updated 6/9/2005 2:42:21 PM ET 2005-06-09T18:42:21

Guest: Rosemary Dew, Chris Lejuez, John Q. Kelly, Mary Prevost, Pam Bondi, Shmuley Boteach

JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST:  Tonight‘s top headline: as America waits for the Jackson verdict, new revelations about the prince of pop. 

Welcome to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY, where no passport is required and only common sense is allowed. 



SCARBOROUGH (voice-over):  Tonight, inside the mind of Michael Jackson, nearly 30 hours of taped conversations set to be revealed.  We will talk to the man who has control of the Michael Jackson tapes. 

And we will go to Aruba to talk with the man who is defending the two suspects in that case and connect the dots in the crime story that still doesn‘t add up. 

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  The three persons of interest did not leave the island. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Also, how a security lapse could have led to this tropical tragedy and what you can do to protect your children. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  I live in that world myself, and I like writing about it and reporting it at the same time that I am disgusted. 

SCARBOROUGH:  He has gone behind the headlines in some of the biggest trials in America.  Tonight, Dominick Dunne is in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY to tell us why justice is not always served when it comes to Hollywood celebrities. 


ANNOUNCER:  From the press room, to the courtroom, to the halls of Congress, Joe Scarborough has seen it all.  Welcome to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.

SCARBOROUGH:  Well, the jury in the Michael Jackson case, it‘s completed its second full day of deliberations without reaching a verdict.  It‘s now been some 14 hours. 

Let‘s go to Karen Brown.  She‘s in Santa Maria, California. 

Karen, we understand the jury, they haven‘t come to a decision, but at least they have chosen a foreman.  Tell us about that and all the events that happened today. 

KAREN BROWN, NBC CORRESPONDENT:  Well, Joe, I can tell you, after deliberating for another six hours today, they did go home without reaching a verdict, but we are learning a little bit more about what may be going on behind those closed doors. 

They have chosen a jury foreperson, who is a 63-year-old Hispanic man.  He has a graduate degree.  He is also the father of two.  After retiring as an engineer, he then worked as a school counselor.  So, he has a lot of experience with children, and that is important in this case, because, of course, it all comes down to the believability of a 13-year-old boy, the alleged victim in this case. 

Now, I sat in that courtroom just about every morning, and I watched this juror.  And he really was a bit of a loner.  During some of the breaks and between witnesses, some of the jurors would chat amongst themselves.  I did not see him doing that.  He was very serious.  He took a lot of notes, and now it is his responsibility to guide this panel through their deliberations—Joe. 

SCARBOROUGH:  What is the scene like out there, Karen? 

BROWN:  Well, Joe, I can tell you, it has been a bit of a circus out here.  Every morning, about 100 fans gather here in front of the courthouse, and they are very vocal.  They hold up their signs.  They chant.  You can see even some children here today.  And they are really adamant about being here for Michael Jackson. 

I spoke to one woman who was on from Poland.  She came all the way here because she truly believes that Michael Jackson needs her in his darkest hour.  I can tell you that I did speak to some law enforcement authorities today that say that they do have a lot of security that they plan on putting in place, because this crowd does continue to grow here.  They have the SWAT team here.  They have the bomb squad here. 

When the verdict comes down, they plan on having snipers on the roof.  So, the authorities here are really planning on keeping this crowd under control. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Karen, Jesse Jackson is scheduled to be on this show this evening, but we understand, right now, he is still at Neverland Ranch.  What is he doing there?  Do you know? 

BROWN:  Well, Joe, throughout this trial, Jesse Jackson has served as a counselor to Michael Jackson.  He said earlier today when he was at the courthouse that he was going to the Neverland Ranch and that he said it‘s important for him to be here, to be here for Michael Jackson, because Jackson is under so much stress, Jesse Jackson saying that, indeed, that Jackson is incredibly anxious at this moment. 

His health is not good.  He really is suffering from severe back pain, and Jackson trying to—the Reverend Jackson trying to give Michael Jackson some comfort and some guidance at, again, this very, very stressful moment for Michael Jackson and the family—Joe. 

SCARBOROUGH:  He certainly—he certainly needs it right now, Karen Brown.  no doubt.  It has to be a very stressful time for Mr. Jackson and his family. 

NBC‘s Karen Brown in Santa Maria, thank you so much for being with us. 

We greatly appreciate it. 

So, what is going to become of the king of pop if he is convicted?  Well, tonight, we are going to get a rare glimpse into the mind of Michael Jackson through tapes of conversations he made with his former spiritual adviser, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach.  He is the author, of course, of “Hating Women.”

He‘s also a radio talk show host. 

The Rabbi, with Michael Jackson‘s consent and for the purpose of publication, recorded more than 30 hours of conversations he had with Michael Jackson back in 2000.

Rabbi, I have read the transcripts, absolutely fascinating.  Welcome to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY. 

Why did you record over 30 hours of tapes with Michael Jackson, tapes that now, of course, all the world want to hear about? 

RABBI SHMULEY BOTEACH, AUTHOR, “HATING WOMEN”:  First of all, Joe, I love you, Joe Scarborough.  It‘s an honor to be on your show. 

Ever since the revelation that these things even exist, which we did not tell anyone about for years, I have done no shows except yours, because I knew you and I have a very special relationship.  But, more importantly, I knew you would give this the serious treatment it deserves. 

Michael and I sat down on his 42nd birthday.  And he asked me, would I finally be able to explain him to the world?  Could we produce a book, a manuscript where he explicates and pontificates on what it is that adults can learn from children?  Why does he prefer the company of kids to adults? 

Why does he believe that the adult world is a corrupt world?  And we sat down for all these hours and hours of taped conversation.  Michael would usually hold the tape recorder right in front of his face.  And I have to say to you, Joe, Michael was so profound and so insightful and so knowledgeable and so erudite that you would not believe it was him. 

People over the years to whom I have shown these—and we chose not to publish them—I chose not to publish it once Michael was arrested, because I thought it was so eloquent, it would be seen almost as a rationalization for pedophilia.

SCARBOROUGH:  You know, the thing is, though, Rabbi, you talk about a rationalization about it, but I must say, you have been very critical of Michael Jackson from the very beginning.  No excuse for what he has done, in my eyes.

But the second I read these transcripts—and I know these tapes also would actually help Michael Jackson—I said, well, you know what?  It doesn‘t explain why a 46-year-old man sleeps with young boys, but certainly it helps you look into his mind. 

I want to read this first one, very telling and heartbreaking.  This is heartbreaking.  It‘s an excerpt from the Jackson tapes where Michael Jackson talks to you about his relationship with his father. 

He says: “He never gave me a piggyback ride.  He never threw a pillow at me.  He never did anything fun.  But when I was 4 years old, there was a little carnival and he picked me up and he put me on a pony.  And because of that one moment, I have this special place in my heart for him.  Imagine if this thing could have happened more often, the difference it would have made in the lives of our families and our children.”

My gosh, Rabbi, most of us have hundreds, thousands of memories with our father, with our mother.  Michael Jackson just never had that.  He never had a functional, loving relationship from the beginning he was on stage. 

BOTEACH:  And now you begin to see why my heart went out to Michael as he revealed this to me, and why I had so much sympathy for him.

And even when you say I was critical of him, I was never critical of him as a pedophile.  I was critical of him for abandoning that message and really corrupting the message that kids are special.  When Michael sat with me and told me that story—and we were in his bedroom, sitting on these two big oak chairs when he told me that story—that he wanted a new relationship with Joe Jackson, that if he just had his father‘s love and his father‘s approval and his father‘s, you know, approval, he would—he would rehabilitate himself.  He would be reborn. 

And I actually communicated that to Joe Jackson, that father—your son doesn‘t want a manager. 

SCARBOROUGH:  What—what did he tell you? 

BOTEACH:  He started talking about Michael‘s career.  And I said to him, it‘s not his career which is at stake.  It‘s your son‘s life... 


SCARBOROUGH:  It‘s his life.

And listen to this, Rabbi.  At one point during the conversations—and I know you were there.  You recorded them.  Jackson confided to you, that all he ever wanted to do was to be loved.  I know a lot of people out there are rolling their eyes.

But I will tell you what.  For somebody—and I have been told this all along as a father.  When I had my first son, I had so many people say, you know what?  The only thing your son wants, the only thing your two sons want, they want your approval.  And that‘s apparently something Michael Jackson never got.  At one point during these conversations, this is what Jackson confided in you.

He said: “I‘m going to say something I‘ve never said before.  And this is the truth.  I think all my success and fame, I‘ve wanted it because I wanted to be loved.  That‘s all.  That‘s the real truth.  I wanted people to love me, truly love me, because I never really felt love.”

How many tragic stories have we heard before? 



SCARBOROUGH:  Listen, listen, Rabbi, first of all, a lot of people out there may be rolling their eyes right now.  I‘m just looking at these.

BOTEACH:  Joe, Joe, I don‘t care.


SCARBOROUGH:  We have seen this—Rabbi, though, we‘ve seen this story before, where somebody has had the entire world.  They have gained the entire world, but they have lost their own soul because they didn‘t have love. 

You just—in these tapes, 30 hours, it comes up time and time again, Michael Jackson never loved. 

BOTEACH:  Well, you know, when he said that to me, I really felt like I was a spiritual confidante.  He looked me in the eye and he said to me, Shmuley, I want to tell you something.  I have never told this to anyone before.  And God knows I am telling the truth.  And I‘m not lying to you.

And he looked me in the eye and he said to me:  I have honed my craft.  I‘ve learned to move my feet.  All I ever wanted was to be loved.  And both of us were—he and I were almost crying, hearing this.  And I said to him, but, Michael if that‘s the case, then you need unconditional love.  It can‘t be the love of a fan who loves your dance, and it can‘t be the love of an admirer who loves your music.

It has to be a wife.  It has to be child.  It has to be your family. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Why little kids, though?  When you were with Jackson at this point...

BOTEACH:  Because they don‘t judge him as a superstar. 

SCARBOROUGH:  When you were with Jackson at this point, was he sleeping with little kids? 

BOTEACH:  Of course not.  There weren‘t even kids around.  Can I tell you something, Joe?  At this point, I mean, when you look at the profundity and the sincerity of...


SCARBOROUGH:  You mean, just back in 2000, little kids weren‘t sleeping in his bed? 

BOTEACH:  Well, of course—I mean, to my knowledge, of course not. 

In fact, the only kid who was around infinitesimally was his accuser.  And even then, he was there for a couple of days with the rest of his family.  Michael was burned out.  Michael was pouring his heart out to me.  He was a man in deep pain.  He felt his life—he had already seen his best moments, that his best years were behind him. 

And I felt that my job was to inspire him.  And that‘s why I preserved these conversations, which, again, which he did for publication, because he wanted people to understand why he hurt so much.  And he also wanted people to understand that his intention with kids was pure. 

SCARBOROUGH:  But—but—but when—when did this so-called pure intention—and, of course, that‘s what we are going to find out when the jury deliberates and when they come back with a verdict—when did it become twisted? 

When did you say, OK, enough is enough, Jackson; listen, I understand that your father didn‘t love you; I understand that you needed fans to love you, but, hey, this is going too far; you are sleeping in bed with little kids; I can‘t be any part of it anymore?

BOTEACH:  In front of me, Joe, Michael‘s behavior was exemplary.  He never swore.  He never used a bad word.  He never touched alcohol.  He had almost no interactions with kid.  And when he did, the parents or adults were always around. 

SCARBOROUGH:  So, what happened? 

BOTEACH:  When I heard him say, I share a bed with my kids, I remember.  I was watching the Martin Bashir.  And I didn‘t want to watch it.  I watched the last few minutes.  I got nauseous.  My stomach turned.

SCARBOROUGH:  So, the—that documentary was the first time you found out he was sleeping with kids. 

BOTEACH:  Of course.  In fact...


SCARBOROUGH:  You know, the thing is, in your...


BOTEACH:  But look at the transcripts, Joe.  Do you see that this is the same man? 

SCARBOROUGH:  No, no.  It‘s not the same man.

BOTEACH:  Look at the beauty of his words.

SCARBOROUGH:  And, you know, the thing is, he is a very well-spoken—you look through all of these transcripts.

BOTEACH:  Very eloquent. 

SCARBOROUGH:  We‘ve been looking through them.  He‘s very eloquent, very well-spoken. 

BOTEACH:  He‘s moving.

SCARBOROUGH:  He‘s moving.  And this Michael Jackson, if this Michael Jackson had taken the stand...

BOTEACH:  I love this Michael Jackson. 

SCARBOROUGH:  If this Michael Jackson still existed, I would suggest that he wouldn‘t be pulling his hair out now, as his family spokesperson is saying. 

We have got to go to break.  But I got to tell you this, Rabbi.  When we come back, an explosive excerpt about a fight he had with Lisa Marie Presley.  And I read through it.  And, again, there‘s a disconnect here between Michael Jackson and the rest of the world, and, of course, between Lisa Marie Presley.  We are going to talk to you about that when SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY returns.  Stay with us. 

Also coming up, what is going to be the fate of Michael Jackson?  We are going to bring in our all-star panel and look into the crystal ball.  That‘s coming up next. 

And later, the latest on the search for missing teen Natalee Holloway. 

She is still lost in paradise.  Now, there are two suspects in custody.  The question is, why haven‘t they been charged?  We are going to be talking to their lawyer to get the very latest. 

Plus, is justice blind when a celebrity is on trial?  Dominick Dunne is going to be here.  And he‘s going to tell us why he thinks the rules are slightly different for the rich and famous. 

Don‘t go anywhere.  SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY is just getting started.


SCARBOROUGH:  We are coming back with more from the Michael Jackson tapes. 

Also, we are going to be talking about a story that SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY broke on TV, missing teen Natalee Holloway lost in paradise.  New developments tonight.  We are going to get the very latest from Aruba. 

That‘s coming up in a minute.



SCARBOROUGH:  Let‘s bring back in Rabbi Shmuley Boteach. 

Rabbi, you know, back in 1993, there was a story that just broke my heart.  I actually—it was one of those stories, I just had to turn my head away.  It was, of course, the two British kids, 10-year-old boys that brutally murdered, beat up and murdered the 4-year-old. 

But when that happened back in 1993, Michael Jackson actually got in a fight with Lisa Marie Presley because he wanted to go visit the two murderers in jail.  And this is what Michael said in the tapes—quote—

“I want to see these boys and talk to them.”

And Lisa Marie responds: “Are you crazy?  You‘re just rewarding them for what they did.”

Jackson says: “Lisa, I don‘t think these boys have ever been hugged.  I don‘t think there‘s ever been anyone that has looked in their eyes and said, I love you.  I just want to look at them and show them that somebody cares.”

Now, there is a disconnect between Michael Jackson there and me, because, when I saw it, if I could have strapped the boys into an electric chair for what they did to the little 4-year-old, I probably would have done it. 

BOTEACH:  Well...


SCARBOROUGH:  And we are showing—those are the two boys right now.  And, again, the tape just breaks your heart.  Very famous case in England, the most brutal murder I have ever heard, of a 4-year-old kid. 

Tell me, what was going through Michael Jackson‘s mind? 

BOTEACH:  Well, this is the Jamie Bulger case.


BOTEACH:  And, of course, the boy—the kid was sliced apart on train tracks. 

It‘s not a sin for Michael to be a dreamer and to be naive and to believe that he could really change these kids.  But Michael‘s whole thing was that kids can‘t do anything bad, that kids really have innocence in them.  And he felt that he could be a voice to the world in articulating that innocence.

And this is the Michael Jackson that I fell in love with, Joe, because this is the Michael Jackson who didn‘t say, I want to be with kids.  I need to be around them constantly.  It was the Michael Jackson that said, look, these kids that are in need, I want to go and see them.

SCARBOROUGH:  Does that Michael Jackson still exist, though, Rabbi? 

BOTEACH:  No, four—it‘s been four years since I saw him, Joe. 

And I have seen him deteriorate so rapidly.  I really don‘t know.  And perhaps—and maybe not.  I have been bursting at the seams with this manuscript that we produced, me and Michael, all these years ago.  And I decided not to publish it, because I didn‘t want people to say that I was going to cover up a pedophile, because he was so eloquent.  But—but Michael deserves to be heard, at least. 

SCARBOROUGH:  And, Rabbi, you also say you don‘t want to play the tapes before the jury—I mean, because, obviously, Michael Jackson‘s voice will be far too strong.  You‘re going to wait until...

BOTEACH:  Yes.  We don‘t want to influence...


SCARBOROUGH:  You are going to wait until after the jury comes back with their decision.

But, at the same time, this is a fascinating look into this man‘s mind. 

BOTEACH:  There could be some good in him and it deserves to be heard. 

I don‘t know if he is a molester.  I truly do not know, Joe.  But I know that what he articulated four years ago over all these hours was so moving, that, if parents would spend just one extra hour with their kids as a result of hearing it or have another dinner with their kids or just read them a bedtime story, which is the initiative that Michael launched, just to get parents to read to their kids, maybe we would finally make childhood cool in America.



BOTEACH:  You don‘t have to have sex at 12.  You don‘t have to have mascara on at 13.  You don‘t have to wear a thong, a thong at 11, that it‘s cool to be a kid.  That was the message.  And, unfortunately, he corrupted it.  But the message remains true. 

SCARBOROUGH:  You know, though, again, let‘s just—let‘s just clear things up for the record.  If somebody in Kansas City or St. Louis is hearing us talk tonight, and talking about this side of Michael Jackson, you know what they are saying.  They are saying, just because Michael Jackson‘s father didn‘t love him, just because he didn‘t get the attention he needed from his family doesn‘t give him an excuse for sleeping with little boys.  This is something you agree with.  Is it not, Rabbi? 

BOTEACH:  Of course.  Of course.  In fact, I see the value of this manuscript, really, Joe, as a great morality tale, that Michael once had such depth.

And celebrity corrupted him utterly, that he thought he could live by rules that you and I know are wrong, that he made black and white and white black.  On the contrary, this is a great morality tale.  It‘s not just Michael Jackson.  It‘s Russell Crowe, who seems to be a decent guy who may go to jail.  It‘s Christian Slater.  Our celebrities are in trouble. 

You are not a deity.  You have to live by right and wrong, no matter how profound Michael was.  I used to say to him, you are the king of pop.  That‘s a moniker.  But you are no king.  You are—you‘re like everybody else.  Show humility and people will love you. 

SCARBOROUGH:  You know...

BOTEACH:  Stop the arrogance. 


BOTEACH:  And I wish we could have saved him, Joe. 


SCARBOROUGH:  And, of course, Rabbi, he was—he was the king.  And he‘s a king who, again, may have had everything in Hollywood, but he didn‘t have his father‘s love.  He didn‘t have his father‘s acceptance.  And who knows.  Maybe it would have...


BOTEACH:  He may still be able to heal himself, Joe.  Maybe he can heal himself.

SCARBOROUGH:  Maybe he will.  Maybe he will. 

All right, Rabbi, thank you.  We can‘t thank you enough for coming to


BOTEACH:  God bless you, Joe.  Always love being with you.


SCARBOROUGH:  God bless you, too.  Thank you for—for—for releasing these transcripts here first.  And we look forward to having you back very soon. 

BOTEACH:  Thank you.  God bless you, Joe. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Now, the faithful outside the courthouse in Santa Maria is waiting, as a jury decides the fate of Michael Jackson.

It‘s time to bring in our all-star legal panel to talk about this case.  We have Mary Prevost.  She‘s a defense attorney, Pam Bondi, a prosecutor in Florida, and John Q. Kelly, a former assistant district attorney in New York and also a prosecutor in the O.J. Simpson case. 

Let‘s go to you first, Mary Prevost.

We know who is the jury foreman.  It‘s juror number 2, a 63-year-old man.  He is a Hispanic male.  I think it‘s—personally, I think it may be bad news for Michael Jackson, because so many of the young boys that he hung out with, that, quite frankly, he took to bed with him were Hispanic boys.  What is your take?  Is that bad for Michael Jackson? 

MARY PREVOST, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY:  I really don‘t think that that matters at all. 

I think the allegations, the content of the allegations, not the color of the skin of the children, is what is going to drive this jury.  We do have a jury foreperson who is older, who apparently has worked with children, who is strong.  And the jury has decided that he is the right person to lead them, and lead them without hopefully a lot of animosity amongst the jurors, if they come to a point where they can‘t agree on a verdict, or if they have to spend a lot of time deliberating.

But I don‘t think that the fact that he is Hispanic really will have anything at all to do with his decision. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Pam Bondi, the jury has already been out longer than O.J. Simpson‘s jury.  That‘s not saying an awful lot.  But what does it mean?  The longer the jury is out, does it break for Jackson?  Does it break for the prosecutor? 

PAM BONDI, FLORIDA PROSECUTOR:  Well, Joe, I think the fact that they are out longer than the O.J. jury is a good thing at this point for the prosecution. 

No, I think when juries are out longer, it means that they are considering it and they are doing their job.  You know, this case went on for almost two months.  And now it‘s in the hands of the jury.  And they are carefully considering and weighing the evidence, which is what their job is. 

And, no, I don‘t think two days is a long time at all.  And, in fact, the judge is letting them go home.  You know, they are working 9:00 to 5:00.  They are going home in the evening.  So, they are not in a rush, nor should they be.  They have a lot to consider.  So, I think it‘s good for the prosecution at this point. 

SCARBOROUGH:  John Kelly, at what point does—do the deliberations drag on so long that you start saying, you know what, we may have a hung jury here? 

JOHN Q. KELLY, FORMER PROSECUTOR:  I think once you get a number of indications, written indications from the jury to the judge, that they are having a hard time reaching a decision on some or all of the counts, and the judge has to start seriously considering declaring a mistrial. 

At this point, there‘s no indication the jury has even taken a preliminary vote.  They have just chosen their jury foreperson.  And we don‘t know if they are just sifting through the evidence and haven‘t even started to vote or see... 


SCARBOROUGH:  Hey, and, John, a lot of—a lot of accounts to consider also, right. 

KELLY:  Yes, they have got 10 counts to consider.  They have got over 60 days of testimony, 100-something witnesses, and they have just got to sift through it and be fair to both sides at this point. 

SCARBOROUGH:  All right. 

Hey, stay with us.  We‘re going to be back with our all-star panel coming up next.

Also, new developments in the search for Natalee.  The police, FBI, and hundreds of volunteers are searching for the missing Alabama teenager.  And, tonight, what we are learning about the suspects in this case.  We are going to have the very latest live from Aruba when SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY returns.

And, also, does fame and fortune equal an acquittal?  Author Dominick Dunne has seen his share of celebrity cases and he comes to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY to give us his own special take.


SCARBOROUGH:  Still lost in paradise, the search for Natalee Holloway in Aruba.  We are going to give you the very latest on the investigation, and we are going to be talking about the suspects that are in police custody and talking to their attorney.

But, first, here‘s the latest news that you and your family need to know. 


SCARBOROUGH:  And let‘s bring our all-star panel back in. 

Mary Prevost, let me go to you.

We have been talking about, obviously, the jury deliberations.  What is your take on what‘s happening in California right now in the Jackson case?  Who does it favor?  Or is it too early to tell? 

PREVOST:  It really is too early to tell. 

Generally and historically, when a jury comes back very early in the case, defense attorneys cringe, because it usually goes in favor of the prosecution.  This case was definitely not a slam dunk by either side.  The prosecution didn‘t have a slam dunk, and neither did the defense.  So, the fact that they are out for two days really doesn‘t mean anything at this point. 

I would think that they would be out for probably at least another three to four days, going through all of this evidence and the 150 or so witnesses that testified and determining the credibility, who is lying and who is not.  So, I wouldn‘t expect a jury to come back until next week. 

Remember, they are not deliberating all day long.  And I think they only deliberated for about six hours today, and they just picked their foreperson.  So, they are just really getting into the evidence now. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Yes.  They have been deliberating for 14 hours at this point. 

John Kelly, you know, the thing is, obviously, you have been involved in a high-profile case or two before.  The thing that I still find hard to believe, but I guess it has to do with expenses, is the fact that this jury is not sequestered, I mean, the fact that some jury members are watching this show right now, watching legal shows on other channels also. 

I would think, for a case that is this high-profile, that they would at this point have sequestered the jury members.  Why not?  Why are jury members able to get all of this outside information?  And, like, for instance, we just talked about the Michael Jackson tapes.  Now, that could impact somebody‘s decision in the case.  Why wouldn‘t the judge sequester them at this point? 

KELLY:  It‘s just, the jurors are assumed to take their duty very seriously when they are told to not discuss the case with anybody, not read any accounts of the case and not watch any TV or listen to any radio.

But, you know, you are right, Joe.  You hear people like Jesse Jackson giving interview after interview and talking about, Michael is going to avoid his risky behavior in the future, sending a subliminal message that he didn‘t commit the crimes, but if he did, he will never do it again, talking about his frail health, things like that. 

I mean, clearly, there are people out there trying to work the jury after hours. 

SCARBOROUGH:  John, Michael Jackson going to—Michael Jackson going to the hospital, when you and I both know he could have gotten any doctor in California to come to Neverland. 

KELLY:  Of course he could have.

SCARBOROUGH:  It‘s all staged. 

Who is it staged for?  The media.  No, it‘s staged for the only people that matter, the jurors.  Michael Jackson is playing to the jurors because he knows they are watching TV.  He knows they‘re listening to the radio.  He knows some of them are reading the newspaper. 

KELLY:  Of course they do.  Every single move that he makes, his spokespeople utter, it‘s all orchestrated at this point.  It‘s all, as I said, if it‘s not direct and obvious, it‘s subliminal; it‘s subtle.

But they are all there.  And every act, every word, every deed is for a purpose at this point.  It‘s to get it to the jury, either directly or indirectly. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Pam Bondi, give us prediction.  What does it look like? 

BONDI:  Oh, well, Joe, at this point, I think there‘s plenty of evidence to convict him.  So, hopefully, the jury will come back and do the right thing.

But, yes, they have got a lot to consider.  I don‘t think the conspiracy counts are real strong, but I think the child molestation counts are, especially since the last evidence they heard was the video of the boy when he was much younger and very emotional.  So, I—I still think it looks good for the prosecution. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Spoken like a true prosecutor.  Thanks a lot for being

with us, Pam Bondi

BONDI:  Thank you. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Mary Prevost and John Q. Kelly, as always, we greatly appreciate you all being in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY. 

Now turning to that other big story we have been talking about.  It‘s been eight days since Alabama teenager Natalee Holloway disappeared.  She disappeared in Aruba.  She is still missing. 

Now with more from Aruba, we‘ve got NBC‘s Martin Savidge with the very latest on today‘s developments. 



The searching continues to try to find 18-year-old Natalee Holloway, who has now been missing for over a week.  There was more searching done today, but not on the scale that we saw yesterday.  Authorities now say that most of the searches are going to be triggered as the result of leads to this investigation.  And, as a result of that, fewer number of people are required because they will be covering much smaller areas. 

Investigators say they have had about 200 leads that they have followed up on this particular case.  Divers went into the water.  We‘re talking FBI divers.  It‘s the first we have heard that they have been used.  Government officials would not tell us exactly where they were working or under what conditions, only to say that they are working somewhere along the coast. 

Given the fact that Aruba is an island, that doesn‘t exactly limit the location too much.  And then there are the suspects, two of them, former security guards that were arrested on Sunday.  They are expected to go before a judge tomorrow, who will make a determination whether or not there is enough evidence to continue for them to be held. 

The charges were revealed that are against them today and they don‘t get much more serious, first-degree murder, accessory to murder, second-degree murder, accessory to murder and kidnapping, with a reason of either doing harm or killing somebody.  There is no death penalty in Aruba.  You could only get life in prison.  It is expected that the two men are going to argue that they did not know Natalee, they have nothing to do with this case, and they do not understand why they are being held. 

And, lastly, there is a request coming from the Aruban government to ask the FBI for something else, cadaver dogs to aid in the search—Joe. 


SCARBOROUGH:  All right, Martin.  Martin Savidge, thanks a lot for that report. 

Now let‘s go live to Aruba and talk by telephone to Chris Lejuez.  He is the attorney for the two suspects still being held in connection with Natalee Holloway‘s disappearance. 

Thank you so much for being with us, Mr. Lejuez. 

There‘s some conflicting evidence coming from the island of Aruba tonight.  Obviously, earlier—and we just heard from our report from Martin Savidge—we had heard from the authorities there that your clients were going—were already arrested and charged with murder and kidnapping.  The Associated Press is reporting that there may be conflicting information, that, possibly those charges have been dropped.  What can you tell us?  Give us the very latest. 

CHRIS LEJUEZ, ATTORNEY FOR ARUBAN SUSPECT:  Well, I don‘t know of any dropping of the charges.  The charges are still valid. 

Tomorrow, the judge will look at the charges and see if there‘s enough evidence to consider the detention legal.  If it‘s considered illegal, they have to let them go or they have to file new charges. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Tell me something.  The police, they don‘t have any forensic evidence in this case, do they?  So it‘s going to be very difficult to charge your clients. 

LEJUEZ:  Well, not as far as I know.  I haven‘t seen it.  I haven‘t heard of it.  I do know that there are statements that they are using, but they do not have any kind of forensic evidence that I have seen.  And because of that, tomorrow, I will plead for the judge to declare the detention illegal. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Mr. Lejuez, we understand that you are representing both of these men who had been arrested earlier, but now that you are only representing one of them because they seem to have conflicting stories.  What can you tell us about that? 

LEJUEZ:  I have been approached by the prosecutor‘s office.  They have requested me to withdraw from one of the cases, something I usually do not do until I have seen all the evidence.  In this case, however, considering the fact that it‘s so unprecedented on our island—we have an island with a very low crime rate.

And because of that and because of the impact on the whole island, I have decided to comply with this request and I have to decided to withdraw from one of them voluntarily. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Let me ask you, did they have conflicting stories when they spoke with you, when they spoke to the police? 

LEJUEZ:  I have not seen the conflicting—when they spoke with me, they did not have any conflicting stories.  They did not have exactly the same story, because they say that they are not friends.  They don‘t socialize.  They each go their own separate ways.

But both of them were very categorically and denying that they had anything to do with the disappearance of this girl. 

SCARBOROUGH:  You know, these two men, obviously, former security guards, reported by the Associated Press tonight that they were known to police for—quote—“trying to pick up women in hotels in Aruba.”  Did they have any contact with Natalee Holloway on the night of her disappearance? 

LEJUEZ:  As far as they have stated to us, they have had no contact with her.  As far as it goes, the story that you claim that the police has given to some press people here in Aruba, I don‘t know anything about that. 

SCARBOROUGH:  What can you tell us about press reports regarding the young Dutch resident there who is apparently a judge‘s son?  He was not a suspect, but he is a person of interest. 

LEJUEZ:  Yes. 

SCARBOROUGH:  He actually, according to all the news reports, picked up Natalee, drove her to the other side of the island.  And yet, he is not in detention, but your two clients are.  What can you tell us about that? 

LEJUEZ:  Well, I have only understood—I have no more information but the press has given to us regarding those three young men that have taken her to her hotel.  They have interrogated them as witnesses and not as suspects.  And, because of that, I see no reason to go into suspecting anything from these guys, these boys. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Why won‘t they even release their names?  Is it because this judge‘s son is very well connected on the island? 


It‘s general practice is not to release names during this period, this part, this phase of the trial—of the criminal case or the prosecution.  This is far too at the beginning of the prosecution, the beginning of the investigation.  It‘s far too soon to release names, perhaps from people that you have to release at a later stage. 

SCARBOROUGH:  All right, thank you so much.  We greatly appreciate you being with us tonight. 

LEJUEZ:  You‘re welcome. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Mr. Lejuez, good talking to you. 

Now let‘s bring in former FBI special agent Rosemary Dew. 

Rosemary, thank you so much for being with us tonight.

Obviously, it‘s unusual.  It‘s very unusual to have the FBI to go down to an island like Aruba and search for a missing teenager.  Why do you think it‘s happening in this case? 

ROSEMARY DEW, FORMER FBI SPECIAL AGENT:  Well, actually the FBI is willing to help police from any nation when they ask.  In this case, it involved a United States citizen. 

Actually, in the last, well, decade, since the mid-1980s, since the terrorism cases began to affect U.S. citizens worldwide, the FBI has done quite a bit of investigating overseas. 

SCARBOROUGH:  But there are a lot of teenage and young tourists, young American tourists, who, unfortunately, disappear overseas.  Why do they—they responded quickly.

Now, obviously, I know their congressmen, Spencer Bachus, a guy I served with in Congress, immediately contacted Dutch authorities and said, hey, invite the FBI in.  But, usually, you don‘t have a 24- or 48-hour turnaround, do you? 

DEW:  In a kidnapping case, you could. 

There are agents in Aruba—I‘m sorry, not Aruba, in Nassau.  There are agents in Barbados.  There are agents nearby.  So, perhaps that accounts for the quick turnaround. 

SCARBOROUGH:  You know, it‘s been over a week now that Natalee has been missing.  What does that tell you about the search?  What does it tell you about the investigation?  Is it bad news? 

DEW:  Oh, it‘s hard to say that it‘s actually bad news.  The one thing I have been concerned about—aside from being an FBI agent, I am also a nurse.  I have been very concerned about the use, potential use of the drug Rohypnol.  I heard that she was behaving—well, she is a very conservative young woman, very dedicated to her studies.  And here she goes off with these guys in the middle of the night. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Can you tell us about the drug that you just mentioned? 

Is that the date rape drug? 

DEW:  That is one of the date rape drugs.  It is known on the street as roofies.  It‘s colorless.  It‘s odorless, often put in drinks.  It‘s tasteless.  It acts very quickly.  It has a profound effect upon the body.  It‘s an amnesiac.

And that‘s one of the reasons that it‘s used by predators in rapes, because the victim will not remember what happened. 

SCARBOROUGH:  And for a very conservative girl like Natalee Holloway, from what we understand, somebody who was actually a world traveler before going to Aruba, this could explain obviously why she left the bar with these three men. 

DEW:  Yes.  It does cause you to suddenly lose your inhibitions. 

There would probably be some physical appearance of lack of coordination.  It‘s a benzodiazepine.


DEW:  Which is a muscle relaxer, a tranquilizer.  The benzos are often used in anesthesia, for example, as amnesiacs. 

SCARBOROUGH:  All right.  All right.  All right, thank you so much, Rosemary Dew.  We greatly appreciate it. 

And let me just say to everybody out there, of course, when I talk about her leaving with three men, well, those are just the reports that we have gotten in the news.  Unfortunately, we are not getting a lot from Aruba authorities.  Obviously, we are not getting a lot from the FBI.  But based on reports of this young woman, that is apparently what happened that night. 

Hey, we will be right back with a lot more SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY in just a minute. 



SCARBOROUGH:  You know, nobody covers a celebrity trial like our next guest.  He is, of course, “Vanity Fair” columnist and the author of the upcoming novel “A Solo Act,” Dominick Dunne. 

I spoke with Dominick earlier and I asked him whether fame and fortune equals acquittal. 


DOMINICK DUNNE, “VANITY FAIR”:  Well, I think it‘s a combination of all. 

I mean, Michael Jackson has an absolutely brilliant attorney in Mesereau.  I mean, I think he is—and he is also a very dramatic figure at that trial, with the flowing white hair and the sort of dashing suits.  And he is a great—he is a great character. 

You know, Michael has had three or four lawyers.  And so, I think that happens a lot in all of these high-class trials, I call them, you know, where they have limitless money, and they go through several lawyers.  Michael went through several before he decided on Mesereau.  Mesereau had been with Robert Blake before, as you remember, and got removed from that case. 

And the same thing happened in the O.J. case.  They started out with one lawyer and then Johnnie Cochran came in and took over. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Isn‘t it ironic that you have celebrities like Blake and O.J. Simpson walk, and yet you have somebody like Martha Stewart, one of the few celebrities that gets ensnarled by, let‘s face it—and I make a lot of people angry when I say this—but by being convicted of a crime that I don‘t think they ever prove she committed?

DUNNE:  Absolutely.  I am with you all the way on that one.  I was a big backer of Martha‘s all the way through that trial. 

And it is amazing that she went to prison and all these other people don‘t.

SCARBOROUGH:  How do you feel about the rich, the powerful, the famous getting off?  I have always said, if O.J. Simpson or Michael Jackson lived in—in the other side of Los Angeles, they would have been in jail.  I mean, case closed.  Are you cynical after all these years of covering our judicial system?  Or do you think, overall, it works? 

DUNNE:  Well, I think, listen, it‘s the best of any country in the world. 

So, you know, it does need improvements.  But there is—and I—you know, I suppose I am as bad as the rest.  I only cover that kind of trial.  I am about to go out in September—not about, but in two months—to cover the Phil Spector trial, which will be another celebrity trial.  You know, I live in that world myself, and I like writing about it and reporting it at the same time that I am disgusted. 


SCARBOROUGH:  Well, at least you‘re—at least you‘re honest about it. 

Talk about Phil Spector.  I mean, here is a guy, obviously, he transformed popular music in the early 1960s with the “wall of sound,” but the guy was always bizarre. 

DUNNE:  Always. 

SCARBOROUGH:  I remember hearing the Beatles talking in 1969 and 1970, trying to get the tapes for “Let It Be” back.  And he was whispering into the phone, talking about how the FBI was circling around his mansion in helicopters and they couldn‘t get it.  And you see this picture of him with this afro.  I mean, talk about the freak show.

DUNNE:  And, listen, let me tell you what I think about that afro. 


DUNNE:  That was like an Angela Davis afro that he had.  I think he is going to plead insanity, and...


DUNNE:  Because he looked pretty crazy in those pictures. 

SCARBOROUGH:  All right.  Dominick Dunne, we will leave it there. 

Thank you so much for being with us and being so generous with your time. 

We greatly appreciate it. 

DUNNE:  Thanks, Joe. 


SCARBOROUGH:  And, coming up, another wild chase on the freeways of Southern California, but this hot pursuit enraged a lot of people up and down the coast.  We‘ll tell you about it, talk the ugly ending to it, when SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY returns.


SCARBOROUGH:  How one man ruined the commute for tens of thousands of people coming up next, and how a dog put a nasty bite—took a nasty bite out of crime. 

And, also, make sure to check out my morning read at Joe.MSNBC.com.

Stick around.  We‘ll be right back.  


SCARBOROUGH:  Another day in California, another car chase, this one with an incredible ending. 

Now, the chase began around 8:45 a.m., West Coast time.  And a suspected kidnapper took police on a six-hour freeway chase and a standoff after he allegedly tried to kidnap a woman in Ventura County.  Now, the chase took place along Interstate 10, outside of Los Angeles.  It reached speeds of 75 miles per hour.  And it tied up traffic in both directions for miles. 

Of course, this are some of the busiest freeways in America.  They were at a standstill.  Now, at one point, police laid down spike strips to blow out the van‘s rear tires, but that didn‘t stop the pursuit.  In their next maneuver, police tried bumping the van, causing it to spin out of control.  But the driver was again able to recover. 

Police finally stopped the van with one last bump, sending it spinning into a sound wall.  Now, the van stalled on the side of the freeway.  And the armored SWAT vehicles then surrounded the car.  After the tense standoff, SWAT members threw a flash-bang grenade into the rear of the window of the van, disorienting the suspect, and then sent in the dogs to finish off the job. 

Six grueling hours after the marathon chase started, police had the man in custody, proving once again, you can‘t outrun America‘s finest, nor can you outrun their Johnny Law dogs. 

Hey, that‘s all the time we have for tonight.  Make sure to catch Imus tomorrow morning.  His guests include Senator Joe Biden.  And that will be exciting. 

Make sure also to read my morning read at Joe.MSNBC.com.

Have a great night.  See you tomorrow.


Content and programming copyright 2005 MSNBC.  ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.  Transcription Copyright 2005 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.


Discussion comments