However, the California Medical Board has already indicated they will suspend his license. He could try to petition back for later but that would be a whole another process.

He's looking at four years max, however it's likely he'll probably spend about two years and that two years maybe in a county jail because of funding issues in the state of California -- Piers.

MORGAN: Ted Rowlands, you've done a fantastic job on this trial from start to finish. Thank you again tonight for your report.

Joining me now in an exclusive primetime interview, a member of Dr. Murray's defense team, Nareg Gourjian.

Mr. Gourjian, obviously not a good day for the defense team. What went wrong?

NAREG GOURJIAN, CONRAD MURRAY DEFENSE TEAM MEMBER: Well, you know, I think what went wrong was a lot of the pretrial rulings that were made by the court in reference to some of the evidence that we planned to offer for the jury to consider. I think that's essentially what denied Dr. Murray a fair trial in this case.

MORGAN: And how did Dr. Murray react after he realized that he had been found guilty of effectively killing Michael Jackson, one of the most iconic entertainers of our lifetime?

GOURJIAN: Well, he was clearly devastated. He loved Mr. Jackson. Mr. Jackson was one of his closest friends. So being convicted of causing Mr. Jackson's death was devastating to Dr. Murray.

MORGAN: Where is Dr. Murray tonight?

GOURJIAN: Dr. Murray is currently at the Inmate Reception Center where he's being -- going through the booking process. Upon completion of his booking process, he will then be transferred to one of the facilities, which will either be Twin Towers or the Mens Central Jail.

MORGAN: What are you expecting as a member of his defense team will be the final sentence here? Obviously, he could get the maximum of four years. What do you think would be a fair punishment given that he's been convicted?

GOURJIAN: Sure. The judge has several option in this case. The judge can either grant probation and sentence him to up to one year in county jail or the court can impose a state prison sentence and either pick the low term of two years, the midterm of three years or the high term of four year.

You know I'm confident and I believe based on Dr. Murray's lack of a prior criminal record, I'm hopeful that the court would take that into account and give Dr. Murray probation with maybe a little bit of county time.

MORGAN: And let me ask you, I suppose, a difficulty question, Mr. Gourjian, which is this really that, if I'd come to you two years ago before any of this was happening, and said to you, look, I can get a doctor to come to a celebrity client with four gallons of propofol and pile him up with this stuff all night long. I can have tape recordings of him completely gaga. And I'll leave him to his own devices while I go off and make phone calls and so on.

I mean, you would have been uneasy as a lawyer about that situation, that state of affairs, wouldn't you?

GOURJIAN: Well, Piers, we have to remember what happened here on June 25th of 2009, Dr. Murray did not have Mr. Jackson on a drip. And that's a key point here to consider. We had witness after witness testify that propofol is not a dangerous drug. It's a safe and wonderful drug.

However, if the patient is on a drip, then certain precautions need to be taken, certain monitoring equipment or certain resuscitation equipment needs to be present. But on June 25th, Dr. Murray did not have Mr. Jackson on a drip. All he administered was about 25 milligrams of propofol. And we knew through the expert witnesses that the clinical effect on propofol is only five to 10 minutes.

So Dr. Murray stayed -- remained by Mr. Jackson's side for about 30 minutes. So the propofol is completely out of Mr. Jackson's system and therefore could not have caused Mr. Jackson's death.

MORGAN: Will you under those circumstances then be launching an appeal against this conviction?

GOURJIAN: Excuse me, would we be appealing?


GOURJIAN: Absolutely. That's something that we discussed with Dr. Murray already. He's got his appellate remedies available. And he intends on seeking those remedies.

MORGAN: And finally, I mean, what kind of state is Dr. Murray in tonight? I mean, he looked a fairly broken man as he was handcuffed and led from court. Are you concerned about his mental condition?

GOURJIAN: I'm not concerned about his mental condition. Like I previously said, he is devastated as to the jury's verdict, but as far as his mental state goes, he's good. You know he's going to be positive. We have to get ready for his sentencing in this matter. And he's confident that the appellate courts would reverse the findings by the jury.

MORGAN: Nareg Gourjian, thank you very much for coming on the show.

GOURJIAN: Thank you, Piers. MORGAN: When we come back, does Conrad Murray have grounds for an appeal? I'll ask one of the country's top legal experts.



REBBIE JACKSON, MICHAEL JACKSON'S SISTER: Nothing will bring him back, but I'm happy he was found guilty.


MORGAN: Reaction from Jackson family members outside the court after the conviction of Conrad Murray, Michael Jackson's doctor, for involuntary manslaughter.

And joining me now from Los Angeles the defense's jury consultant, John G. McCabe, and from Miami Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz.

And let me start with you, Alan Dershowitz. Right verdict, do you think?

ALAN DERSHOWITZ, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: Well, the verdict was certainly reasonable verdict. The instruction and the prosecution's argument left a lot of confusion in the jury. They argued that the jury did not have to believe that Conrad Murray had actually caused the death of Michael Jackson.

It was enough if he significantly contributed to it. And the jury may well have been very confused as to whether the propofol itself had to be the causative agent in the death. Because there was some substantial evidence that it might not have been the agent in the death or that he might have self-administered it. So it's a -- it's a verdict that's not surprising but a verdict that might very well be successfully appealed.

MORGAN: Were you surprised Conrad Murray didn't get released on bail today? Because a lot of people raised an eyebrow at that, given that he doesn't appear to be an ongoing threat to the public.

DERSHOWITZ: Well, it was completely his lawyer's fault. His lawyer was utterly unprepared to make an argument about bail. It was shocking to see that lawyer floundering like a deer in headlights.

The judge said, basically, is that all you have to say? He made no argument for bail. What he should have done is he should have clearly indicated that they had a plan for home confinement. He should have outlined the issues on appeal.

He should have provided evidence of why he wasn't dangerous and why his medical licenses would probably be removed. But he sat there and he just made no argument.

The denial of bail is crucially important because it basically means that he's going to get some jail time, some prison time because otherwise the judge wouldn't have put him away. And second, I think it diminishes his chances of winning on appeal.

I think this lawyer has some very hard question to answer. Why wasn't he ready for this verdict? And why wasn't he ready to argue that bail motion more effectively?

MORGAN: It did seem extraordinary. Let me turn to John McCabe, who was part of the jury consultancy team. Obviously, Mr. McCabe, the wrong result here. Looking back, do you have any regrets now about the way the jury composition was made up?

JOHN MCCABE, JURY CONSULTANT: Not at all. We were dealing with a high risk, high reward strategy, in the sense that we were looking for people who were very smart, because they needed to be able to understand the scientific evidence. But at the same time, those smart people tend to be of higher status and are more likely to abide by the status quo.

It's hard very difficult to get somebody who is high status and idiosyncratic or sort of a rebel.

MORGAN: I mean, one of the question marks, I guess, is quite a few of the jury members had family relatives who had had forms of addiction. You could argue that played against your client, because perhaps they thought, you know, we've been through this with our relatives and we blame the doctors in these situations.

MCCABE: A lot of these factors cut both ways. On the one hand, you're absolutely right that they could see -- they could blame a doctor in that context. On the other hand, their personal experience with addiction might make them more attuned to the length that people will go to get the substances that they're addicted to.

MORGAN: Alan Dershowitz, returning to you, what do you think the sentence will be here? Because he can get four years. Would you think that would be an appropriate sentence given that he's been convicted?

DERSHOWITZ: Well, I hope the lawyers do a better job on sentencing than they did on bail. I hope they're better prepared to make arguments on sentencing than they were bail. The fact that he put him away pending sentencing, which is not typical in a situation like this, means the judge is going to give him a very harsh sentence.

So I anticipate there will be a substantial prison sentence. He will be denied pending appeal, as well as bail pending sentencing. So he'll be in quite some time. Even if his conviction is reversed, he will have served a very substantial criminal sentence.

So in many respects a victory on appeal might be a pyrrhic victory. It will be a victory for the lawyers, but not much of a victory for the client. If he gets a year in jail or two years in jail, it might be that long before an appeal finally reverses the conviction, if it does.

Where do you go to get the time back? That's why he should have been granted bail. He's not going anywhere. He has a very famous face. If he lost on appeal, then fine, he can go in and serve his sentence. But it's outrageous for somebody to go have to go in, serve a substantial part of a sentence, only to have the sentence reversed on appeal.

This judge made a terrible mistake, but he wasn't helped very much by the lawyers.

MORGAN: Alan Dershowitz, while you're there, I've got to ask you about the other big story of the day, the Herman Cain accuser number 4, Sharon Bialek. I just interviewed her, her first proper interview since the press conference.

What do you make of all this? Do you think she has credibility?

DERSHOWITZ: It was a great interview, by the way. And I thought she handled herself very, very well, as did Gloria Allred handle it very, very well. The burden has now shifted. They have clearly presented an extremely credible case, with specifics, with a timeline that he must answer.

He can't simply say, it didn't happen. He now has an obligation to answer those charges. And if he doesn't, he's going to have no credibility as a presidential candidate.

MORGAN: Because she's been very specific and, crucially, seems to have the backup of two over people that she confided in at the time, including one being her ex-boyfriend, who is a physician. These are credible people.


MORGAN: Who appeared to have signed affidavits here.

DERSHOWITZ: Right. And also there are three other witnesses. And each story corroborates each other. If Gloria Allred is right -- and I assume she is -- that none of these people knew each other, this has now become a very credible allegation. And the burden has clearly shifted to Cain.

He must answer these charges.

MORGAN: Alan Dershowitz and John McCabe, thank you both very much.

Dennis Hix testified for the defense and brought Michael Jackson's doctor to tears when he said Conrad Murray was the best doctor he has ever had. Dennis Hicks joins me now for an exclusive interview.

Dennis, we spoke a while ago, before the trial was over. And you spoke very movingly about Conrad Murray. How do you feel now that this doctor that you had so much time for and support for has been convicted of the death of Michael Jackson?

DENNIS HIX, PATIENT OF DR. CONRAD MURRAY: In the words, piers, of a famous actor, I'm mad as hell, and I ain't going to take it any more.

MORGAN: Do you think that Conrad Murray has been stitched up here?

HIX: Conrad Murray was the only man on this planet that loved Michael Jackson enough to try to help him. I seen -- every day you see the Jacksons in court getting their face time on TV. Where the hell were they when he was shooting himself with Demerol?

MORGAN: You're clearly feeling very emotional about Dennis. After I interviewed you, actually, I took a long look at the sequence of events leading up to Conrad Murray working for Michael Jackson. It seemed so out of character for him to take a huge payday, 150,000 dollars a month, to go and basically do whatever Michael Jackson appeared to want him to do.

It just didn't seem in keeping with the doctor that you know.

HIX: I told you before, when I spoke with him, he told me he was trying to save him. He knew what he was doing. Whether the Jacksons knew it or not, who knows? If it would have been my brother, I would have fixed him somehow. I wouldn't let him keep doing that crap.

They've taken down a gentle giant today.

MORGAN: Have you had the chance to talk to Conrad Murray?

HIX: Just when I testified.

MORGAN: I mean, if you had the chance now, what would you say to him?

HIX: Oh. He shouldn't have cared so much. That was the biggest mistake he made, was caring too much for Michael Jackson. I know this man. You know, the charges against him, we all heard this trial. The charges against him were that he shot him up with Propofol and abandoned him.

Well, that can't be the same man that came to my house in the middle of the night to get me when I was too stubborn to go to the doctor. My wife called him. He came over in his scrubs and made me go to the hospital, where later he put three stents in me that same night.

I mean, the likelihood of Conrad Murray shooting Michael Jackson up with Propofol and getting up and walking away from him would be as likely as you getting out of your chair and flying over here to where I'm at right now.

MORGAN: Dennis Hix, thank you very much for joining me this evening. I know it's a very difficult time for you and for many of Conrad Murray's patients.

HIX: It is.

MORGAN: Thank you for your time, sir. HIX: Thank you.

MORGAN: When we come back, a star prosecution witness, a doctor with a scathing diagnosis of Conrad Murray.



DR. ALAN STEINBERG, PROSECUTION WITNESS: When you monitor a patient, you never leave their side, especially after giving Propofol. It's like leaving a baby that's sleeping on your kitchen countertop.


MORGAN: In Conrad Murray's trial, prosecution experts used strong language about the way Michael Jackson was treated. My next guess called it gross negligence.

Joining me from Los Angeles, cardiologist Alan Steinberg. Mr. Steinberg, thank you for joining me.

Many people say that your evidence was among the most powerful testimony that was heard throughout the whole trial, and may have led, in fact, to his guilty verdict. How did you feel when you saw that Conrad Murray had been convicted?

STEINBERG: I was happy. And I'm glad the jury came up with the correct decision.

MORGAN: His defense team earlier --

STEINBERG: Yes, I mean, Dr. Murray did so many deviations from the standard of care that were so egregious. One, a strong anesthetic medicine like Propofol, giving it for sleep, giving it in an unmonitored setting in someone's home, not having the right equipment, not even having any help, no way to call for help.

The way he responded to the arrest was inappropriate, and delay in calling 911. Each one of those individual mistakes that Dr. Murray made -- each one individually led probably to Michael Jackson's death. So I think the jury made the correct decision in the guilty verdict for manslaughter.

MORGAN: The defense earlier were trying to -- one of his team was on the show earlier saying that there's a minimal amount of Propofol involved here, and that probably wasn't what killed Michael Jackson. From your belief, from what you read and heard, what do you think?

STEINBERG: Well, one, when I read -- did my testimony and my report, I just reviewed Dr. Murray's very own words to investigation. And in that investigation, every single night for 50 nights, he was giving a drip, an infusion overnight, which is very dangerous.

Then for me to believe that that night he didn't. In fact, in his own words in that testimony, I thought he was giving the drip -- on three different occasions, he mentioned that Michael Jackson was on a drip that night. It was slightly vague, but I think I'm pretty clear that there was a drip.

And when someone's on a drip, you need to monitor them closely. I don't think he got 25 milligrams. There's no way. As you know from the autopsy report, the Propofol levels were extremely high. And he died of Propofol poisoning and respiratory arrest.

MORGAN: What do you thing this all means for this whole culture of doctors shopping around celebrity homes in Hollywood and giving them whatever drugs they want? Do you think those days are over? Or will it still carry on but just in a discreet way?

STEINBERG: No, I think hopefully it is over. I think this is a good thing. It's wake-up call for all physicians that we need to practice within our boundaries and within the standard of care. I think it's going to help, you know, the next celebrity who may die or the next doctor that may get caught into that whole world.

So I think this is -- puts us on notice. And I think it's going to be good for the public and for physicians, too.

MORGAN: Dr. Steinberg, thank you very much for your time.

STEINBERG: Thank you.

MORGAN: When we come back, I'll talk to some of the people who knew Michael Jackson best and get their reaction to this dramatic verdict.



KATHY HILTON, JACKSON FAMILY FRIEND: We're thrilled, but still, Mr. and Mrs. Jackson and their family are leaving today without their son.


MORGAN: Kathy Jackson, a Jackson family friend. Kathy Hilton, I'm sorry, a Jackson family friend.

Joining me now are some people who spent a lot of time with Michael, Lavelle Smith Junior. He choreographed a dance with him. Michael Prince knew him for 15 years, with Michael the night before he died. And Raymone Bain, his former business manager.

Let me start with you, Raymone. You knew Michael very, very well. What was your reaction to the verdict today?

RAYMONE BAIN, FMR. JACKSON GENERAL MANAGER, SPOKESPERSON: Well, I was happy in some regards, Piers. But I was so sad because he's not here. We've lost our friend. We've lost our employer. A mother and father have lost their son. The children have lost their father. And the siblings have lost their brother.

So it's not a celebratory feeling. I hurt right here. It's kind of an emptiness to me. I'm happy that justice was served as far as it could with an involuntary manslaughter charge. I want to thank the jury and the judge and the D.A.

But clearly there is a cloud over all of us, because Michael Jackson can't come back.

MORGAN: Michael Prince, do you share that view? I also want to ask you, as I would ask anyone I guess involved in this, do you have any sympathy with Conrad Murray, who has always said he was just trying to help Michael?

LAVELLE SMITH JR., CHOREOGRAPHER: Absolutely not, I don't.

MICHAEL PRINCE, EDITOR, "THIS IS IT": I do have some sympathy for him. But you could take all the words Raymone said and just make them come out of my mouth with my voice. And that was a beautiful answer.

Nothing anybody can do can bring Michael back. The kids lost a dad. But to the extent of what we can do within our legal system, justice has been served, at least halfway. Now we have to wait for the sentencing.

And hopefully that will be -- give some finality to the whole thing.

MORGAN: Lavelle, I heard you saying absolutely no way there. So no sympathy from you towards Conrad Murray?

SMITH: No sympathy. A doctor who comes to a person's house and gives them medicine that you're only supposed to administer in a hospital? No way. He knew what he was doing.

Now I feel bad for his mother. She is losing her son for a little bit. But -- and she's an elderly lady. But for him, absolutely not.

MORGAN: I suppose the really strange aspect of all this is that so many people like yourselves who were so close to Michael appeared to have absolutely no idea of this extensive drug consumption. I mean, we're hearing night after night, all this Propofol and Demerol and all this stuff being pumped into his body.

By day, he was training for his new show, and apparently showing no signs of the side effects of this. Let me ask you, Lavelle, how could that be possible?

SMITH: You tell me. I have no idea. But I know that when I was with Michael, we worked hard, 10, 12, 14 hours days. He was there. He was in the moment. We created. I never saw that. I never saw any signs of that.

I told some reporter, no cigarettes, no liquor, no nothing. We worked.

MORGAN: Michael Prince, when you heard the now infamous tape of Michael slurring and sounding completely out of it, were you as shocked as everybody else, given that you were working so closely with him?

PRINCE: I was shocked to hear it. I was shocked that another human being would record that. And I think -- I think I said this before, that the doctor may have done it to show Michael -- you know, Michael, I gave you some medicine and you did fall asleep.

Other than that, I can't think of any sane reason why anybody would have made that tape.

SMITH: If that was the reason, wouldn't he just have videotaped him sleeping or something? That seems like a more sinister thing to do.

PRINCE: Absolutely.

MORGAN: It's all very strange.

Raymone, let me come back to you. You very eloquently I think spoke for all of you at the start there about the fact that nothing will bring Michael back. Although there's justice today for the family and the friends, he's not coming back. And his family won't get their brother, their son, their father and so on.

What do you think Michael's legacy should be?

BAIN: Well, Michael's legacy, unequivocally, Piers, is going to be his children. I've said it for two years. He was a wonderful father. And the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Those children are just as refined and good hearted, spiritual as he.

And that's going to be his greatest legacy, not the awards, not the music, but the way the children are going to mature and the successes that they are going to achieve. I guarantee you that.

Let me answer one more thing. With regard to the fact that we didn't know or see, one of the things that has been said -- and I've said it for several months -- there was an alienation of Michael Jackson. And it's unfortunate that that happened and many of us weren't able to get to him or have access to see the deterioration.

MORGAN: Yeah, it's a great shame. I know that from other people, that it was a difficult situation. Raymone Bain and Lavelle Smith and Michael Prince, thank you all very much for your time.

SMITH: Thank you, Piers.

BAIN: Thank you.

MORGAN: Coming up, we return to our big story tonight, my exclusive interview with the only Herman Cain accuser to go public. And it's quite dramatic. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MORGAN: Now back to our top story; the only Herman Cain accuser to go public, Sharon Bialek, says that Cain made an unwanted sexual advance after their dinner together in 1997. And she stands by her story, even in the face of fierce denials from the Cain campaign.

Listen to what she told me tonight in an exclusive interview.


MORGAN: Herman Cain through his campaign team today has said the allegations are completely false; quote, "Mr. Cain has never harassed anybody." They're basically calling you a liar.

BIALEK: Well, I know what happened and he knows what happened.


MORGAN: Well, one thing for sure - Herman Cain still has a lot of questions still to answer. And, Mr. Cain, you're welcome to come on this show to answer them. That's all for us tonight. "AC 360" starts right now.