CNN LARRY KING LIVE
Police Search Jackson's Home; Scott Peterson Ordered to Stand Trial
Aired November 18, 2003 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LARRY KING, HOST: Tonight: Police state a surprise raid on Michael Jackson's home at Neverland Ranch while he's away. They say it's part of an ongoing criminal investigation. One source with knowledge of the probe says it does have to do with an allegation of child molestation. So does (ph) Jackson family attorney Brian Oxman -- he joins us tonight -- and the reporter covering the story from the get-go, Court TV's Diane Dimond. She was on the scene at Neverland today. Also with us, Jann Carl, correspondent with "Entertainment Tonight," Court TV's Nancy Grace, the former prosecutor, and the renowned defense attorney Johnnie Cochran, who represented Michael Jackson in connection with the '93 child molestation lawsuit.
And then later: Scott Peterson will stand trial on double murder charges. But before his preliminary hearing ends, more details emerge of his relationship with Amber Frey. We'll have the latest on that story, the Michael Jackson investigation all next on LARRY KING LIVE.
Before we talk to any of our guests, let's get an update from Frank Buckley, on the scene at the Neverland Ranch. Frank, what's the latest?
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Larry, investigators are still here at Neverland Ranch. They've been here since about 8:30 this morning. A spokesman for the sheriff's department here in Santa Barbara County says that some 60 to 70 investigators from the sheriff's department and the district attorney's office have been here throughout the day, and they continue to do whatever it is they're doing. We haven't been able to see what, if anything, they've removed, but we know that investigators are still here on the scene.
KING: And we do know it definitely is in connection with a child molestation matter?
BUCKLEY: Well, that's what one source who is familiar with this investigation has told me. He said that it is having to do with an allegation of the sexual molestation of a child. But again, still just an investigation, at this point. No charges, obviously, have been brought.
KING: That's a very big area, right, to cover?
BUCKLEY: It is. The ranch is so big, in fact, Larry, that where we are, which is at the gatehouse, you can't even see over the hill, where the residence is. So this is a great deal of area to cover.
KING: Thanks very much, Frank Buckley, on the scene at Neverland.
Here's a statement released late today through Michael Jackson's spokesman, Stuart Backerman. I just spoke to Stuart right before we went on the air. And here's what they have to say. "We cannot comment on law enforcement's investigation because we don't know yet what it's about. We can comment on the malignant horde of media hounds claiming to speak for Michael on this and many other issues. A rogues' gallery of hucksters and self-styled inside sources have dominated the airwaves since reports of a search at Neverland broke, speculating, guessing, fabricating information about an investigation they couldn't possibly know about. Michael himself said, quote, `I've seen lawyers who do not represent me and spokespeople who do not know me speaking for me. These characters always seem to surface with a dreadful allegation just as another project, an album, a video is being released.' Michael, will, as always" -- again, the statement continues -- "fully cooperate with authorities in any investigation, even as it's conducted yet again when he is not at home."
What do you make of this, Johnnie Cochran?
JOHNNIE COCHRAN, JACKSON'S ATTORNEY IN '93 MOLESTATION SUIT: Well, it sounds like dej… vu to me, from that standpoint. I don't know very much about this at all, Larry. It's unfortunate, clearly, and we'll have to see how it plays out. I mean, I think that Tom Sneddon was involved in the investigation back in 1993. So...
KING: Tom is who?
COCHRAN: It's Tom Sneddon is the district attorney there in Santa Barbara County, and I understand he was there -- one of the people there today. So probably hear more from him in the near future. I don't know what the allegations are or where this is going. I do know that Michael is -- maintains his innocence. I know that. And that's all I know, at this point.
KING: Brian, you're the Jackson family attorney. Does that include Michael?
BRIAN OXMAN, JACKSON FAMILY ATTORNEY: We've represented most of the family in their divorce cases, and we've represented them for 14 years. And I have always been a defender of Michael, never wanted to speak for him because he speaks for himself. And what I want to do is let Michael be able to answer any of these allegations that he has made. But I can tell you the entire family is very upset about the whole thing, and they see this...
KING: Upset at Michael or upset about the coverage, as the statement says?
OXMAN: The statement. The statement is -- the allegation, I think, is the correct way to look at this. They are just upset. It's dej… vu, as Johnnie says. But more important, it's here we go again. Michael just seems to be a sitting target for anyone who wants to take a potshot at him, and this appears to be another one of those cases. And it causes a worldwide hysteria.
KING: Diane Dimond, when she joins us, will be by phone. She's covering a story that she may tell us about, connected with this.
Nancy Grace, what would they be looking for at the house in connection with child molestation evidence?
NANCY GRACE, COURT TV: Good question, Larry, because, of course, unless there is a child victim there to tell them some type of evidence, some type of verbal statement, we're wondering what could be found at the house? But I've got a clue. Larry, we know that there are about 70 members of law enforcement there. We know that a member from the district attorney's office is there, which is, in my mind, very significant. This is something that is a joint effort by police and the DA's office. They would be responsible for a preliminary hearing or a grand jury...
KING: So what would...
GRACE: ... proceeding.
KING: So what might they...
GRACE: That means that...
KING: ... be looking for?
GRACE: That means to me it's much more serious, if a DA is in. Also, a locksmith was brought in earlier today, reported by Diane Dimond. We have heard reports that there are lockboxes there, possibly photos, who knows, something that is significant to the alleged complaint of a 12-year-old boy.
And Larry, I just heard Brian Oxman state that Michael Jackson's there for anybody to take potshots at, but I would like to point out that not long ago, we were discussing this affidavit of a 13-year-old boy. Sound similar? Yes. This boy -- I will only call him J. Chandler (ph) -- signed an affidavit, a sworn affidavit, describing sexual contact when he -- starting around the age of 5 to 7 with Michael Jackson. This resulted in a multi-million-dollar settlement.
Now, also in my experience as a felony prosecutor, that's one type of offender that can't help but repeat...
KING: All right...
GRACE: ... offend, and that's a child molester.
KING: Is that -- is that the case you settled, Johnnie?
COCHRAN: Yes, I think she's probably referring to that case, and that case was resolved and, you know, the record was pretty clear about it. You know, there's a -- it's very complex. It's not as easy as Nancy makes it for anybody involved in it to talk about that. It was resolved to the satisfaction of all parties.
KING: But you can't talk about that, right?
COCHRAN: It's very -- it's very limited, what you can say about that.
KING: Of course, the obvious thinking of the public is, if someone didn't do anything, why settle for a penny?
COCHRAN: Well, I think that it had -- you just look back at what happened, and the record was that both sides maintained that they brought -- the young person's side and his lawyer, Larry, felt and maintained they brought their case in good faith. The defense said they'd making that in good faith. And the matter was resolved and it never went further. There was never any criminal charges.
KING: But the public thinks?
COCHRAN: Yes. Perhaps so. But you know, at any rate, Michael Jackson has always been a target by many -- for many. You know, one of the things that I think that Brian was thinking about today is that, isn't it ironic, though, these charges are brought on the day of the release of his latest album. And these things always seem to happen.
KING: Do you see a connection, Jann Carl?
JANN CARL, "ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT": You know, I don't know if I can say there's a connection that the DA's office -- or that they -- you know...
KING: Out to disturb an album, do you...
(CROSSTALK)
CARL: Yes. I mean, this is something...
COCHRAN: ... it's always coincidental.
CARL: You know, I think it's if an ongoing investigation, and according to some reports, it's been going on for three months, you know, you have to look at when did they ask the judge for the search warrant? When did the judge actually come forward and give them the search warrant? And if they asked for the search warrant a week ago or two days ago and they finally got it late last night or early this morning, then, no, I would say it doesn't have anything to do with the release of an album.
KING: What must they show to get a warrant, Brian?
OXMAN: There has to be some kind of showing of probable cause. And what we've seen with, like, the Kobe Bryant case is an accuser who makes the allegation, can establish the probable cause merely by the accusation itself. But it's so interesting. There are 60 officers, vans, trucks -- this is an invasion more than it is anything else. I've handled child molestation cases for 27 years, and I've never seen 60 officers approach anybody's house in this manner. Something is amiss...
GRACE: That's because this is...
COCHRAN: ... in the Santa Barbara's office...
GRACE: ... a fortress, Brian! This isn't a regular...
OXMAN: Oh, I -- oh, I've had...
GRACE: ... one-bedroom apartment! This is a fortress...
COCHRAN: I've seen fortresses...
GRACE: ... the police are searching!
OXMAN: ... I've seen houses where they have to batter the door down, and they don't bring 60 officers. This is incredible.
GRACE: You know, Brian, I only have one thing to say. This affidavit says, "Michael Jackson and I in bed together," "He had me twist his nipples"...
OXMAN: You are reading the Jordie Chandler affidavit, which is 10 years old and...
GRACE: "He told me nothing was wrong with it."
OXMAN: The affidavit...
KING: That case is settled.
OXMAN: ... is just long history. It's digging up old history. And here's the point of the problem. Michael settled that case and, it appears that what the accusation here is, it's mirroring the 10- year-old accusation. It's a deja vu all over again, and I'm wondering about that.
KING: But that doesn't mean it isn't true, Brian.
OXMAN: Correct, Larry. We don't know. We don't know who the accuser is and we...
KING: Well, at this point, no one knows anything.
OXMAN: We just don't know.
KING: Let me get a break and come back with more. Diane Dimond will be joining us by phone. Later, we'll discuss in the program -- some other panelists will join us -- the wind-up of the Peterson hearing. You're watching LARRY KING LIVE. Don't go away.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS PAPPAS, SANTA BARBARA SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT: We have investigators. We have additional personnel on scene to handle forensics considerations and things of that nature. The district attorney's office has investigators on scene, as well. And that makes up the bulk of that contingent, most of those being from the Santa Barbara County sheriff's department.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: By the way, we'll be taking some calls on this from you, the viewers. And a news conference is scheduled by Santa Barbara authorities for tomorrow morning at 11:00 AM Pacific time.
You were saying something, Jann?
CARL: The last time when this occurred, 10 years ago, I know that there was -- Johnnie we were talking about it -- there was a body search. I mean, it was part of the search warrant to search the body of Michael Jackson. And he talked about being...
KING: You mean the kid was able to identify things...
CARL: Well, that was the implication.
KING: Is that true, Johnnie?
COCHRAN: Well, again, without going into details regarding the case per se...
KING: No charges were ever filed, right?
COCHRAN: No charges were ever filed. There was a humiliating search warrant for Michael's body. That was one of the...
(CROSSTALK)
KING: And did they follow through on that?
COCHRAN: Oh, yes. They did. And that was a -- it was a court order.
CARL: They photographed it.
COCHRAN: It was a court order.
(CROSSTALK)
COCHRAN: It was one of the most difficult days I ever spent as a lawyer.
KING: Nancy, are you hooking one with the other because -- just because that's the only basis you have to go on, the similarity of a matter 10 years ago?
GRACE: Larry, I am basing this on over a decade of handling startlingly similar cases. Larry...
KING: Yes, but no one was convicted in this.
GRACE: Yes, I know that, Larry. There was a multi-million- dollar settlement in order to keep it out of court. And when Johnnie's referring to a full body search -- it was apparently a photographic session of Michael Jackson's body to corroborate, in my mind, what the alleged child victim -- how he described Michael Jackson without his clothes on.
Now, Larry, you know, of course, a defense attorney can paint that as perfectly innocent. In my mind, I don't think that's innocent. I don't think that's appropriate. In fact, that is a felony. You asked me earlier, what do I think police are looking for? Let me just be blunt. In my mind, they are looking for photographs, they are looking for videos, they are looking for letters, communications between Jackson and this young accuser, something to corroborate what this young boy, if he exists, has said -- the description of the inside of the home, the bedroom, whatever, something to corroborate his story.
KING: Yes, back it up. Is this a case, Brian, of sort of like it looks like a duck and it acts like a duck, it could be a duck?
OXMAN: It is a case of excitement and hysteria because here we have the same accusations that we had 10 years ago. It's like playing the play-offs all over again. There are more than...
KING: But Nancy is right in getting excited about something like that. I mean, angry excited.
OXMAN: People get excited. Nancy is excited. I understand that.
GRACE: No, I'm not excited! I'm discouraged...
OXMAN: You sure look excited to me, Nancy.
GRACE: ... with the justice system -- I'm disturbed that the justice system chose not to go forward with an investigation. He had an excellent attorney, I can vouch for that, with Johnnie Cochran. And now, apparently -- and I don't know all the facts yet, nobody does. But apparently, there's yet another young alleged victim out there. And if the justice system had done what it should have done 10 years ago, there wouldn't be another alleged victim!
OXMAN: I think the justice system did do what it should have done 10 years ago, and what we're finding here now is that it happened once, a shakedown took place once, and apparently, it might be the same accusation again. We don't know. We can't prejudge this. We don't know anything about the accuser. We don't know what it's all about. And when we find out, we'll make a reasoned judgment about it.
KING: How serious was that, years ago, Johnnie? I mean, by -- the allegation...
COCHRAN: I think it was very serious. It was a very serious, very serious case
KING: Were they close to indicting?
COCHRAN: You know, it's hard to say. I mean, it was -- there were both offices. There was Gil Garcetti in Los Angeles and Mr. Sneddon, I think, in Santa Barbara. It was a -- I took it very seriously. And at the end of the day, when the matter was resolved, you know, I felt it was the appropriate resolution for all parties involved.
KING: Are there times a client will resolve something financially. even though he didn't do the alleged act?
COCHRAN: I think there are.
KING: And what would be those times?
COCHRAN: I think that -- I think you look at a number of factors -- without speaking about that particular case, which I'm really precluded from doing. I think if you felt that your name was going to be drug through the mud and it would do great damage to your career, it would last a long period of time, one might make that decision.
KING: In other words, hypothetically, Kobe Bryant might have done nothing wrong but might settle this just to let it go away?
COCHRAN: To not have to have all this exposed and lose all his corporate...
(CROSSTALK)
CARL: ... charge that severe, even a charge as child molestation? I mean, that seems to be a category all in itself to me, that, yes, your name is going to be drug through the mud, but you've got an accusation -- and maybe Brian can answer this, too -- that's so severe that most of us consider one of the worst crimes.
KING: In other words, Brian, I would say that if that was -- if I was accused of that, the natural thing to say, I would never settle if I didn't do it.
OXMAN: Well, sometimes it's not your choice.
KING: If I did do it, I would settle.
OXMAN: I have brought child molestation cases against defendants, and I always include a negligence allegation in that because that means that the homeowners' insurance policy takes over and a homeowners' insurance policy...
KING: Really?
OXMAN: ... can settle right out from under the defendant. The defendant can scream, I will not settle that case, and they have no choice because the insurance company settles it.
KING: Nancy, how do you respond to that? What if the insurance company says, We're going to settle this.
GRACE: You know what, Larry? You know, how I respond to that? This is not, in my mind, a matter of money or insurance companies and settlements and civil suits! This is about, in my mind, a young boy, in this case, an alleged 12-year-old boy! You say we don't know what the facts are? You're right. But I do know this. Something a 12- year-old boy said sent 70 people out to Neverland...
KING: By the way...
GRACE: ... on an exhaustive search...
KING: But Nancy, let's...
GRACE: ... and a judge agreed signing a search warrant!
KING: Let's be fair. A 12-year-old boy could also fantasize, and he could imagine.
GRACE: Sure, Larry. It could happen.
KING: So the mistake we make on this program frequently is we jump to conclusions.
GRACE: Larry, I'm not...
KING: We make a leap.
GRACE: ... jumping to a conclusion. I know...
(CROSSTALK)
CONTINUED BELOW.............................
Police Search Jackson's Home; Scott Peterson Ordered to Stand Trial
Aired November 18, 2003 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LARRY KING, HOST: Tonight: Police state a surprise raid on Michael Jackson's home at Neverland Ranch while he's away. They say it's part of an ongoing criminal investigation. One source with knowledge of the probe says it does have to do with an allegation of child molestation. So does (ph) Jackson family attorney Brian Oxman -- he joins us tonight -- and the reporter covering the story from the get-go, Court TV's Diane Dimond. She was on the scene at Neverland today. Also with us, Jann Carl, correspondent with "Entertainment Tonight," Court TV's Nancy Grace, the former prosecutor, and the renowned defense attorney Johnnie Cochran, who represented Michael Jackson in connection with the '93 child molestation lawsuit.
And then later: Scott Peterson will stand trial on double murder charges. But before his preliminary hearing ends, more details emerge of his relationship with Amber Frey. We'll have the latest on that story, the Michael Jackson investigation all next on LARRY KING LIVE.
Before we talk to any of our guests, let's get an update from Frank Buckley, on the scene at the Neverland Ranch. Frank, what's the latest?
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Larry, investigators are still here at Neverland Ranch. They've been here since about 8:30 this morning. A spokesman for the sheriff's department here in Santa Barbara County says that some 60 to 70 investigators from the sheriff's department and the district attorney's office have been here throughout the day, and they continue to do whatever it is they're doing. We haven't been able to see what, if anything, they've removed, but we know that investigators are still here on the scene.
KING: And we do know it definitely is in connection with a child molestation matter?
BUCKLEY: Well, that's what one source who is familiar with this investigation has told me. He said that it is having to do with an allegation of the sexual molestation of a child. But again, still just an investigation, at this point. No charges, obviously, have been brought.
KING: That's a very big area, right, to cover?
BUCKLEY: It is. The ranch is so big, in fact, Larry, that where we are, which is at the gatehouse, you can't even see over the hill, where the residence is. So this is a great deal of area to cover.
KING: Thanks very much, Frank Buckley, on the scene at Neverland.
Here's a statement released late today through Michael Jackson's spokesman, Stuart Backerman. I just spoke to Stuart right before we went on the air. And here's what they have to say. "We cannot comment on law enforcement's investigation because we don't know yet what it's about. We can comment on the malignant horde of media hounds claiming to speak for Michael on this and many other issues. A rogues' gallery of hucksters and self-styled inside sources have dominated the airwaves since reports of a search at Neverland broke, speculating, guessing, fabricating information about an investigation they couldn't possibly know about. Michael himself said, quote, `I've seen lawyers who do not represent me and spokespeople who do not know me speaking for me. These characters always seem to surface with a dreadful allegation just as another project, an album, a video is being released.' Michael, will, as always" -- again, the statement continues -- "fully cooperate with authorities in any investigation, even as it's conducted yet again when he is not at home."
What do you make of this, Johnnie Cochran?
JOHNNIE COCHRAN, JACKSON'S ATTORNEY IN '93 MOLESTATION SUIT: Well, it sounds like dej… vu to me, from that standpoint. I don't know very much about this at all, Larry. It's unfortunate, clearly, and we'll have to see how it plays out. I mean, I think that Tom Sneddon was involved in the investigation back in 1993. So...
KING: Tom is who?
COCHRAN: It's Tom Sneddon is the district attorney there in Santa Barbara County, and I understand he was there -- one of the people there today. So probably hear more from him in the near future. I don't know what the allegations are or where this is going. I do know that Michael is -- maintains his innocence. I know that. And that's all I know, at this point.
KING: Brian, you're the Jackson family attorney. Does that include Michael?
BRIAN OXMAN, JACKSON FAMILY ATTORNEY: We've represented most of the family in their divorce cases, and we've represented them for 14 years. And I have always been a defender of Michael, never wanted to speak for him because he speaks for himself. And what I want to do is let Michael be able to answer any of these allegations that he has made. But I can tell you the entire family is very upset about the whole thing, and they see this...
KING: Upset at Michael or upset about the coverage, as the statement says?
OXMAN: The statement. The statement is -- the allegation, I think, is the correct way to look at this. They are just upset. It's dej… vu, as Johnnie says. But more important, it's here we go again. Michael just seems to be a sitting target for anyone who wants to take a potshot at him, and this appears to be another one of those cases. And it causes a worldwide hysteria.
KING: Diane Dimond, when she joins us, will be by phone. She's covering a story that she may tell us about, connected with this.
Nancy Grace, what would they be looking for at the house in connection with child molestation evidence?
NANCY GRACE, COURT TV: Good question, Larry, because, of course, unless there is a child victim there to tell them some type of evidence, some type of verbal statement, we're wondering what could be found at the house? But I've got a clue. Larry, we know that there are about 70 members of law enforcement there. We know that a member from the district attorney's office is there, which is, in my mind, very significant. This is something that is a joint effort by police and the DA's office. They would be responsible for a preliminary hearing or a grand jury...
KING: So what would...
GRACE: ... proceeding.
KING: So what might they...
GRACE: That means that...
KING: ... be looking for?
GRACE: That means to me it's much more serious, if a DA is in. Also, a locksmith was brought in earlier today, reported by Diane Dimond. We have heard reports that there are lockboxes there, possibly photos, who knows, something that is significant to the alleged complaint of a 12-year-old boy.
And Larry, I just heard Brian Oxman state that Michael Jackson's there for anybody to take potshots at, but I would like to point out that not long ago, we were discussing this affidavit of a 13-year-old boy. Sound similar? Yes. This boy -- I will only call him J. Chandler (ph) -- signed an affidavit, a sworn affidavit, describing sexual contact when he -- starting around the age of 5 to 7 with Michael Jackson. This resulted in a multi-million-dollar settlement.
Now, also in my experience as a felony prosecutor, that's one type of offender that can't help but repeat...
KING: All right...
GRACE: ... offend, and that's a child molester.
KING: Is that -- is that the case you settled, Johnnie?
COCHRAN: Yes, I think she's probably referring to that case, and that case was resolved and, you know, the record was pretty clear about it. You know, there's a -- it's very complex. It's not as easy as Nancy makes it for anybody involved in it to talk about that. It was resolved to the satisfaction of all parties.
KING: But you can't talk about that, right?
COCHRAN: It's very -- it's very limited, what you can say about that.
KING: Of course, the obvious thinking of the public is, if someone didn't do anything, why settle for a penny?
COCHRAN: Well, I think that it had -- you just look back at what happened, and the record was that both sides maintained that they brought -- the young person's side and his lawyer, Larry, felt and maintained they brought their case in good faith. The defense said they'd making that in good faith. And the matter was resolved and it never went further. There was never any criminal charges.
KING: But the public thinks?
COCHRAN: Yes. Perhaps so. But you know, at any rate, Michael Jackson has always been a target by many -- for many. You know, one of the things that I think that Brian was thinking about today is that, isn't it ironic, though, these charges are brought on the day of the release of his latest album. And these things always seem to happen.
KING: Do you see a connection, Jann Carl?
JANN CARL, "ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT": You know, I don't know if I can say there's a connection that the DA's office -- or that they -- you know...
KING: Out to disturb an album, do you...
(CROSSTALK)
CARL: Yes. I mean, this is something...
COCHRAN: ... it's always coincidental.
CARL: You know, I think it's if an ongoing investigation, and according to some reports, it's been going on for three months, you know, you have to look at when did they ask the judge for the search warrant? When did the judge actually come forward and give them the search warrant? And if they asked for the search warrant a week ago or two days ago and they finally got it late last night or early this morning, then, no, I would say it doesn't have anything to do with the release of an album.
KING: What must they show to get a warrant, Brian?
OXMAN: There has to be some kind of showing of probable cause. And what we've seen with, like, the Kobe Bryant case is an accuser who makes the allegation, can establish the probable cause merely by the accusation itself. But it's so interesting. There are 60 officers, vans, trucks -- this is an invasion more than it is anything else. I've handled child molestation cases for 27 years, and I've never seen 60 officers approach anybody's house in this manner. Something is amiss...
GRACE: That's because this is...
COCHRAN: ... in the Santa Barbara's office...
GRACE: ... a fortress, Brian! This isn't a regular...
OXMAN: Oh, I -- oh, I've had...
GRACE: ... one-bedroom apartment! This is a fortress...
COCHRAN: I've seen fortresses...
GRACE: ... the police are searching!
OXMAN: ... I've seen houses where they have to batter the door down, and they don't bring 60 officers. This is incredible.
GRACE: You know, Brian, I only have one thing to say. This affidavit says, "Michael Jackson and I in bed together," "He had me twist his nipples"...
OXMAN: You are reading the Jordie Chandler affidavit, which is 10 years old and...
GRACE: "He told me nothing was wrong with it."
OXMAN: The affidavit...
KING: That case is settled.
OXMAN: ... is just long history. It's digging up old history. And here's the point of the problem. Michael settled that case and, it appears that what the accusation here is, it's mirroring the 10- year-old accusation. It's a deja vu all over again, and I'm wondering about that.
KING: But that doesn't mean it isn't true, Brian.
OXMAN: Correct, Larry. We don't know. We don't know who the accuser is and we...
KING: Well, at this point, no one knows anything.
OXMAN: We just don't know.
KING: Let me get a break and come back with more. Diane Dimond will be joining us by phone. Later, we'll discuss in the program -- some other panelists will join us -- the wind-up of the Peterson hearing. You're watching LARRY KING LIVE. Don't go away.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS PAPPAS, SANTA BARBARA SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT: We have investigators. We have additional personnel on scene to handle forensics considerations and things of that nature. The district attorney's office has investigators on scene, as well. And that makes up the bulk of that contingent, most of those being from the Santa Barbara County sheriff's department.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: By the way, we'll be taking some calls on this from you, the viewers. And a news conference is scheduled by Santa Barbara authorities for tomorrow morning at 11:00 AM Pacific time.
You were saying something, Jann?
CARL: The last time when this occurred, 10 years ago, I know that there was -- Johnnie we were talking about it -- there was a body search. I mean, it was part of the search warrant to search the body of Michael Jackson. And he talked about being...
KING: You mean the kid was able to identify things...
CARL: Well, that was the implication.
KING: Is that true, Johnnie?
COCHRAN: Well, again, without going into details regarding the case per se...
KING: No charges were ever filed, right?
COCHRAN: No charges were ever filed. There was a humiliating search warrant for Michael's body. That was one of the...
(CROSSTALK)
KING: And did they follow through on that?
COCHRAN: Oh, yes. They did. And that was a -- it was a court order.
CARL: They photographed it.
COCHRAN: It was a court order.
(CROSSTALK)
COCHRAN: It was one of the most difficult days I ever spent as a lawyer.
KING: Nancy, are you hooking one with the other because -- just because that's the only basis you have to go on, the similarity of a matter 10 years ago?
GRACE: Larry, I am basing this on over a decade of handling startlingly similar cases. Larry...
KING: Yes, but no one was convicted in this.
GRACE: Yes, I know that, Larry. There was a multi-million- dollar settlement in order to keep it out of court. And when Johnnie's referring to a full body search -- it was apparently a photographic session of Michael Jackson's body to corroborate, in my mind, what the alleged child victim -- how he described Michael Jackson without his clothes on.
Now, Larry, you know, of course, a defense attorney can paint that as perfectly innocent. In my mind, I don't think that's innocent. I don't think that's appropriate. In fact, that is a felony. You asked me earlier, what do I think police are looking for? Let me just be blunt. In my mind, they are looking for photographs, they are looking for videos, they are looking for letters, communications between Jackson and this young accuser, something to corroborate what this young boy, if he exists, has said -- the description of the inside of the home, the bedroom, whatever, something to corroborate his story.
KING: Yes, back it up. Is this a case, Brian, of sort of like it looks like a duck and it acts like a duck, it could be a duck?
OXMAN: It is a case of excitement and hysteria because here we have the same accusations that we had 10 years ago. It's like playing the play-offs all over again. There are more than...
KING: But Nancy is right in getting excited about something like that. I mean, angry excited.
OXMAN: People get excited. Nancy is excited. I understand that.
GRACE: No, I'm not excited! I'm discouraged...
OXMAN: You sure look excited to me, Nancy.
GRACE: ... with the justice system -- I'm disturbed that the justice system chose not to go forward with an investigation. He had an excellent attorney, I can vouch for that, with Johnnie Cochran. And now, apparently -- and I don't know all the facts yet, nobody does. But apparently, there's yet another young alleged victim out there. And if the justice system had done what it should have done 10 years ago, there wouldn't be another alleged victim!
OXMAN: I think the justice system did do what it should have done 10 years ago, and what we're finding here now is that it happened once, a shakedown took place once, and apparently, it might be the same accusation again. We don't know. We can't prejudge this. We don't know anything about the accuser. We don't know what it's all about. And when we find out, we'll make a reasoned judgment about it.
KING: How serious was that, years ago, Johnnie? I mean, by -- the allegation...
COCHRAN: I think it was very serious. It was a very serious, very serious case
KING: Were they close to indicting?
COCHRAN: You know, it's hard to say. I mean, it was -- there were both offices. There was Gil Garcetti in Los Angeles and Mr. Sneddon, I think, in Santa Barbara. It was a -- I took it very seriously. And at the end of the day, when the matter was resolved, you know, I felt it was the appropriate resolution for all parties involved.
KING: Are there times a client will resolve something financially. even though he didn't do the alleged act?
COCHRAN: I think there are.
KING: And what would be those times?
COCHRAN: I think that -- I think you look at a number of factors -- without speaking about that particular case, which I'm really precluded from doing. I think if you felt that your name was going to be drug through the mud and it would do great damage to your career, it would last a long period of time, one might make that decision.
KING: In other words, hypothetically, Kobe Bryant might have done nothing wrong but might settle this just to let it go away?
COCHRAN: To not have to have all this exposed and lose all his corporate...
(CROSSTALK)
CARL: ... charge that severe, even a charge as child molestation? I mean, that seems to be a category all in itself to me, that, yes, your name is going to be drug through the mud, but you've got an accusation -- and maybe Brian can answer this, too -- that's so severe that most of us consider one of the worst crimes.
KING: In other words, Brian, I would say that if that was -- if I was accused of that, the natural thing to say, I would never settle if I didn't do it.
OXMAN: Well, sometimes it's not your choice.
KING: If I did do it, I would settle.
OXMAN: I have brought child molestation cases against defendants, and I always include a negligence allegation in that because that means that the homeowners' insurance policy takes over and a homeowners' insurance policy...
KING: Really?
OXMAN: ... can settle right out from under the defendant. The defendant can scream, I will not settle that case, and they have no choice because the insurance company settles it.
KING: Nancy, how do you respond to that? What if the insurance company says, We're going to settle this.
GRACE: You know what, Larry? You know, how I respond to that? This is not, in my mind, a matter of money or insurance companies and settlements and civil suits! This is about, in my mind, a young boy, in this case, an alleged 12-year-old boy! You say we don't know what the facts are? You're right. But I do know this. Something a 12- year-old boy said sent 70 people out to Neverland...
KING: By the way...
GRACE: ... on an exhaustive search...
KING: But Nancy, let's...
GRACE: ... and a judge agreed signing a search warrant!
KING: Let's be fair. A 12-year-old boy could also fantasize, and he could imagine.
GRACE: Sure, Larry. It could happen.
KING: So the mistake we make on this program frequently is we jump to conclusions.
GRACE: Larry, I'm not...
KING: We make a leap.
GRACE: ... jumping to a conclusion. I know...
(CROSSTALK)
CONTINUED BELOW.............................