updated 11/8/2007 11:17:57 AM ET 2007-11-08T16:17:57

Guests: Jennifer Stockman, Julie Roginsky, Pat Robertson, Jason Schulte, Clint Van Zandt, Vikki Ziegler, Chuck Nice

DAN ABRAMS, HOST:  Tonight, the Republican candidate who has made 9/11 the corner stone of his campaign.  The candidate who stumps speeches that are littered with references to 9/11 is being endorsed by a man who said this country had it coming to us.  We learned today Rudy Giuliani is being endorsed by tele-evangelist Pat Robertson.  Forget for a moment that the two totally disagree on issues like abortion and gay marriage.  The issue of the September 11th attacks is Giuliani‘s campaign focus and here is what Robertson said on September 13th, 2001 in response to Jerry Falwell opining on what led to the World Trade Center attacks.


JERRY FALWELL:  I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays, and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that alternative lifestyle, the ACLU people for the American way, all of them who tried to secularize America, I point the finger in their face and say you helped this happen.



ABRAMS:  Totally concur.  Well, Robertson has tried to distance himself from that statement.  He also said in the wake of 9/11:

“We have allowed rampant pornography on the Internet, and rampant secularism. 9/11 is happening because God Almighty is lifting His protection from us.”

So does this endorsement really help the hailed hero of 9/11? 

Joining us now is Jennifer Stockman of the Republican Majority for Choice.  Democratic strategist, Julie Roginsky, and MSNBC political analyst Pat Buchanan.  All right.  Thanks to all of you for coming on the program.  Appreciate it.  All right.  Jennifer, does this really help?  I mean, is this what Giuliani wants?  Pat Robertson.

JENNIFER STOCKMAN, REPUBLICAN MAJORITY FOR CHOICE:  Clearly he‘s been courting Robertson‘s endorsement.  They‘ve all been. Romney has been.  Well, I think in order for any candidate to win they have to unite.

ABRAMS:  How can a candidate of 9/11, right?  I mean 9/11, 9/11, 9/11.  So, what we hear in every speech.  And now the man who is coming out by his side to endorse him is a guy who‘s saying that you know, we had it coming to us.

STOCKMAN:  Well, I have to believe that Robertson was looking at

the only candidate who actually could beat Hillary and Rudy is the only

one.  I think that Rudy, on the other hand, needs Robertson because he will

bring the base.  He will help carry him to the primary.  And that‘s often

what -

ABRAMS:  Pat, what do you make of this?


is going to bring the evangelical Christians to Rudy.  What he gives him

some insulation, Dan.  I also think that Pat Robertson sees Rudy Giuliani

as a winner and he thinks Rudy -

ABRAMS:  I know why Robertson wants to endorse Giuliani.  I get it, the question is should Giuliani be welcoming Robertson, considering his campaign is based around 9/11?

BUCHANAN:  Well, look.  He wants to win the presidency of the United States and Pat Robertson can help.  Despite the fact that Rudy would say it was ridiculous what Robertson said.  I mean, he attacked Ron Paul for disagreeing about 9/11.  Look, Rudy wants to win.  This is an asset for him.  No doubt about it.  I don‘t think it locks up the Christian evangelicals.  The key thing this does, Dan, is not simply for Rudy but this drives an enormous wedge between the Christian evangelicals and the old Christian coalition.  It comes apart.

ABRAMS:  And here is what John McCain and Sam Brownback said when they heard about Pat Robertson endorsing Giuliani.


SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, ® PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:  Every once in a while I‘m left speechless.  This is one of those times.


SAM BROWNBACK:  I was surprised to hear that.


ABRAMS:  Yes..  Julie, they‘re surprised.  But, you know, look, everyone knows why Robertson wants to endorse Giuliani.  OK.  Fine.  Giuliani sort of welcoming this endorsement, bringing him into the tent, so to speak.  I mean, does this hurt him as being sort of the candidate of 9/11?

JULIE ROGINSKY, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST:  Well, the real Giuliani please stand up.  This the guy who flip flopped on abortion, he flip flopped on assault weapons, and is now flip flopping on gay rights by getting his bigot to support him.  He even flip flopped on the Yankees.  I don‘t even know what Rudy Giuliani stands for anymore, so, when I hear words like he‘s the best guy to beat Hillary?  Which Rudy Giuliani the best guy to beat Hillary?  The guy that‘s endorsed by bigot who says that gay people and feminists and pro-choice people are responsible for 9/11?  Or Rudy Giuliani who ho had this big inclusive big tent policy when he was mayor of New York?  He‘s got nothing left to stand for and to me; I‘m really sure who‘s running out anymore.  He‘s running so desperately to get this nomination; he doesn‘t even know what he is running to become president of anymore.

ABRAMS:  Good.

STOCKMAN:  But first of all, Rudy is not a flip flopper.  If there is one thing that I think everybody can agree with.

ABRAMS:  He‘s evolving.  It‘s sort of - the evolution of Rudy Giuliani.

STOCKMAN:  On the choice issue, he has been very strong.  He has a lot of integrity.  He said at the last conference.


ABRAMS:  Civil unions are suddenly becoming - he‘s evolving his position on gay rights, right?

ROGINSKY:  Excuse me, can I say something about the pro-choice

issue, gay rights (INAUDIBLE)?  He says he‘s pro-choice but he would

appoint strict constructionists judges.  I don‘t really care what Rudy

Giuliani‘s personal belief is on abortion.  I care what he would do as

president.  When he said that he would appoint judges that George Bush-


STOCKMAN:  He‘s caught on the strict constructionist term and he‘s logo.  But let‘s not forget that President Reagan chose Sandra Day O‘Connor who was then, she has turned out to be very pro-choice.


ABRAMS:  Even on that time, Sandra Day O‘Connor was considered a wild card.  But Pat, could you bring us back to this issue of Robertson-Giuliani.  Again, you are advising Giuliani, all right?  Pat Robertson they say is ready to endorse you.  We know why you want him.  Do you express any concern to Giuliani?  Do you say I‘ve got to tell you, there‘s something about being associated with Pat Robertson and let me read you some of what he said in the past: “Just like what Nazi Germany did the Jews, so Liberal America is now doing to evangelical Christians.  It‘s no different.  It‘s the same thing.  It‘s happening all over again.”  He went on to say: “It‘s the Democratic Congress the liberal-based media and the homosexuals who want to destroy the Christians - it‘s more terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history.”  Is that the guy you want on your side if you‘re Rudy?

BUCHANAN:  If you want to get the Christian evangelicals, he can help.  What are you talking about?  He doesn‘t agree with everything he said.  Look, these are two people who have been at the opposite ends.  I mean, how does Pat Robertson endorsed a guy who‘s a veteran of six gay pride parades, for heaven‘s sake.  This is two people coming together for a purpose and that‘s to get Rudy in the White House.

ABRAMS:  Yes, but wait.  I thought, and correct me if I am wrong Jennifer, but John Kerry probably lost the 2004 election because of the allegation of, what do we call it flip flopping or his views evolving, et cetera.


ABRAMS:  And you know, it seems that Rudy Giuliani isn‘t just

changing them.  He is fundamentally altering who he is.  If he‘s now

associating himself -

STOCKMAN:  I don‘t know how that changes who he is.  I mean Rudy running for president not Pat Robertson.  He‘s not the candidate.  So it doesn‘t matter.


ABRAMS:  What do you mean it doesn‘t matter in the people around you help define who you are.  No?

STOCKMAN:  Well, he‘s one endorsement of many, many endorsements. 

And he will bring - Why is Mitt Romney, why were all of the candidates so

interested in getting Pat Robertson‘s endorsement?  I mean, that‘s what -

ABRAMS:  It‘s something about Rudy Giuliani, OK and the positions he has taken in the past and the fact that he has been someone who has always been on social issues comparatively liberal.  And he is now trying to get the evangelical vote, right?  Let me ask that.  Let me throw this to Pat.  Pat, you agree with me, don‘t you, that he‘s not going to be able to get much of the evangelical vote, is he?

BUCHANAN:  No.  I don‘t think so.  But this provides him with some insulation.  He can go south and say, look, I mean, look, Pat Robertson and we do disagree but Pat Robertson‘s found enough in my record to support me and so can you folks and we agree on the war.  So, look, it is a gain for Rudy.  There‘s no doubt about it—it‘s a very cold, pragmatic deal between two people to help get the presidency—get the nomination.


ABRAMS:  All right.  Very quickly Julie, I don‘t have to ask, go ahead.

ROGINSKY:  Let me say this quickly Rudy Giuliani is running as the president of 9/11, is being endorsed by a guy who said that liberal judges are worst than people who flew planes into the World Trade Center?  Does Rudy Giuliani agree with that?  If he‘s a guy who has any a record to run on anymore.

ABRAMS:  And I‘m concerned about the fact that he‘s basically saying we had it coming to us at one point.  And then say oh.  All right.  Pat, this is an important poll that was taken that was out tonight.  It says if Pat Buchanan were an independent candidate running for president who would you vote?  Clinton, 44 percent.  Giuliani, 35 percent.  Pat Buchanan is still pulling in 12 percent.  I mean, Pat, you are still a real candidate out there.

BUCHANAN:  What that says if you have a third party conservative and authentic conservative in the race that‘s the end of Rudy Giuliani as the Republican nominee.

ABRAMS:  All right, Pat, I‘m going to give you your opportunity to announce on this program that you are, in fact, going to be running for president.  Pat Buchanan?

BUCHANAN:  I‘ll do it, Dan, if you pull a Pat Robertson and endorse me.


ABRAMS:  So, Pat, you are saying that if I‘m willing to endorse you right now.

BUCHANAN:  If you‘ll come across.

ABRAMS:  That you will run for president?

BUCHANAN:  It‘s too far a leap for you, Dan.

ABRAMS:  You‘re that confident that I will not endorse you, Pat.

BUCHANAN:  You take it easy.

ROGINSKY:  Pat, you are the only Republican that doesn‘t flip flop. 

I‘m pretty proud of you.

ABRAMS:  All right.

STOCKMAN:  I think what this shows most of all is how divisive the

social conservative wing of the party is right now.  They don‘t know what‘s

going on.  They‘re all endorsing Pat Buchanan -

ABRAMS:  Julie, Jennifer, Pat Buchanan, Pat, you and I will talk about this off camera. But I would not count on it if I were you.  And as a result, I don‘t think the public is not going to be counting on Pat Buchanan as a candidate.

Coming up next: A woman tells a man who does not want to be a dad that she‘s infertile and still using contraception, then the miraculous conception, she now wants him to pay for the child, he joins us about his legal case.  Does a man have any, quote, “Right to choose”?

And, later, another teacher busted for allegedly having sex with a 13-year-old student.  She met him because he was her daughter‘s ex-boyfriend.

Plus, a college student on the dean‘s list now suspected of being involved in the rape and throat slashing of her roommate.  The motive?  The victim may have refused to join on an orgy.  Yuck.  Coming up.


ABRAMS:  What if a guy does not want to have kids has a girlfriend promise she can‘t have kids but then gets pregnant?  Should he still have to pay child support?  A Michigan law says yes.  And now a Federal Court of Appeals has refused to step in.  Now, Matthew Dubay must continue to make monthly payments to his ex Lauren Wells.  He based his fighting in the courts saying he was deceived and shouldn‘t have to pay.  Joining me now from Lansing, Michigan is Matthew Dubay.  Mel Feit, the executive director of the National Center for Men, joins us.  He helped bring the case.  And Vikki Ziegler, a family law attorney and civil litigator.  Thanks to all of you. Appreciate it.  Matthew, first of all, lay out the facts for us.  What happened?

MATTHEW DUBAY, SUED OVER CHILD SUPPORT TO EX:  What happened was we had a relationship, brief relationship for about three months.  During which time I made it clear to her I was not willing to be a father.  She made it very clear to me that she could not get pregnant as well as she was on contraceptives for other medical reasons.  We broke up.  Shortly thereafter, she informed me she was pregnant and she was keeping the child and that I would pay for it.

ABRAMS:  When you say she said she could not get pregnant.  How definitive was she about that?

DUBAY:  She explained to me she had a medical condition where she could not get pregnant.

ABRAMS:  No way?  No how?

DUBAY:  That is correct.

ABRAMS:  And then the miraculous conception occurs, right?

DUBAY:  Correct.

ABRAMS:  All right.  Now, before I get into the legal issue, you know,  there are going to be a lot of women out there and who are going to look at you and say come on, this guy has sex with this woman.  This is life.  When a child comes up, what you want no one to have to pay for the child?

DUBAY:  No.  That‘s not the case at all.  If this case were reversed and it was a woman that was being forced into being a mother, it would never happen because she has options.  Those options are overlooked in men and we‘re given no choice.  We simply have to live with whatever the woman decides.

ABRAMS:  All right.  You know, Vikki, here is what concerns me about cases like this.  All right?  This is a guy who‘s being told specifically by - let‘s assume the facts are true, right?  Let‘s assume she said I am infertile, I cannot have children.  Let‘s assume just for argument‘s sake and I don‘t know this would be the case - let‘s assume she knows that that may not to be true.  Because there‘d been other cases where women have known having sex with a guy, not telling their husband, having someone else‘s child, lying to the husband, and the husband is still forced to pay child support.  Is that fair?  Isn‘t there some sort of fraud involved?

VIKKI ZIEGLER, FAMILY LAW ATTORNEY:  Yes, I mean, look, that‘s not what happened in this case in the sense of what they filed.  Fraudulent inducement is an actionable claim.

ABRAMS:  But in all - every case I‘ve seen the father still has to pay.  It seems court after court rules that even if, even if the mother lies, even if she makes up stories, even if she has sex with some other guy, it‘s in the best interest of the child, the courts say for the person that the child is with to pay.  Fair?

ZEIGLER:  Generally happens.  Prevention—number one.  Number two, what is the real question?  Child support is not just because the father pays.  The mother and father have to contribute to the welfare.

ABRAMS:  Even if the mother lies to get the child?  Even if the mother lies to the father?

ZEIGLER:  Yes.  Because, you know what?  A lot of people have lied to me in my life.  I‘m sure you.  I don‘t take everyone‘s word, so, I‘m going to protect myself.  That‘s the key.

ABRAMS:  All right.  Go ahead, now.

MEL FEIT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CENTER FOR MEN:  Vikki is right.  This case was about fraud.  For us it was about the meaning of Roe vs. Wade (ph) and I think the practical intent and the effect of Roe was to make it possible for every woman to have an intimate sexual relationship while at the same time choosing not to be a parent even in the event of a contraceptive failure.  The question we‘re asking.


ABRAMS:  Hang on, Mel.  That was not  -- the reasoning in Roe vs.  Wade was that a woman‘s body was her own to do with it what she would with regard to an abortion or not.

MEL:  No.  You should—you are wrong.  You should read the case.

ABRAMS:  That‘s exactly what the court ruled in this case.

FEIT:  No.  In the very center of the case the court ruled that the

financial burden than could be imposed on the woman was so great as to

outweigh the state interest.  We were asking the court to decide the right

to separate sexual intimacy from force procreation is a fundamental human

right or right to be enjoyed only by people with internal reproductive

system because it can‘t be a both, Dan.  It can‘t be a fundamental right

entitled to -


ZEIGLER:  You are never going to win that reproductive argument. 

You never going to win that.  We understand what the Ninth Amendment says.  You will never get to point.  Really the bottom line is this—there is a child here now.  We can have a pre-sex contract before everyone has intercourse and say, hey, why don‘t you sign my reproductive organs away and you know what?  These are my financial responsibilities because maybe they would be able, this gentleman wouldn‘t be in this situation today.  Perhaps that‘s something to think about.

FEIT:  Here is what‘s so interesting about the Dubay case.  The state of Michigan said after the child is born, out of the mother‘s body, Child Support Laws are enforced gender neutrally.  Well, after this child was born that Matt said he wanted the baby put up for adoption.  The woman refused.  Matt had to pay her charge.  Matt asked the state of Michigan to show us one single case, just one example of a woman who wanted to put her baby up for adoption who was subsequently forced to pay a man child support.  The state couldn‘t or wouldn‘t or didn‘t show a single case.  You know why?  There is no case.  There are thousands of men forced to pay child support.  Not a single woman.

ABRAMS:  Legally this is a horrible case, Mel.  You guys were forced to pay attorney fees because it was such a bad case.

FEIT:  Yes, it‘s a shameful thing.

ABRAMS:  But it‘s practical matter -

ZEIGLER:  It was meritless.

ABRAMS: Yes, in legal case this is frivolous.  But as a practical

matter, I think that people, men should not be forced into situations where

they‘re lied to, not this case but still a situation that I‘ve done before,

not the debate-

FEIT:  He may have been lied to.

ABRAMS:  Matt Dubay, Mel Feit, Vikki Zeigler, thanks a lot. 

Appreciate it.

Coming up: A substitute teacher allegedly sleeps with a 13-year-old middle school student who also happens to be her daughter‘s ex-boyfriend.  While her husband and daughter happened to be upstairs.

Remember when CNN Lou Dobbs said on 60 MINUTES - “If you reported something it‘s a fact.”  Then we learned he got it wrong.  Now he‘s saying he almost never gets any viewer mail disagreeing with him.  Yes, right.  That‘s up next in Beat the Press.


ABRAMS:  It‘s time for tonight‘s Beat the Press.  Our daily look back at the absurd and sometimes amusing perils of live TV.

First up: FOX‘s business reporter Rebecca Gomez was asked for business analysis of Rosie O‘Donnell possibly coming to MSNBC.  She took the opportunity to try to slam me.


REBECCA GOMEZ:  I mean, they‘re - the show that they have right now at 9:00 o‘clock live with Dan Abrams, you know, he failed at trying to be a general manager there.


ABRAMS:  Ouch! It‘s true, MSNBC‘s ratings were only up 47 percent during my tenure as GM.  But I understand why a go-go her nickname on her show might have it out for me.  After all we did show you this embarrassing moment back in August where she didn‘t seem to know the difference between median like the midpoint and medium like a t-shirt size.


REBECCA GOMEZ:  We could see a nationwide drop in the medium home price.  Of course, we have seen prices fall in local markets but we are talking about nationwide medium home price drop for the first time ever.


ABRAMS:  Yes.  The crack business team at FOX now aware of the difference between median and medium.  Just in time for the launch of business channel.  OK.  No hard feelings.  I like your show.  I just couldn‘t resist.  Come on.

Next up: Everyone knows that FOX‘s Alan Combs the so-called liberal plays second fiddle to conservative, Sean Hannity over at FOX.  At some point he‘s going to have to say enough is enough.


ALAN COMBS:  And now we continue with Sean‘s exclusive interview.

And we continue now with Sean‘s exclusive interview.

And we continue now the conclusion of Sean‘s interview.


ABRAMS:  Poor Alan.  Sean this, Sean that, Sean, Sean, Sean.

Finally: Talk about living in a bubble apparently over at CNN, everyone in Lou Dobbs‘ world agrees with him on everything.  That he said explains why he doesn‘t read emails on air from viewers who disagree with him because there aren‘t any.


LOU DOBBS:  There are a few.

LARRY KING:  You don‘t have any.

DOBBS:  We have a few.  Very few.

KING:  Really?

DOBBS:  You know, typically our audience is in general agreement.


ABRAMS:  Very few, Larry, we never get emails disagreeing with us.  We need your help Beating the Press.  If you‘ve seen anything right or wrong, amusing or absurd, go to our Web site Abrams.msnbc.com.  Leave us the tip in the box.  Please include the show and time you saw the item.

Up next: Another teacher busted for having sex with a 13-year-old student.  This time he was her daughter‘s ex-boyfriend.  The husband and daughter allegedly upstairs while it was happening.

And the college student now a suspect in the rape and murder of her roommate, the motive? The victim may have refused to join in on an orgy.  Coming up.



DAN ABRAMS, HOST:  Welcome back.  Coming up tonight, a college student suspected of being involved in the rape and throat slashing of her roommate allegedly because the victim wouldn‘t participate in an orgy.  And washing machine built for dirty french dogs, poodles to be exact.  Plus, an Ohio store clerk fights off an armed robber using a piece of aluminum.  Poodles brushed clean and a courageous clerk using brushed metal; it‘s in tonight‘s “Winners and Losers.”

But first, tonight a former teacher charged with sexual assault after allegedly having sex with her daughter‘s 13-year-old ex-boyfriend with her husband standing nearby.  Thirty-nine-year-old Anne Knopf(ph) denied allegations that she had sex with her daughter‘s ex in the basement of her home while her husband and children slept upstairs.  Court records show the boy drove his mother‘s car to Knopf‘s home once a week for about four or five weeks. 

Joining me how is Jason Schulte, reporter with the Pierce County Herald.  Jason, thanks very much for taking the time.  I appreciate it.  So what is the most significant piece of evidence that they have against her? 

JASON SCHULTE, REPORTER, “PIERCE COUNTY HERALD”:  Probably e-mails that they collected.  It shows on how much that she said he loved them, how much she wanted to be with him, and that the feelings that she really couldn‘t control that she had for him. 

ABRAMS:  Why do they think that she had sex with this 13-year-old while her daughter and her husband were upstairs in the house? 

SCHULTE:  Probably the thought that it was done - according to the complaint, it was done during the night while they were sleeping.  So probably figuring that was the safest - this is just a guess - probably the safest place where they couldn‘t get in the most trouble. 

ABRAMS:  So, the husband is there in court with her, right?  I mean, is he still with her?  I mean, is he staying with her through this?  Has he filed for divorce? 

SCHULTE:  As of today, he has not filed for divorce.  He was with her the entire way for the court hearing.  And that‘s all we know for right now. 

ABRAMS:  All right.  Jason Schulte, thanks a lot.  Appreciate it. 

SCHULTE:  Thank you, Dan. 

ABRAMS:  And then another teacher sex story, a 25-year-old teacher accused of having sex with her 13-year-old student.  The pair fled Nebraska and headed to Mexico where authorities tracked them down.  Today, for the first time, he talked about it publicly. 


UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER:  But did you have sex with her - it was just only those few times before you went to (UNINTELLIGIBLE). 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE STUDENT:  I‘m not sure that it was two times but it was - two or three times. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER:  You said a few times.  A couple of times.  How many times? 



ABRAMS:  So, the question remains, why do some female teachers risk everything to have sex with their young students?  Well, some of those teachers answered that question in their own words. 

DEBRA LAFAVE:  Pretty much it was oral sex.  Yes, he wanted it.  And, Yes, I gave it to him.  Because at that point in time I was already in the mode of wanting to please him. 

MATT LAUER, HOST, THE “TODAY” SHOW:  After sex with this student did you say, “In the eyes of the law I just committed rape?” 

LAFAVE:  No.  I don‘t think - no.  I didn‘t say that. 

LAUER:  You and this student have open conversations about the fact that you two might be getting into very dangerous territory? 

LAFAVE:  You know, there was very little conversation to be honest with you.  You know, looking back, he was 14, you know, what is there really to say to a 23-year-old? 

LAUER:  What did you have in common? 

LAFAVE:  Nothing. 

LAUER:  Did you know what you were doing was wrong? 

LAFAVE:  At the time?  I don‘t think I did.  Obviously not, because I wouldn‘t have done it.  He consented but I should have been the one to say, “Look, you are a kid.  And this is not a good idea whether you want it or not.”

LAUER:  You should have said it on a number of occasions. 

LAFAVE:  Oh, yes. 

LAUER:  You should have said it when you first started flirting with him, and you clearly should have said it before you had sex with this young man. 

LAFAVE:  Clearly.  Well, like I said that‘s a fog that I was in.  The only way that I can describe that is I felt that I was a peer of theirs. 

LAUER:  So what is the one thing you want people to know about you? 

LAFAVE:  That I committed a sex offense, but I‘m not a sex offender even though I‘m labeled as that.  I made a really, really, really bad choice. 

LAUER:  You don‘t see yourself as a predator? 

LAFAVE:  It‘s hard.  It is so hard because I lived 23 of my - years of my life, you know, knowing who I was.  I was a kind-hearted person who loved children who would never, you know, do anything to break the law.  I was a good person.  And then now, everything has just changed.  So it‘s just really hard for me to accept that. 

PAMELA ROGERS, FORMER TEACHER:  No matter how broken - no matter how broken my spirit was, I don‘t know how I could have got to the point to have made the decisions that I have made.  I don‘t know what I was thinking.  And it‘s clear that I wasn‘t thinking. 

I was blinded by emotions that I‘m ashamed that I had.  And it‘s obvious that I need help to resolve those issues.  I‘m so sorry to all the people that I have affected and hurt.  I have embarrassed and devastated my family and have embarrassed my friends.  I have humiliated myself. 

What I did was wrong and I am deeply in regret of everything.  I‘m sorry to everyone.  I‘m sorry to the victim‘s family.  They are here today.  I betrayed my profession.  It‘s something that I am truly ashamed of.  I betrayed the family of the victim. 

I have lost my career and it was more than just a career to me.  It was my life.  It is what made me happy.  I have lost my freedom, my dreams, my dignity, and I feel I have lost myself. 

MARY KAY LETOURNEAU, FORMER TEACHER:  We really got along well.  And I was trying to leave it at a level that gee, I think you are great.  But there was something different though.  We had a chemistry in the way our heads worked. 

JOSH MANKIEWICZ, “DATELINE NBC CORRESPONDENT”:  Back when this first broke in the headlines, I think lots of people understand how a 13-year-old would get a crush on his teacher.  I think what people didn‘t understand and the question everybody was asking then and I‘m now going to ask you is how does a 34-year-old woman fall for a 13-year-old boy? 

MARY KAY LETOURNEAU, FORMER TEACHER:  He‘s quite the man, and was back then, actually.  It was very clear that we wanted to be together and it was serious. 

MANKIEWICZ:  What were you worried about? 

LETOURNEAU:  His mother getting angry.  

MANKIEWICZ:  That‘s it.


MANKIEWICZ:  You weren‘t thinking to yourself, “I could be fired, I could go to jail?” 

LETOURNEAU:  Oh, no.  There wasn‘t a time that I thought or that he thought that you could go to prison for that. 

MANKIEWICZ:  OK.  I understand that he didn‘t think that.  But you never thought that? 

LETOURNEAU:  No, I wasn‘t.  This doesn‘t look good, you know, just being a teacher.  I was really thinking there would be a fine, like pay a fine option because, you know, I had been to traffic court situations. 

MANKIEWICZ:  But you can‘t tell me that you thought this was on the order of a traffic violation? 

LETOURNEAU:  Well, what I really believed is that the law would look into it. 


ABRAMS:  Pay a fine.  I don‘t know if we have more answers now that we have heard from all of those women but, bizarre. 

Up next, University Of Washington honor student under suspicion in the throat-slashing murder and rape of her roommate.  The alleged motive?  That the victim may have refused to join in on an orgy?  And later, an Ohio store clerk fights off a knife wielding robber using a piece of aluminum.  He‘s one of tonight‘s “Winners and Losers.”  



DAN ABRAMS:  This week, NBC Universal is going green.  Today‘s carpool, telecommute day.  I made sure to take the subway to work today as I often do.  Many others carpooled or worked from home.  Do you know that in California, Florida, New Jersey, and New York hybrid electric cars can use the HOV lanes regardless of how many people are in the car? 

Coming up, a University Of Washington honor student now suspected of being involved in the throat slashing murder and rape of her roommate.  Coming up.


DAN ABRAMS:  Tonight, a University of Washington honors student is being detained in Italy in connection with stabbing death of her roommate.  Twenty-year-old Amanda Marie Knox from Seattle says she found the bloody body of her 21-year-old roommate, Meredith Kercher, Friday morning.  Kercher was fatally stabbed in the neck possibly after being sexually assaulted in some sort of forced sex orgy. 

NBC‘s Jim Maceda joins us from London with details.

JIM MACEDA, NBC NEWS, LONDON:  Hi, Dan.  Well, this dark case is now moving fast and furious to the point where Italian police say the investigation is closed, even though further questioning of the three main suspects will continue tomorrow. 

There is already reportedly a wealth of forensic evidence out there, especially found in the house where British student Meredith Kercher was killed.  Now this includes blood and other bodily substances, probably hair and semen, as well as fingerprints throughout that house.  There is also two cell phones that were found belonging to the victim found in the house‘s backyard. 

The Italian police have traced incoming and outgoing calls.  It‘s allowed them to move very quickly in only three or four days to close in on those suspects and to blow wide open the alibi of the American roommate, Amanda Knox.  She had said that she was, indeed, in the house on that night of last Thursday, thought that Miss Kercher was having a loud orgy of some sort with two men in an adjacent room including Amanda‘s own Italian boyfriend but closed her ears, she said, and didn‘t think any more of it. 

Well, Knox apparently crumbled under the pressure of continuing relentless police interrogation.  And Miss Kercher‘s friend is a key suspect in a very bizarre murder case that certainly has shocked the university town of Perugia in central Italy.  Dan, back to you. 

ABRAMS:  All right.  Thanks, Jim.  Here now is former FBI profiler and MSNBC analyst Clint Van Zandt and Vikki Ziegler.  Thanks a lot.  All right.  Clint, let‘s get into some of the facts here. 


ABRAMS:  So initially, the girl, this honor student comes forward and says, “I discovered the body at the house.  I see blood.  I then call the police.”  And then she changes her story, right? 

VAN ZANDT:  Yes.  She has changed her story two or three times, Dan.  But the initial thing is she puts herself at the crime scene.  She was there.  She knows somebody was there with the victim.  She heard screaming and then she does a no-no-no and puts her hands over her ears so she doesn‘t have to listen to a homicide. 

ABRAMS:  And Vikki, that‘s always trouble, is it not, for a potential defendant, for a potential suspect when they say, “Oh, yes, I have changed my story.  And I remember, yes, I was in the house.  But then I forgot what happened after that.” 

VIKKI ZIEGLER, DEFENSE ATTORNEY:  One hundred percent.  We don‘t know who‘s representing her, if she has an attorney in Italy.  Absolutely, conspiracy.  I mean, these are serious issues.  These people have some serious problems ahead, so their alibis are changing and we don‘t know if they are recorded or not.  So we don‘t know if there are written statements. 

ABRAMS:  Well, there are.  I mean, Clint, what is interesting is that we actually have the statements from the various witnesses in this case, the Italian authorities already releasing them.  And it is clear that she gives varying accounts of what happens. 

VAN ZANDT:  Sure.  She does and her two boyfriends.  You know, initially, she says her 23-year-old boyfriend is there.  Then she says he is not.  The boyfriend says no, I‘m not there.  And the cops say well, interesting because we found your bloody footprint right next to the victim. 

So, you know, Dan, this is going to be a case, I think, where, you know, somebody is going to be offered a deal.  Somebody stabbed the victim to death.  Somebody may have held her down.  Somebody may have facilitated it.  Somebody is going to get a deal.  Two people are going to go away for a long time. 

ABRAMS:  Vikki, why do you think they are convinced that this was part of some sort of orgy?  Is it because they found the evidence of sexual assault? 

ZIEGLER:  One hundred percent.  I think they said that she was defending herself.  She was half naked when she was found.  And there was loud noises.  There was a group of - a gaggle of men in her room, and that‘s really the allegations. 

ABRAMS:  All right.  Here‘s from the statement, all right?  Remember, there are two guys there.  One of them was her boyfriend.  And there was this other guy.  And in her statement, she basically is now saying that one of the guys wanted this woman who is now dead, that the two of them went into her room.

“Well I think I stayed in the kitchen.  I can‘t remember how long they were in the bedroom together.  I can only say at a certain point I heard Meredith screaming, and I was so frightened I put my fingers in my ears.  I don‘t remember anything after that.  My head is really confused.  I don‘t remember if Meredith called out or if I heard thuds because I was upset.  But I can‘t imagine what was happening.” 

She claimed she had a lot to drink and had fallen asleep.  She added whether she didn‘t know if her boyfriend was there that evening.  I mean, this is a big problem, Clint.  When you are basically saying in a statement to the authorities, and, again, let‘s assume for a moment that the statement from the Italian authorities is accurate.  I‘m sure she is going to challenge it at some point.  But when you are saying, “I was so frightened I put my fingers in my ears.  I don‘t remember anything after that, my head is really confused,” that is not a particularly helpful statement. 

VAN ZANDT:  No, what‘s not helpful too, I think, she is starting to build up a potential defense “I was drunk.  We were smoking marijuana.  The devil made me do it.”  You know, she is a 20-year-old woman.  She got caught up in something that‘s way over her head. 

But, Dan, this wasn‘t even just a cut your throat as terrible as it is.  This woman‘s body was bruised.  She had multiple stab wounds.  It appears that one or more people held her down and continued to try to force her to participate in this orgy.  And she fought them off right to the end. 

ABRAMS:  Real quick, as a legal matter, she‘s got no protection.  She is not state department.  She is going to be tried under Italian law. 

ZIEGLER:  One hundred percent.  This girl is in serious trouble.  The forensic - once they mount all the evidence against her, she could be going down unless she is going to turn coat and tell listen, “This is really what happened.” 

ABRAMS:  And being an American citizen doesn‘t make a difference when you are in Italy unless you are working for the government. 

ZIEGLER:  The crime was committed in Italy.  It doesn‘t matter.  One hundred percent tried in Italy. 

ABRAMS:  She‘s being held tomorrow morning.  There is a hearing. 


ABRAMS:  The judge is going to determine if there is enough evidence to continue to hold her to trial. 

ZIEGLER:  Absolutely, and Italian law is very different than in the United States.  They can keep her and detain her until the trial if they believe she is a suspect. 

ABRAMS:  And let‘s be clear.  She has not been charged yet.  She‘s just being detained at this time.  And then the authorities are going to figure out - the judge is going to decide tomorrow if there is enough evidence to hold her.  All right.  Clint Van Zandt and Vikki Ziegler, thanks a lot. 

ZIEGLER:  Thank you. 

VAN ZANDT:  Thanks, Dan.

ABRAMS:  Up next in “Winners and Losers,” pretty poodles, primped and polished after getting a bath in a new automatic dog-washing machine.  Hulk Hogan‘s son facing criminal charges after running his car into a tree.  And the artist once again known as Prince threatening to sue his own fan web sites for using his image.

French poodles, dragged to the cleaners, the son of a big-time wrestler busted drag racing, or a singer who looks like he dresses in drag threatening to sue his biggest fans?  Which will be tonight‘s big winner or loser? 



ABRAMS:  It‘s time for tonight‘s “Winners and Losers” for the 7th day of November, 2007.  Our first winners, primped and polished french pooches getting cleaned in the dog-washing machine.  These bathing bow wows testing out a new dog washer which douses and dries them in under four minutes.  The sometimes hesitant pooches are dragged in, even the hulks, then subjected to everything but the spin. 

Our first loser?  Hulk Hogan‘s son who got arrested after taking a spin.  The 17-year-old turned himself in to the cops today after allegedly street racing his roadster right into a tree. 


HULK HOGAN, WRESTLER:  That‘s against the law. 


ABRAMS:  The hulkster heir now facing reckless driving and DUI charges. 

The crash left one of his pals seriously injured. 


HOGAN:  What are you going to do, big, stinky, nasty Todd, when the largest arms in the world destroy you? 


ABRAMS:  Our second loser?  A 17-year-old high school football player who pulled a knife on the field.  The suspected slasher cut the hand of an opponent as the teams lined up to shake hands at the end of the game. 


UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR:  All right.  Let‘s break someone‘s clavicle on three. 

One, two, three, break someone‘s clavicle.  That‘s a deal.  Let‘s go.


ABRAMS:  The blade-wielding bozo was booted off the team, and now charged with assault with a post game hand slash. 

Our second winner?  An Ohio store clerk who avoided getting slashed at the hands of an armed robber.  The knife-brandishing bandit barged into the store and headed right for the register.  But the quick-thinking clerk grabbed a piece of aluminum and readied for the rumble.  The cowardly crook took off and the clerk called the cops. 

But the big winners of the day?  Blind cops in Belgium who are seeing their skills put to good use to bust bad guys.  The lawmen now transcribing and analyzing wiretaps. 


UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR:  What about guns?  When do we get guns? 

ABRAMS:  The blind cops can even carry guns and make arrests, much of the same work as their sighted colleagues maybe apart from matching fingerprints. 

The big loser of the day?  Singer Prince, now pointing the finger at his own fans, threatening to sue thousands for illegally using his image and music.  The artist, formerly known as having a fan base, is reportedly targeting his three biggest fan web sites, demanding they take down all photos, images, and lyrics related to the rock diva.  


ABRAMS:  Here now, comedian and commentator Chuck Nice, from VH1‘s “Best

Week Ever.”  Chuck -


ABRAMS:  What is Prince doing? 

NICE:  Oh, Prince is - You know, what?  Prince knows what most celebrities don‘t know, real stars don‘t need fans.  That‘s how big prince is.  “I‘m a real star.  I don‘t even need you.” 

ABRAMS:  Now, he has three big fan sites. 

NICE:  Right, yes. 

ABRAMS:  You seem surprised. 

NICE:  I am surprised.  I‘m surprised he has three fans, period, and he probably will not after this whole fiasco.  I can understand where Prince is coming from when you think about it.  It‘s like, you know, are you really my fan?  Seriously, where is the real worship?  Where‘s the deification?  Where is the human sacrifice? 

ABRAMS:  But is this - I mean, is this guy just a whacko?  This is a guy who was named Prince and then he said, “You know what?  I‘m going to be the ‘Artist Formerly Known as Prince,‘ and now I‘m going to be Prince again.” 

NICE:  Well, maybe that‘s what the fans should have done.  They should have named their web sites circle line, squiggly line, arrow pointing down guy fan web site. 

ABRAMS:  All right.  So here‘s - one of the fans said, “Such a very sad day.  I can‘t even listen to his music right now.  He will gain control but the Princedom will be a bit smaller with all of us gone.”  From Moon Songs. 

NICE:  Oh my god.  If prince got any smaller, he would disappear. 

ABRAMS:  Is someone giving him legal advice here?  I bet - what do you think happened here?  I bet he probably saw something he didn‘t like on a fan site and he said, “You know what?  I don‘t want anything to do with that.”  Because there‘s no way these fan sites are going to start paying for that.  

NICE:  Of course not.  I mean maybe Prince‘s problem is the fans, the sites are not loving him enough.  That‘s what he should be suing for.  It‘s like, “You don‘t love me as much as I need you to love me.”

ABRAMS:  Do we have that Britney fan site?  Because remember the guy who was like screaming, Britney! Britney!  I mean I don‘t see any people out there saying that about Prince.  

NICE:  No.  Well, that‘s because people are crying for Prince, not about prince.  You know what I mean.  That‘s the deal. I don‘t know what his problem is.  I mean I can‘t believe that Prince, as big as he is, just sitting around monitoring web sites.  What is he doing?  Just sitting there?

ABRAMS:  How much time do you spend on the Chuck Nice sites? 

NICE:  You know what?  All of them are under construction.  Every one of my sites is under construction.  That‘s so much I care about Chuck Nice. 

ABRAMS:  He needs a guy like this.  This is the guy, the Britney fan.  


CHRIS CROCKER, BRITNEY SPEARS‘ FAN:  You people care about readers and

making money off of her.  She‘s a human!  What you don‘t realize is that

Britney‘s making you all this money, and all due is write a bunch of -

NICE:  I think he actually heard her sing.  

ABRAMS:  Chuck Nice, good to see you.  Thanks a lot. 

NICE:  What just happened there?

ABRAMS:  That‘s all the time we have for tonight.  Stay tuned for “THE MIND OF MANSON.”  See you tomorrow.



Copy: Content and programming copyright 2007 MSNBC.  ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.  Transcription Copyright 2007 Voxant, Inc. ALL RIGHTS  RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material other than for research. User may not reproduce or redistribute the material except for user‘s personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon MSNBC and Voxant, Inc.‘s copyright or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.


Watch Live with Dan Abrams Monday - Thursday at 9 p.m. ET


Discussion comments