Transcript: Fox News Live (Fox News)
Host: Rita Cosby
Date aired: April 18 2004
Guest: Joe Tacopina, the attorney for Frank Tyson and Vincent Amen and Les Levine, private investigator
RITA COSBY, HOST: Two of Michael Jackson’s former employees subpoenaed by the grand jury in his child molestation case. Will their testimony hurt the defense and will they even testify at all? Les Levine is a private investigator; one of the best in the business who often works with Ben Brafman, one of the defense attorneys for Jackson. And Joe Tacopina is a defense attorney representing the two former Jackson employees. Joe, I gotta start with you. Are they going to testify or not?
JOE TACOPINA, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: It’s quite frankly not our intention to have them testify. I mean the only way I see Frank or Vinnie testifying…
COSBY: This is Frank Tyson and Vinne Amen
TACOPINA:…two of Michael’s closest associates is before a trial jury if they’re invited defendants.
COSBY: And they were offering immunity right? They’re still not gonna take it.
TACOPINA: They were offered a limited source of immunity: Use immunity. And use immunity doesn’t do us much good. It’s like a proffer agreement. It’s like protection once [unintelligible] the prosecutor. And Rita if this were another case and if this weren’t the Michael Jackson case, I would consider it. I do not see the investigators, the prosecutors in this case, going in with an open mind. I think they believe in their theory of the case whatever that theory is gonna be. I don’t think any witness is gonna take them off that theory. I know what Frank Tyson and Vincent Amen would say would take them [prosecutors] off their theory. They support Michael Jackson’s innocence. They have issues with the mother of this alleged victim.
COSBY: Did they see anything improper? Any sexual…
TACOPINA: Absolutely not.
COSBY: Anything towards them? There was a report that he said that he stayed in a bed or near a bed with Jackson and they drank booze together, which it doesn’t…
TACOPINA: It doesn’t address the issues that Michael’s charged with, one. Two, the report that you’re talking about was hardly a report, hardly an interview. It was something that was really taken out of context. Frank and Vinnie both stand by, steadfastly, Michael Jackson and maintain his innocence as well as their own. They did nothing wrong. And I don’t intend on just throwing them into the lion’s den so to speak, just so they could, you know, have their say.
COSBY: Did they, have they ever seen anything else improper outside of themselves?
TACOPINA: Absolutely not. They, well you know, there’s a lot of people involved in this case and a lot of different prongs. Michael Jackson certainly is not responsible for what someone else may or may not have done. Frank and Vinnie did nothing wrong. They never saw Michael Jackson do anything wrong. It’s basically simple as that as far as I’m concerned at this point.
COSBY: And Les Levine, speaking of the lion’s den, who else is going before the lion’s den?
LES LEVINE, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: It’s interesting in what Joe says. To me it indicates perhaps the weakness of the case under prosecution that at this late date after formal charges have been levied, that they’re still interested in searching for witnesses to further support…
COSBY: Well there’s a lot of people saying, going to employees, going to other people calling them…
LEVINE: The mere fact that they went to a grand jury when they weren’t necessary, when they didn’t have to, shows to me that they’re still fishing for evidence.
COSBY: When are you hearing that an indictment, uh because that, as everybody says, a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich regardless of the merits of the case.
LEVINE: Word on the street is that the district attorney will probably seek an indictment sometime this coming week. Of course, the chances of getting it are great, but there’s always that risk that he won’t. But it appears to be this week.
COSBY: Has there been any other evidence, Les, that has gone to the grand jury because one of the issues Mark Geragos and Ben Brafman–who you work for–uh, they have been pushing extensively to get exculpatory evidence that they feel helps Michael Jackson. And there’s a big argument as to whether they can even get it before a grand jury.
LEVINE: Yeah, well there has been a tremendous amount of exculpatory evidence given to the prosecution and to the grand jury. Whether that’ll turn the tide at this particular date, I would think not. But certainly there is a tremendous amount of exculpatory evidence in this case.
COSBY: Such as? Can you give us sort of a defense?
LEVINE: I mean, just the background of the individuals bringing the suit. I mean, their record of bringing lawsuits is, you know everybody knows about it. And uh, this is just as I once said before: this is just a remake of an old movie. We’ve seen all this before. We’ve seen people supposedly coming from 1980 and 1990, but there’s certainly no new evidence against Michael. So to me this is just a rehashing of the old story.
COSBY: Joe, one of the things, too, about the former employees was this mother and the son, and of course there have been some questions about things that they’ve done in past lawsuits. But one of the things they’re alleging in this case is that they were essentially kidnapped; sort of held there by Frank and Vinnie, these two employees who you represent, also told ‘go to Brazil, get you out of the country’ also, ‘keep you incognito’. Did they do anything? Were they keeping her or the boy against their will?
TACOPINA: Let me say basically and simply, no. Let me also say that I wish I really wish, Rita, I could try my case right here. I wish I could expose all the evidence I know about. I will have a picnic, quite frankly. It would be my pleasure to go out and meet these types of charges if they’re ever levied. They are ludicrous. I know that there’s absolutely no credible evidence that will sustain those charges against Frank and Vinnie. They did nothing against her will. Anything she got, she got ‘cause she wanted it. She had a certain agenda quite frankly. And to now go and implicate my clients at this late date, we’re not gonna stand for it. Fortunately, we don’t have to answer for it now. But if there should come a time when we’re asked to speak our peace in front of a trial jury, we’ll be more than happy to accommodate the accuser.
LEVINE: I think this is a case, Rita, where the best lawyers in the country have been hired to defend Michael Jackson. And the system in this particular case will work. When the trial comes, I’m sure all the facts will come out. And I truly believe that Michael will be exonerated.
COSBY: And we’ll be watching closely, as you said maybe an indictment will come down sometime this week.
LEVINE: I believe sometime this week.
COSBY: Thank you very much. We appreciate both of you being here. Thank you.
Transcribed by whisper for MJEOL.com
Excuse any typos.
Watch VIDEO of this interview
Host: Rita Cosby
Date aired: April 18 2004
Guest: Joe Tacopina, the attorney for Frank Tyson and Vincent Amen and Les Levine, private investigator
RITA COSBY, HOST: Two of Michael Jackson’s former employees subpoenaed by the grand jury in his child molestation case. Will their testimony hurt the defense and will they even testify at all? Les Levine is a private investigator; one of the best in the business who often works with Ben Brafman, one of the defense attorneys for Jackson. And Joe Tacopina is a defense attorney representing the two former Jackson employees. Joe, I gotta start with you. Are they going to testify or not?
JOE TACOPINA, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: It’s quite frankly not our intention to have them testify. I mean the only way I see Frank or Vinnie testifying…
COSBY: This is Frank Tyson and Vinne Amen
TACOPINA:…two of Michael’s closest associates is before a trial jury if they’re invited defendants.
COSBY: And they were offering immunity right? They’re still not gonna take it.
TACOPINA: They were offered a limited source of immunity: Use immunity. And use immunity doesn’t do us much good. It’s like a proffer agreement. It’s like protection once [unintelligible] the prosecutor. And Rita if this were another case and if this weren’t the Michael Jackson case, I would consider it. I do not see the investigators, the prosecutors in this case, going in with an open mind. I think they believe in their theory of the case whatever that theory is gonna be. I don’t think any witness is gonna take them off that theory. I know what Frank Tyson and Vincent Amen would say would take them [prosecutors] off their theory. They support Michael Jackson’s innocence. They have issues with the mother of this alleged victim.
COSBY: Did they see anything improper? Any sexual…
TACOPINA: Absolutely not.
COSBY: Anything towards them? There was a report that he said that he stayed in a bed or near a bed with Jackson and they drank booze together, which it doesn’t…
TACOPINA: It doesn’t address the issues that Michael’s charged with, one. Two, the report that you’re talking about was hardly a report, hardly an interview. It was something that was really taken out of context. Frank and Vinnie both stand by, steadfastly, Michael Jackson and maintain his innocence as well as their own. They did nothing wrong. And I don’t intend on just throwing them into the lion’s den so to speak, just so they could, you know, have their say.
COSBY: Did they, have they ever seen anything else improper outside of themselves?
TACOPINA: Absolutely not. They, well you know, there’s a lot of people involved in this case and a lot of different prongs. Michael Jackson certainly is not responsible for what someone else may or may not have done. Frank and Vinnie did nothing wrong. They never saw Michael Jackson do anything wrong. It’s basically simple as that as far as I’m concerned at this point.
COSBY: And Les Levine, speaking of the lion’s den, who else is going before the lion’s den?
LES LEVINE, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: It’s interesting in what Joe says. To me it indicates perhaps the weakness of the case under prosecution that at this late date after formal charges have been levied, that they’re still interested in searching for witnesses to further support…
COSBY: Well there’s a lot of people saying, going to employees, going to other people calling them…
LEVINE: The mere fact that they went to a grand jury when they weren’t necessary, when they didn’t have to, shows to me that they’re still fishing for evidence.
COSBY: When are you hearing that an indictment, uh because that, as everybody says, a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich regardless of the merits of the case.
LEVINE: Word on the street is that the district attorney will probably seek an indictment sometime this coming week. Of course, the chances of getting it are great, but there’s always that risk that he won’t. But it appears to be this week.
COSBY: Has there been any other evidence, Les, that has gone to the grand jury because one of the issues Mark Geragos and Ben Brafman–who you work for–uh, they have been pushing extensively to get exculpatory evidence that they feel helps Michael Jackson. And there’s a big argument as to whether they can even get it before a grand jury.
LEVINE: Yeah, well there has been a tremendous amount of exculpatory evidence given to the prosecution and to the grand jury. Whether that’ll turn the tide at this particular date, I would think not. But certainly there is a tremendous amount of exculpatory evidence in this case.
COSBY: Such as? Can you give us sort of a defense?
LEVINE: I mean, just the background of the individuals bringing the suit. I mean, their record of bringing lawsuits is, you know everybody knows about it. And uh, this is just as I once said before: this is just a remake of an old movie. We’ve seen all this before. We’ve seen people supposedly coming from 1980 and 1990, but there’s certainly no new evidence against Michael. So to me this is just a rehashing of the old story.
COSBY: Joe, one of the things, too, about the former employees was this mother and the son, and of course there have been some questions about things that they’ve done in past lawsuits. But one of the things they’re alleging in this case is that they were essentially kidnapped; sort of held there by Frank and Vinnie, these two employees who you represent, also told ‘go to Brazil, get you out of the country’ also, ‘keep you incognito’. Did they do anything? Were they keeping her or the boy against their will?
TACOPINA: Let me say basically and simply, no. Let me also say that I wish I really wish, Rita, I could try my case right here. I wish I could expose all the evidence I know about. I will have a picnic, quite frankly. It would be my pleasure to go out and meet these types of charges if they’re ever levied. They are ludicrous. I know that there’s absolutely no credible evidence that will sustain those charges against Frank and Vinnie. They did nothing against her will. Anything she got, she got ‘cause she wanted it. She had a certain agenda quite frankly. And to now go and implicate my clients at this late date, we’re not gonna stand for it. Fortunately, we don’t have to answer for it now. But if there should come a time when we’re asked to speak our peace in front of a trial jury, we’ll be more than happy to accommodate the accuser.
LEVINE: I think this is a case, Rita, where the best lawyers in the country have been hired to defend Michael Jackson. And the system in this particular case will work. When the trial comes, I’m sure all the facts will come out. And I truly believe that Michael will be exonerated.
COSBY: And we’ll be watching closely, as you said maybe an indictment will come down sometime this week.
LEVINE: I believe sometime this week.
COSBY: Thank you very much. We appreciate both of you being here. Thank you.
Transcribed by whisper for MJEOL.com
Excuse any typos.
Watch VIDEO of this interview
