updated 8/9/2005 10:33:37 AM ET 2005-08-09T14:33:37

Guest: Paul Reynolds, Beth Holloway Twitty, Catherine Crier, Lisa Fox,

Bryan Stevenson, John Miner, Johnny Grant, Anthony Summers

DAN ABRAMS, HOST:  Coming up, for the first time Natalee Holloway's mother confronts one of the suspects in her daughter's disappearance. 

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ABRAMS (voice-over):  We've got the only pictures of Natalee's mother and Deepak Kalpoe as she asked the tough questions about his time with her daughter.  We talk live with Beth Holloway Twitty. 

And Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens slams the criminal justice system, saying it's time to stop victims' families from making impact statements in death penalty cases. 

Plus new information that could suggest Marilyn Monroe was the victim of foul play?  A former L.A. prosecutor who investigated her death produces what he says are notes of some of her final thoughts and says it further proves she did not kill herself.  He joins us live. 

The program about justice starts now.  

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ABRAMS:  Hi everyone.  First up on the docket, another ABRAMS REPORT exclusive.  The mother of missing Alabama teen Natalee Holloway confronts a suspect in her daughter's disappearance.  There it is...

(VIDEO/AUDIO GAP)

ABRAMS:  All right, so what's happening now is...

(VIDEO/AUDIO GAP)

ABRAMS:  ... this investigation about what's going on.

(VIDEO/AUDIO GAP)

ABRAMS:  ... a little bit late for this interview.  She is about four minutes away, I'm told.  And we are going to be the first ones to talk to her about this confrontation.  Can you imagine how emotional that must be, having to sit face face-to-face, talk to the man that she is convinced is somehow responsible or at the very least knows more about this.

Very quickly, Michelle, let me ask you one more question.  The landfill, is the search still continuing at that landfill? 

MICHELLE KOSINSKI, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT:  Yes, it really looked like that was failing for a couple of days.  They couldn't secure the equipment.  Texas EquuSearch volunteers left the island this morning.  But there is this one local man, he works as a private investigator.  He also has search and rescue experience.  He has really taken on this case and this search.  So he is back in the landfill this morning with some other volunteers. 

They're using heavy equipment, digging through that garbage where a couple of days ago dogs caught a strong scent.  What is it exactly?  They don't know.  But they need to dig down through about 15 feet of garbage and they want to clear that area out of there.  That scent that they caught made them very much optimistic, but they just don't know what's under there right now and they're going to keep it up for days if they have to. 

ABRAMS:  All right, Michelle Kosinski, thanks very much.  Appreciate it. 

As we wait for Beth Holloway Twitty to arrive after being briefed on the status of the investigation, I'm joined now by Paul Reynolds.  He's in Houston.  He's Natalee Holloway's uncle.  He's been spending a lot of time down in Aruba following the investigation; and Ricardo Yarzagaray, an Aruban attorney familiar with the Aruban law and this investigation. 

All right, Paul, let me start with you.  This must have been very difficult, I assume, for Beth to go and confront Deepak Kalpoe.  We will ask her about it in a minute.  But you have been talking to her.  You know how she's been feeling, how passionate she is about all of this.  It must have been hard for her. 

PAUL REYNOLDS, NATALEE HOLLOWAY'S UNCLE:  Well she is just absolutely determined to find out what happened and where her daughter is.  And going and seeing Deepak is not a surprise to me.  It's something I would expect her to do.  And, you know, I would expect her to do it in a way that would be a positive way to get some information from him to you know find out what he is thinking and see what he can tell us. 

ABRAMS:  And Paul, you were there, were you not, at that cafe? 

REYNOLDS:  I went there last week and actually spent a little time talking to him myself.  I didn't tell him who I was and he didn't recognize me.  But I JUST wanted to kind of get a better idea of who he was and what kind of person he was. 

ABRAMS:  But when you went there, you were able to sort of look at him and I don't know if the term was you corrected me or someone had said stare him down and you said really that's not what you were doing there.  You were really trying to just sort of evaluate, et cetera, right? 

REYNOLDS:  Right.  He didn't recognize me.  And I didn't, you know, was not there to confront him.  I just wanted to interact with him a little bit and see what kind of person he was.  And I pretended to be a customer.  Well, I was a customer and interacted with him in that manner, just to see. 

ABRAMS:  Yes.  All right, joining me now from Aruba just hours after that confrontation is Natalee's mother, Beth Holloway.  Thanks a lot, Beth.  I know that you raced over here to do this interview.  So thanks a lot.  We appreciate it.  Tell me about...

BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, NATALEE HOLLOWAY'S MOTHER:  OK.

ABRAMS:  Tell me about going to that cafe and talking to Deepak Kalpoe, one of the suspects. 

TWITTY:  Well, you know, he really didn't have too much to say to me.  We were there, I don't know probably—I don't know if it was an hour.  I haven't even stopped to think back on that now.  It took me a while to kind of digest that afternoon, but maybe an hour.  It could have been more.  It could have been an hour and a half.  And, you know, the main thing I was just asking him was, I know that Joran had—he had admitted sexual assault that he committed against Natalee in their car with Deepak and Satish in and I just asked Deepak, I said did you try to help Natalee or did you participate? 

You know I think that is a legitimate question for me to ask him.  I certainly would have hoped he would have been trying to help her.  You know there were a couple of other things I asked.  He would not comment—just kept telling me that his lawyer told him he was not allowed to speak with me and I kept reminding him and—about the reward.  I said we have $250,000 for her whereabouts.  We have $1 million for her safe return. 

I asked him if he could please you know tell customers coming in—I was a little disappointed to find that I had placed in the window of the Internet caf’ had been taken down and that really disturbed me, and I asked him why.  And he said that his boss had made him take it down. 

(CROSSTALK)

TWITTY:  And you know...

ABRAMS:  Sorry.

TWITTY:  I'm sorry. 

ABRAMS:  No—sorry.  Go ahead.

TWITTY:  Go ahead. 

ABRAMS:  I was just going to say so you made it clear to him, did you not, that you did not believe everything he was saying? 

TWITTY:  Oh, absolutely.  I made it perfectly clear that the beach trip never happened.  And you know there have been too many witnesses that have made holes all in that story.  So we know we have moved from one lie to the next and you know Deepak was extremely nervous.  I think I just ruined his afternoon. 

And all he could do was just franticly type on the computer.  It was just senseless typing on it, just every second that he would have to turn away from me.  Of course, he tried to do it a lot.  But you know I was just persistent and I need answers. 

And you know Aruba needs answers.  And these citizens here, they deserve answers from Deepak.  None of us should be subjective to what he is choosing to put us through.  And, you know, I just can't see why—I even invited him to come on your show with me.  I think that would be a great way—if he doesn't have anything to hide, to come forward and talk with us... 

ABRAMS:  What did he say? 

TWITTY:  (UNINTELLIGIBLE) he just told me that—the end of the closing of our conversation, he said the media doesn't know this side of you and I just told him that I had been saving it for you, Deepak. 

ABRAMS:  And what me meant by that was that you were not the kind, loving compassionate woman that you seem to be on TV, he's basically saying that you were being mean?

TWITTY:  No, I think he knows that I'm all of those that you described but that I was not afraid to confront and look for answers and that I will stop at nothing, and I think he knows that now, to get them. 

ABRAMS:  Did he deny the things that you were saying to him or did he say, I simply can't answer because my lawyer has told me not to. 

TWITTY:  Either, (A), he did not respond at all.  He would not look at me.  I kept having to redirect him and tell him to look at me.  And, (B), he would just tell me that his lawyer told him that he couldn't speak with me.  And those were his only two responses other than the one about where he told me that—towards the end of our conversation—that the media hadn't seen this side of me.  And I gather he must be watching me and I gather he must be seeing what I'm saying about him.  So that is interesting to me.  I'm glad he's keeping up with it.  He needs to be. 

ABRAMS:  Are you glad you went? 

TWITTY:  Oh, I am.  And you know I went to develop some pictures.  And I'm glad I did.  I frequent a restaurant that is two doors down from the Internet cafe.  I have been to it three times now since I have been on the island and I plan to go back. 

ABRAMS:  I was going to ask...

TWITTY:  ... he doesn't have anything to hide...

ABRAMS:  I was going to ask you about that.  Do you intend to go back on a regular basis? 

TWITTY:  Oh, absolutely.  I've got a lot more film that I need to have developed.  And I'm just hoping that Deepak will make the right decision and help clear Aruba and protect his integrity. 

ABRAMS:  Let me ask you about the FBI.  The FBI just briefed you on what has been going on in the investigation.  You mentioned before that Joran had admitted sexual assault.  Of course he now denies any of that.  Have they given you any update on the progress of the investigation? 

TWITTY:  Well, we really didn't talk about that.  The main thing that we discussed is—I think these officials from Holland are just doing an awesome job.  And, you know, hopefully in the next, you know, coming days or coming weeks that they will just be able to you know hopefully make some progress with Joran and, who knows, certainly, we'd be thrilled of the possibility of Deepak and Satish being rearrested.  I think the whole new interrogation process would just reveal some incredible information from those two boys...

ABRAMS:  It sounds to me...

TWITTY:  ... and Paul van der Sloot. 

ABRAMS:  It sounds to me like you view Deepak and his brother as possible witnesses. 

TWITTY:  No, I'm not going to say that.  Because remember, Deepak could not answer me.  When I asked him if he tried to help Natalee or was he a participant in the sexual assault, and he could not and would not answer me.  Now if he was not—if he did not participate, I think he would emphatically state, absolutely, no way.  And he couldn't even do that.  So we can't rule him out as a participatory (UNINTELLIGIBLE) in this—in these sexual acts committed against her.  We can't rule that out at all.

ABRAMS:  So...

TWITTY:  He won't deny it. 

ABRAMS:  So literally for an hour or so, you were there across from a man you believe at the very least knows something about your daughter's disappearance, and he was, for an hour...

(CROSSTALK)

ABRAMS:  ... saying I can't answer that question.  My lawyer told me not to.  I assume that you had some—you added some choice words? 

TWITTY:  Well, I was very detailed in how I was—in how I presented the question.  Yes, they were very detailed.  I just—you know he would not tell me, though, that he was not a participant.  And I gave him plenty of opportunity. 

ABRAMS:  You're seen on the videotape handing him something.  What was it? 

TWITTY:  I can't tell you right now. 

ABRAMS:  OK.

TWITTY:  I really—I'll be honest.  I haven't even stopped to think about too much of that afternoon. 

ABRAMS:  Did this conversation make you angrier or was it somewhat cathartic? 

TWITTY:  You know it not only makes me angry, but it should make every citizen in Aruba angry and it should make everyone that has been watching this in the U.S. angry.  Because they see that he is causing so much damage.  These boys single-handedly are doing this and it's just a tragedy.  So it's not only me that is angry.  It's everyone involved in this.  It's terrible. 

ABRAMS:  Beth, it sounds like it has been a long day for you already. 

Thanks a lot for taking the time again... 

TWITTY:  OK.

ABRAMS:  ... to come back.  We appreciate it.  We will stay on top of it as best we can. 

TWITTY:  OK.

ABRAMS:  And Paul, thanks a lot to you...

TWITTY:  Thank you. 

ABRAMS:  ... as well.

All right, coming up, Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens is taking on the criminal justice system. 

A former prosecutor who investigated Marilyn Monroe's death says the secret she told her psychiatrist proved she didn't kill herself.  He joins me live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIN RUNNION, SAMANTHA RUNNION'S MOTHER:  In choosing to destroy Samantha's life, you chose this.  You chose to waste your life to satisfy a selfish and sick desire.  You knew it was wrong.  And you chose not to think about it.  Well, now you have a lot of time to think about it.  Don't waste it.  Write it down so that the rest of us can figure out how to stop you people. 

You're a disgrace to the human race. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABRAMS:  Erin Runnion's daughter, Samantha, snatched from her front yard, brutally raped and murdered.  But this weekend a Supreme Court justice said she and others like her should not have had that chance to confront her daughter's murderer in a courtroom.  At an American Bar Association event on Saturday, Justice John Paul Stevens listed the reading of victim impact statements before a defendant is sentenced in death penalty cases as one of what he calls—quote—“serious flaws in our administration of criminal justice.”

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUSTICE JOHN PAUL STEVENS, U.S. SUPREME COURT:  The admissibility of victim impact evidence that sheds absolutely no light on either the issue of guilt or innocence or the moral culpability of the defendant serves no purpose other than to encourage jurors to decide in favor of death rather than life on the basis of their emotions rather than their reason. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABRAMS:  He went on to suggest that both the jury selection process and the fact that many judges in death penalty cases are elected is unfair to defendants. 

Joining me now, Court TV anchor and formed elected judge, Catherine Crier, who is the author of the new book, “Contempt: How the Right is Wronging American Justice.”  Also with me is a current elected judge in Dallas, Lisa Fox, and Bryan Stevenson, executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative of Alabama and law professor at New York University.  Thanks to all of you. 

Catherine, let me start with you.  On the issue of victim impact statements in death penalty cases, look, I'm OK with it because I think in the end what it is a catharsis.  It's an ability for the victim's family members to have a say at some point in the process. 

CATHERINE CRIER, COURT TV ANCHOR:  Well but Dan, the problem is, it's completely inadmissible.  I happen agree with Judge Stevens.  It's a very unpopular position.  It's being admitted, but it has no probative value whatsoever.  It's entirely prejudicial. 

And people I know are saying prejudicial to the rights of the defendant.  I'm not applauding some scumbag defendant.  But there is an appropriate place and that is just what you said, the cathartic element.  Let them talk to the defendant after sentencing. 

Let them talk to the defendant outside the presence of the jury or the trier of the facts...

ABRAMS:  You're OK with it then, right, as long as the jury has determined death.  Let's say a jury recommends a death penalty...

CRIER:  Right.

ABRAMS:  ... and then before the judge officially imposes...

CRIER:  Right.

ABRAMS:  ... the death penalty, you're fine with that? 

CRIER:  Absolutely fine. 

ABRAMS:  All right.  What about that, Lisa Fox?

LISA FOX, DALLAS COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT:  I don't have a problem with it during the punishment phase.  People forget that jury trials are bifurcated.  You have a guilt or innocence phase and that is where you spend your entire time basically protecting the rights of the citizen accused.  During punishment, you have to look at the defendant, everything he's done in the past, and I believe that the effect that it has on the victim's family or the victim himself, and like in sexual assault cases, I think that is relevant. 

People's lives are destroyed.  People's lives have been turned upside-down and a jury should take that into consideration when determining what is the appropriate sentence for this particular crime for this particular defendant. 

ABRAMS:  And Bryan Stevenson, the bottom line, is it not, that when it comes to the death penalty, what you're really saying is how awful was this?  There is no objective way to determine that for any jury, and so why shouldn't the impact on the family members be a factor, the same way how gruesome the crime was is a factor?  I mean, it's one of these sort of mushy things that jurors have to kind of go with their gut on? 

BRYAN STEVENSON, EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE OF ALABAMA:  No, I think we've upheld the new death penalty in part because we don't want juries going with their gut and relying on factors that we can't evaluate.  We now have aggravating circumstances and the courts have said those are the factors that juries must consider...

ABRAMS:  But those circumstances are so hard to define some of the time.

(CROSSTALK)

ABRAMS:  I mean you can't say that there is some objective criteria that allows you to say you know how gruesome, how brutal the crime was, et cetera.

STEVENSON:  Well but they are precisely defined.  But I think the bigger problem, Dan, is that you know we have always presumed in our criminal justice system that all victims are created equal.  Why should it matter if a 4-year-old child is murdered whether her mother is...

(CROSSTALK)

STEVENSON:  ... articulate corporate executive or her mother's a prostitute. 

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  Absolutely.

ABRAMS:  Well then why should it matter then how brutal the crime was if in the end the person is dead anyway?

STEVENSON:  Well you can debate whether we should have brutality of the crime as an aggravating factor.  Most death cases are imposed because (UNINTELLIGIBLE).  Felony, because of the number of victims, things that are quantifiable and objective, but the harder part about the death penalty it's not the nature of the aggravation, but the nature of the mitigation. 

And we started introducing victim impact evidence because somehow people thought that the penalty phase ought not be just about the defendant.  Well the criminal justice system has always tried to keep who the victim is as a non-relevant factor.  Because if we start considering who the victim is, it's not just defendants that are going to be prejudiced.  It's also going to be many victim who are poor, who are people of color, who are inarticulate, who are disfavored.  Those are the people I'm frankly as concerned about with the introduction of victim impact evidence as the right to defendants.  And most murder victims in this country are poor, black, disfavored, marginalized.

ABRAMS:  Here is an example of when a victim's impact statement can get a little bit out of hand—the Jeffrey Dahmer case. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RITA ISBELL, SISTER OF VICTIM KILLED:  Never, Jeffrey.  Jeffrey, I hate you.  (UNINTELLIGIBLE) I hate you!  Jeffrey Dahmer (UNINTELLIGIBLE).  (UNINTELLIGIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  (UNINTELLIGIBLE)

ISBELL:  (UNINTELLIGIBLE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABRAMS:  Catherine, I remember I was at Court TV at that time.  You know that's an example of a victim impact statement that gets a little out of hand. 

CRIER:  And obviously that is very rare.  But there's a perfect example.  The jury, this sadistic disgusting cannibalistic individual, you really needed the impact of—on a victim's family member to tell them this.  And the attributes of a crime are important.  Because you've got to be looking at does the punishment fit the criminal? 

And a horrific, you know, stabbing in one incident versus a cold, calculated mutilation in another, you hate to say this but when you work in the criminal justice system, there are distinctions made between levels of crime that may be relevant.  But sadly there's a place for victim impact statements.  It's simply not as evidence in front of the jury. 

ABRAMS:  Justice Stevens also talked about another issue and that is the election of judges.  He's basically saying look if you're elected as a judge, you're going to have so much community pressure on you in these cases and that's not appropriate.  Here is what he said. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVENS:  The fact that most of the judges who preside and often make the final life or death decision must stand for re-election, creates a subtle bias in favor of death. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABRAMS:  Judge Fox, I mean look, that's true, isn't it? 

FOX:  No, I just think that is just—it's offensive.  So I guess...

ABRAMS:  Really? 

FOX:  ... if you are an elected official, you're less ethical, less...

ABRAMS:  No, you're more prone to care about what the public thinks and as a result, you're more likely to say if the public is angrier, I've got to go with death. 

FOX:  I totally disagree.  Number one, it's not the judge that goes with death.  It's the jury that decides whether or not...

ABRAMS:  Ultimately the judge decides.  It's the recommendation from the jury, isn't it? 

FOX:  The jury decides whether or not that person—at least in Texas the jury decides whether or not the defendant accused is sentenced to death or not.  And they also forget that it's the prosecutors who decide whether which case that they will take and try as a death penalty case. 

(CROSSTALK)

ABRAMS:  They're elected in a lot of cases too though.

FOX:  The DAs are elected...

ABRAMS:  Yes.

FOX:  ... that is correct. 

ABRAMS:  All right Bryan...

(CROSSTALK)

ABRAMS:  ... final word on this.  I've got to wrap it up. 

STEVENSON:  Well there are nine states where judges do the sentencing.  We've seen judges targeted because of unpopular death penalty decision, Rose Bird in California, Chief Justice Aultman (ph) in North Carolina, Robertson in Mississippi, Penny White in Tennessee.  I think it's unquestionable that when we make the death penalty a popular referendum, which is what judicial selection through the electoral process sometimes does, we undermine the reliability, independence and fairness.

ABRAMS:  All right, I've got to wrap it up.  Catherine, good luck with the book, “Contempt: How the Right is Wronging American Justice”.  I look forward to reading it.  I haven't had a chance.  It's something I'm actually very interested in.  Lisa Fox, Bryan Stevenson, thanks a lot.  Appreciate it. 

STEVENSON:  You're welcome.

FOX:  Thank you.

ABRAMS:  Coming up, new details cast doubt on whether Marilyn Monroe's death was really a suicide.  The prosecutor investigated it says some of the last things she told her psychiatrist prove she didn't take her own life.  He joins me next.

And two jurors from the Michael Jackson case now saying (UNINTELLIGIBLE) we got it wrong. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  I believe that they did let a guilty man go free. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABRAMS:  They?  So why did they continue to talk about reasonable doubt the day after the verdicts?  Coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ABRAMS:  Coming up, new information that could suggest Marilyn Monroe was the victim of foul play.  Former L.A. prosecutor who investigated her death produces what he says are notes of some of her final thoughts and says that that further proves that she did not kill herself.  He joins us live, first the headlines. 

(NEWS BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  Happy birthday to you.  Happy Birthday to you.  Happy Birthday, Mr. President.  Happy Birthday to you. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABRAMS:  Marilyn Monroe, three months before she was found dead, naked, lying face down on her bed.  The official finding that she died of acute barbiturate poisoning, a probable suicide, at the age of 36.  but now there's new information out that could change the way people look back at the life and death of Marilyn Monroe. 

Former L.A. County prosecutor John Miner, who was present at her autopsy, has come forward with what he says are his own extensive, nearly verbatim notes of secret tapes that Marilyn made for her psychiatrist, possibly days before her death.  In those notes, Marilyn allegedly talks about problems with sex, a sexual encounter with actress Joan Crawford, an affair with Bobby Kennedy, then attorney general of the United States, and her admiration for President Kennedy.  The notes also quote Marilyn on plans for the future, to study Shakespeare and make a whole series of his plays into films. 

John Miner says that based on those notes from the tapes—quote—“there was no possible way Marilyn Monroe could have killed herself.” 

With me now from Los Angeles, that former prosecutor, John Miner and Johnny Grant, the honorary mayor of Hollywood.  He was a friend of Marilyn Monroe's and knows old Hollywood well.  Gentlemen thank you very much for coming on the program.  We appreciate it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Thank you.

ABRAMS:  All right, Mr. Miner, let me start with you.  There are a lot of people out there who are saying, you know look, this just doesn't do it.  These are just notes, et cetera.  Why did you just come forward with the notes now? 

JOHN MINER, FORMER LOS ANGELES PROSECUTOR:  On the first instance, I didn't just come forward.  I have been interviewed on this matter for years.  I gave a promise to Dr. Greenson when he let me hear these tapes that Marilyn Monroe made for him as a part of her therapy that I would never reveal the contents.  And until attacks were made on Dr. Greenson, implicating him in possibly causing the death of Marilyn Monroe, I obtained the permission of his widow to come back (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and false accusations. 

ABRAMS:  Why would this psychiatrist have let you sit there and take verbatim notes of what was supposed to be a private conversation for him? 

MINER:  Well how do you know I took verbatim notes?

ABRAMS:  I thought that's what they were.  I mean it sure looks that way.

MINER:  There were notes that I made immediately afterwards.  And there's a trial lawyer' memory.  And I put together a transcript, which in my best judgment, is an accurate account of what Ms. Monroe said on those tapes. 

ABRAMS:  One of the things I think is most relevant to the question of her death is this statement, which this comes from your notes.  Quote—“I made you another present—referring to her psychiatrist—I have thrown away all of my pills in the toilet.  You see how serious I am about this.”

Mr. Grant, bottom line, you too believe that Marilyn Monroe was the victim of foul play? 

JOHNNY GRANT, HONORARY MAYOR OF HOLLYWOOD:  I do.  I do.  I have gone through those—the report that John made, at least two dozen times, looking for nuances that would make me believe she was in the mood to kill herself.  Absolutely not.  I knew her for a long time and she had gone through a lot of adversity, so she was used to that.  And she was at a point of the best part of her career with her new contract and everything happening the way it was.  So I just don't believe it.  And I'm joining John to help take the stigma off of Marilyn Monroe's name. 

ABRAMS:  And do you agree with Mr. Miner's theory that she was killed by some sort of barbiturates and an enema? 

GRANT:  Well I am not an authority on that, but I believe his report.  I have heard him tell this story many, many times, had the questions asked to him in many ways and he's convinced me—and I will tell you, Dan, most of the people in Hollywood don't believe Marilyn Monroe took her own life. 

ABRAMS:  All right.  Mr. Miner, Mr. Grant, stay with me. 

Joining me now by phone from Ireland, author and journalist, Anthony

Summers.  His latest book, “Sinatra: The Life”.  He also wrote “Goddess: 

The Secret Life of Marilyn Monroe”.  Mr. Summers, thanks for coming on the program.  You don't buy it.

ANTHONY SUMMERS, MARILYN MONROE BIOGRAPHER (via phone):  No, I don't buy it.  John Miner is a nice man and he said generous things about my own work.  And he tells a good story.  But how well a man tells a story doesn't make the story true.  He first brought to me and thus to “Vanity Fair” magazine, to which I contribute sometimes, his so-called transcript back in 1995, before he said he had shown it to anyone else.  And “Vanity Fair” and I decided it wasn't worthy of being published and I haven't changed my mind. 

ABRAMS:  Why not? 

SUMMERS:  What happened in 1995 was that Miner got in touch to say he was going to let go what he claimed to have heard Monroe say on the purported tapes.  He said he had 70 to 80 handwritten pages of what he called manuscript type notes of what he supposedly heard back in 1962.  He obviously wanted money—I mean it was evident that he wanted money were everything to be published.  Some of it, perhaps he said to found a scholarship in memory of Monroe psychiatrist, that's Greenson, but also for himself and he spoke of having been offered six-figure sums for his story. 

I asked him how he could possibly recall 80 pages worth of what Monroe had said 30 more than years earlier.  And he said, as I think he said just now, that he had made notes full of a sort of shorthand back in 1962. 

ABRAMS:  All right.

SUMMERS:  And he claimed he'd got an extraordinarily good memory.  He said he'd—he later said he had located those notes in a storage shed.  But in spite of months of urging, he never produced them and he did produce not 70 to 80 pages, but a 35-page narrative written on a yellow legal pad.  But he admitted that he had written that up only in the very last few weeks. 

ABRAMS:  All right...

SUMMERS:  ... “Vanity Fair” and I said thanks, but no thanks...

(CROSSTALK)

SUMMERS:  I don't understand why any reputable paper like “The New York Times”, like the “L.A. Times”...

ABRAMS:  Right.  All right...

SUMMERS:  ... would decide to run the material. 

ABRAMS:  Let me ask—I'm almost out of time.  Mr. Miner, what is your response?  I mean basically what Mr. Summers is saying is that the notes just aren't credible.

MINER:  Well, Mr. Summers is certainly entitled to his opinion.  But I think it reflects something else.  It reflects the fact that he probably is thinking in his own mind I was not as good an investigative reporter as I should have been.  Read his book.  You'll see that there's no explanation for why the first officer on the scene did not declare the residence a crime scene. 

No explanation why no forensic team was called for to inventory everything in the residence, take everybody out.  There's no explanation for the fact that Ms. Monroe's body was taken to the Westwood Memorial Cemetery from the residence...

ABRAMS:  But bottom line...

(CROSSTALK)

SUMMERS:  None of this has anything whatsoever to do with the new...

(CROSSTALK)

ABRAMS:  And Mr. Miner, I just want to ask you the final question.  But regardless of that, you're telling us that these notes that have now been disclosed were written immediately after you heard those psychiatrist's tapes, not later, correct? 

MINER:  I made notes after I heard it, yes. 

ABRAMS:  Immediately after? 

MINER:  What do you mean by immediately? 

ABRAMS:  I don't know.  You said it was your own memory.  That you had taken notes immediately after. 

MINER:  I took the notes the evening...

ABRAMS:  All right.

MINER:  ... that I made my notes of what she said—my own personal notes of what she said the evening of the day that I heard it. 

ABRAMS:  All right.  Fair enough.  Fair enough.  I've got to wrap this up.  We should point out that in 1982 there was an effort to get the investigation reopened after examining the evidence, they decided not do it.  But Anthony Summers, John Miner and Johnny Grant, thank you so much for taking the time to come on the program.  This is a debate that will linger. 

Two jurors in the Michael Jackson case now say he is guilty.  I'll ask Rita Cosby—she interviewed them—why they're suddenly changing their tune.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ABRAMS:  Coming up, two jurors in the Michael Jackson case now say we got it wrong.  He's guilty.  We'll hear from them coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ABRAMS:  (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the jury acquitted Michael Jackson.  You know that.  Now two members of that jury are telling MSNBC that they believe that Jackson was actually guilty, that the pressure from other viewers led them to vote for Jackson's acquittal, even though they believe he'd abused the young victim in this case. 

Joining me now MSNBC's Rita Cosby, host of “Rita Cosby Live & Direct”, the big premiere tonight at 9:00 p.m. Eastern.  Rita has an exclusive interview with both of those Jackson jurors.  Rita, welcome to MSNBC. 

RITA COSBY, “RITA COSBY LIVE & DIRECT”:  Thank you very much. 

ABRAMS:  So to be clear, both of these jurors are now telling you that they believe that Jackson was legally not guilty, meaning that there was proof beyond a reasonable doubt—legally guilty? 

COSBY:  Well it depends on which one you talk to.  We interviewed two.  We talked to Ellie and we talked to Ray Hultman.  Ray said look, there were some shades of reasonable doubt.  I understand why we went to the conclusion.  But both of them say they fought like a dickens in that jury room, said that you know that he was guilty.  In fact, I even looked them in the eye and I said, do you believe that Michael Jackson is a serial child molester and they said yes.  They were very strong and they knew coming out and doing this interview now...

ABRAMS:  Why did they cave if they're so strong?  Why did they cave?

COSBY:  Well that's what I asked them.  I grove them.  I said why did you cave?  They said that there was just so much pressure.  In fact, you'll hear tonight.  We're going to be on at 9:00, our debut performance.  And you're going to see some incredible things that were said to these jurors, and I—look, I said to them, you know a lot of people are going to be angry, there's going to be a lot of emotion.  In fact, take a look.  Here is a little bit of what they had to say. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COSBY:  The other jurors who are going to be watching this are going to be angry at you.  Are you ready for the onslaught? 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Yes, I'm ready. 

ELEANOR COOK, MICHAEL JACKSON JUROR:  They can be as angry as they want to. 

They ought to be ashamed.  They're the ones that let a pedophile go. 

COSBY:  I see you and I think this is a woman who feels guilty, who is at home at night.  You probably cry about what you did. 

COOK:  Sure.  I sure do.  But God has forgiven me.  And now I'm going to have to forgive myself.  And I will. 

COSBY:  If the boy is watching right now, what would you want to say to him? 

COOK:  What would I want to say to him right now?  COSBY:  Do you feel you let him down? 

COOK:  No, I did the best I could with—in my surroundings.  And I have prayed for that young man every night. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSBY:  And Ellie further said, Dan, walk one day in my shoes.  All of you are going to be critiquing me now.  I'm 79 years old.  I'm a great grandmother.  I sat in that jury room and if you heard and experienced what we're going to tell you about tonight, I bet that you at home might have even caved too.  It's really interesting.

ABRAMS:  They—this business about they let them go, they did this and this and that—I mean you know look, Ray Hultman, all right, one of—not the older woman—this is what he had to say on the “Today Show”, not when he's inside the jury room, but this is the day after the verdict. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Do you think that Michael Jackson molested the boy in question in this case, the accuser? 

RAY HULTMAN, MICHAEL JACKSON JUROR:  No, I don't.  I believe that there's reasonable doubt because of a number of factors and that was what was the case was about.  I mean there was a lot of evidence presented, but it didn't lead me to believe that it erased the unreasonable doubt or it erased the reasonable doubt, rather, in this case. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABRAMS:  Rita; this a case of show me the money?  I mean...

(CROSSTALK)

ABRAMS:  ... he knows that the story is not going to be so good...

COSBY:  (UNINTELLIGIBLE)

ABRAMS:  ... if he goes and he says yes...

COSBY:  Well that's exactly—I said look, of course, if you come out and say well it was one big happy jury, they say it was all a big act in that jury room.  And if you look—especially if you look at Ellie Cook, she is bawling.  This is a woman who clearly still regrets this decision. 

And Ray said to me, I am coming out now because I want to speak the truth and he said I know people are going to condemn me.  And I even pointed out, just as you did, I even repeated some other stronger comments.  I said your words are going to come back to haunt you and he said I know that.  I'm going to have to live with myself, but again look at what I went through. 

It's interesting.  You'll watch the interview tonight.  We're airing a lot of it.  You're going to see a different side of these people.  You can talk about money with them.  Every single juror—almost every single one is looking at book deals, not just these jurors. 

ABRAMS:  Yes, but they're the only ones who are saying oh we got it wrong. 

We got it wrong.

COSBY:  They're the only ones—but they also say, if you talk to all the other jurors, Ellie Cook particularly said I came out loud and clear. 

ABRAMS:  Yes, all right we'll see.

COSBY:  You've got to watch it.

ABRAMS:  We will.  Rita Cosby...

(CROSSTALK)

ABRAMS:  ... and keep in mind, a reminder, Rita's interview, catch it all with the jurors tonight.  Her new show premiers 9:00 p.m. Eastern.  We're all looking forward to it.  Rita, great to have you. 

COSBY:  Thank you very much. 

ABRAMS:  Coming up, ABC newsman Peter Jennings died today after a battle with lung cancer.  Tonight I offer a different type of tribute.  Coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ABRAMS:  My “Closing Argument”—the news today that ABC newsman Peter Jennings died of lung cancer.  I didn't know Peter Jennings.  I probably met him once or twice.  I really only knew of him.  All day those who did know him have looked back at his professional successes.  He was after all one of the giants of this business. 

But as someone who overcame cancer myself and who thought about what his obituary would or should look Like, I want to take a different look back and tell you about something besides his tremendous professional successes.  As a friend at ABC said to me today—quote—“I would think he would have wanted to be known for more than just that” and he was. 

Known for an incredible commitment to family, to both his children, Christopher and Elizabeth, his sister and parents and colleagues say he kept a picture of his father, Charles, the first anchor of a nightly news show in Canada, prominently displayed in his office right off of ABC's newsroom. 

And Jennings who was Canadian born held off on becoming an American citizen despite the potential professional advantages because he feared it would upset his mother, Elizabeth, an ardent Canadian nationalist who died in 1991.  When he finally became an American citizen in 2003, he did so quietly, passing his citizenship with a perfect score.

Asked whether he did so to placate his critics, he responded, my decision to do this has nothing to do with politics.  It has nothing to do with my profession.  It has everything to do with my family.  His friends say that while he seemed the ultimate and passionate observer on the television screen, off camera he made personal calls to acquaintances, colleagues when they lost loved ones. 

Ted Koppel, his colleague at ABC, said Jennings was surprisingly sentimental.  Some of that was reflected in his April 5 on air announcement that he was ill and would be anchoring the news only when he felt up to it.  It was his last.  And though most like me did not know him personally, somehow that compassion even seeped into his evening broadcast. 

In April one viewer wrote on the ABC message board, the evening news without Peter Jennings would mean dinner without her favorite dinner guest.  Quote—“We'll miss your mellow familiar voice at 6:30 as we sit down to eat.  We'll keep your reservation open at our dinner table as long as it takes.

Be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ABRAMS:  I've had my say, now it's time for “Your Rebuttal”.  Really almost out of time here, so I just have time for one e-mail that I like. 

Dorothy Louks in Canton, Michigan says, “I really enjoy your show each night, but will you please say coming up instead of comin' up.  It sounds so much better.”  Well only if I can call you Dottie instead of Dorothy.  Dorothy, why should I be so formal? 

Your e-mails abramsreport—one word -- @msnbc.com.  We go through them at the end of the show. 

Coming up, “HARDBALL” with Chris Matthews.  See you.

END

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

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.

The Abrams Report each weeknight at 6 p.m. ET

Discuss:

Discussion comments

,