Nancy Grace Transcript from tonights show

Nancy Grace Transcript from tonights show: VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell in for Nancy Grace. Pop star Michael Jackson fighting allegations by a former business associate who says the singer owes him millions. A civil lawsuit under way in Santa Monica, California featuring Michael Jackson on voice mail. That`s like a new instrument. Fascinating clips that we have obtained and will play for you for the very latest on all of this we are delighted to have in studio my dear friend and colleague Diane Dimond, not only an investigative reporter but author of the fabulous Jackson book, "Be Careful Who You Love," which is sitting right on my dining room table. Diane, what is the very latest? DIANE DIMOND, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER: You don`t even need to read that book because you were there with me for most of it. The very latest is this, Fred Schaffel is suing Michael Jackson for $3.8 million. Part of his claim is that he took $300,000 from Michael Jackson, paid off somebody in Brazil for something. We don`t know what. The judge will not let us know what that was. That of course demonstrable because it lets everybody know, see, Michael trusted me with all this money, and I put out a lot of money and he owes me 3.8. Well, today in court we realize now he doesn`t have receipts for all of this. And his 3.8 request has now gone down to 1.6 million. He cannot come up with receipts for that 300,000 and others. He had a receipt, showed it to the judge. She rejected it. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, what a shock. I mean, this is a guy who asked for money in paper bags and says money is French fries and super size it if he wants a lot of money. No wonder there`s no receipts. DIMOND: Well that`s what Michael Jackson did in calling it French fries and whatnot. But this fascinates me because during the criminal trial Frederick Marc Schaffel of course was one of the unindicted co- conspirators. And I was told by many sources close to Mr. Schaffel and close to the investigation that Mr. Schaffel was almost anal in keeping receipts. He would keep a receipt for $1.29 from the 7-Eleven for some aspirin and then he would put in for it. So now that he suddenly doesn`t have any receipts I`ve got to think, hmm. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Very curious. And luckily, we have Marc Schaffel`s attorney with us tonight, Howard King. We are delighted to have you back, sir. Well, you`ve been hearing Diane Dimond. We`re all wondering how did $3.8 million become just over $1 million? Why the switch? And was it mid- stream or did we just forget to ask? HOWARD KING, MARC SCHAFFEL`S ATTORNEY: No one asked. I mean, this was based on a ruling made before the case even went to trial. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yeah but I mean how can you be sitting there in court day after day discussing how this man`s owed $3.8 million and nobody figured out that it`s really just over $1 million or $1 1/2 million? That to me is the absolute metaphor of the craziness of Michael Jackson`s life. That even in the trial nobody can figure out -- and this happened in the criminal trial. We couldn`t figure out a lot of times what was going on. KING: Listen, I made an opening statement over a week ago where I asked for a million six. I didn`t add it up, and nobody else did. I mean, the fact of the matter is he`s owed a lot more money. Diane`s right. There are no receipts for all these cash transactions, and in fact I asked Marc Schaffel on the witness stand today what do you think about not getting receipts? And he goes, well, I`m not going to give Michael Jackson money anymore without getting a receipt. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well that`s a good thing. Be forewarned, anybody, if you do business with Michael Jackson get a receipt. Now, we have these fascinating tapes we want to play for you. They really are incredible. It`s incredible that Michael Jackson would leave these kind of voice mails. Purportedly it is him. Let`s listen to a conversation involving Marlon Brando, the late great actor. (BEGIN AUDIOTAPE) MICHAEL JACKSON: Marc, we must... Marlon Brando has been pushing. And he is a wonderful man. He`s a God. We have to get this done. We want it done before Christmas. Put together a business plan. The whole thing is fine for TV. He just wants to make a big deal. He wants a lot of money and we would own it together... We`ll form our own company. Start putting that together so when we see him, when I see him.. I can give him a presentation that we have been busy working. He really wants it. I mean, I think that`s he`s not going to be living too much longer, that`s what it is I think. Please Marc, get this done. Let`s get the jive thing done. I need that money for the house. Ah, let`s move mountains. The album is going to be turned in soon. He`s going crazy. So things are looking good. I hope to talk to you soon. I`ll see you today at the studio at 3:30. I love you very much. Thank you, bye. (END OF AUDIOTAPE) VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, you know, Diane Dimond, you raise a point. We were listening to this. That he sounds very alert, very cogent. There`s been so much talk about possible drug problems in his past, which he of course has denied aside from the treatment he went through in the `90s. DIMOND: Right, the pain pills. VELEZ-MITCHELL: But he sounds good there. He did a deposition in London which was played in court today. You have actually seen it apparently. He apparently looks sharp there too. DIMOND: I have seen portions of it. And first of all, I was taken with his voice is kind of deep down here like this. Instead of the wispy little voice. There are always two and three sides to Michael Jackson, the man who`s in charge, I`ll see you at the studio at 3:30, the man who talks like this, and the man who talks like this. And I think it depends on his situation. If he`s in trouble he suddenly becomes the wispy wafey kid who just doesn`t really understand what`s going on around him. VELEZ-MITCHELL: But this is sort of vindication for everybody who said he`s totally out of it, he was carried into court. Because he didn`t speak a lot as you know, we were standing there outside court, it was hard to tell. He would just shuffle by. And everybody was reading whatever they wanted into it, and now it seems that perhaps he`s a lot more together than we thought. DIMOND: Well, remember, these tapes were taken, Mr. King could probably tell you better, in 2003 and 2002 maybe. These two had a relationship for about three years, these two men, and they put together charity singles that sort of didn`t go anywhere. And they had all these projects together. So I don`t really know when those tapes were. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Right. And Brian Oxman, the deposition was apparently last September in London. So that is more recent. Do you think that this trial in some odd way is painting Michael Jackson in a better light than he was painted in the criminal trial, even though he was acquitted in the criminal trial? BRIAN OXMAN, JACKSON FAMILY ATTORNEY: I think we see a real Michael Jackson when we watch the deposition. We see what kind of a man he is. And it`s the kind of a man that I know him to be. I like him. I`ve always liked him. And I`ve always thought that he was aware of his business dealings. Michael`s only problem is it`s such a commotion that goes on around him that there really isn`t anybody who can handle this kind of a commotion. And he has people who he hires to do this and oftentimes they`re simply not capable and as a result you find these kinds of lawsuits. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Alright. Howard King, Marc Schaffel`s attorney, I understand your client was on the stand. A lot happening in court. He was on the stand, and you had said -- everybody was talking last night after you said on this show, the NANCY GRACE show, that if they get ugly, meaning the Jackson camp, and start talking about Marc Schaffel`s past as a gay porn producer, that you`re going to get ugly and start saying explosive things, revealing details about Michael Jackson`s past. Everybody wanted to know what details? Can you give us a hint? Is it of a sexual nature? Is it about the Brazil issue? KING: They did not ask Marc Schaffel one question about his background today. VELEZ-MITCHELL: So basically, you didn`t go there either. KING: I did not. VELEZ-MITCHELL: But I bet you, Diane Dimond is going to go there. Diane, what do you think Marc Schaffel knows about Michael Jackson? DIMOND: Well, I`ll tell you, there are no saints in this story. I did a three-part series on Marc Schaffel for another network I work for, and he`s left a long string of people who complain about him. Many called him a con man. Then you have Michael Jackson on the other side who has never met a lawsuit he didn`t like or didn`t get involved in. It just seems to me these two were such intimates that they both probably know sexual intimacies about each other. Not that there was any relationship between them. But what their desires were, what their hopes were, what they did when they kicked back at night and had a glass of Jesus juice. You know, I think both of these guys could take each other down. But this was really supposed to be an accounting case. You owe me X numbers of dollars. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Of course we`re all wondering is there still, Brian Oxman, Jackson family attorney, another secret to be revealed? This is kind of like the search for the holy grail. We all keep wondering, because he is such an enigma, what is the real Michael Jackson? And we wonder, does Marc Schaffel have the answer to that? OXMAN: There is a secret in this case, and that secret is no ticky, no money. Marc Schaffel does not have the documentation to establish this kind of case, and that`s becoming apparent in the courtroom. RICHELLE CAREY, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everybody. I`m Richelle Carey with your headline prime news break. President Bush says diplomacy is the key to settling North Korea`s nuclear worries. The U.N. is still debating the situation. North Korea defends this week`s missile firings and vows further launches. New York City police say they`ve arrested a man who terrorized subway riders this morning. They say he was wielding two battery-powered saws and lashing out at people. One man was critically hurt. We may soon be blaming global warming for another thing an increasing number of western wildfires. Researchers say that wildfires increased suddenly in the 1980s and seasons also became longer. You can find the study in today`s online edition of the journal "Science." And happy birthday, Mr. President. George W. Bush is 60 today. White House spokesman Tony Snow says it`s not a big deal for his boss, it`s just one day after being 59. That is the news for now. Thanks for watching. Keep it here. I`m Richelle Carey. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell filling in for Nancy Grace. Of course we`re talking Michael Jackson, who is back in the spotlight over, what else, a lawsuit filed by a former business associate who says the kooky king of pop owes him almost 4 million, now it`s down to about 1 1/2 million in change and he is set to collect, but, says team Jackson, not so fast, they`ve countersued claiming businessman Marc Schaffel owes Jackson money. And throughout it all some fascinating clips of Jackson purportedly calling Schaffel desperate for money, which he calls French fries, and when he wants a lot of it he says super size me. Now, over the commercial break Diane and I have been cooking up some really tough questions for you, Marc Schaffel`s attorney, Howard King. And this is the crux of the matter. You had said purportedly, correct me if I`m wrong, that Schaffel put out $300,000 for a mystery man, Mr. X, originally in Brazil, now we hear it may be Argentina, but then testifying today Schaffel supposedly said on the stand Michael Jackson gave me $2 million for record expenses as well as the $300,000 that I can`t talk about what it`s for. KING: That`s incorrect. He -- Marc Schaffel pulled that $300,000 out of an account he had in Europe, and -- VELEZ-MITCHELL: Isn`t there a record of that, Mr. King? KING: Absolutely. It was exhibit 401 at trial today. VELEZ-MITCHELL: And that wasn`t good enough for the judge? KING: Sure, it was. I don`t know what Diane was talking about. That was admitted into evidence right after lunch. VELEZ-MITCHELL: We`re going right off the wire copy that says, quote, this is quoting Schaffel, "He gave me the $2 million for the record and expenses and the situation I can`t talk about," he said, referring to the $300,000. So that implies that he was talking about Jackson giving him money. KING: Two different transactions. In 2001 Michael Jackson invested $2 million with Marc Schaffel to make "What More Can I Give." And Marc Schaffel made it. In 2003 Marc Schaffel took care of a personal matter for Mr. Jackson in South America using his own cash. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, you talk about this personal matter in South America and that of course sets alarm bells off for Diane and myself because we were in the Jackson trial hearing about the alleged conspiracy, of which Michael Jackson was acquitted -- DIMOND: And Brazil was involved in that. VELEZ-MITCHELL: And Brazil was involved in that. So should we put two and two together or can you tell us no, don`t put two and two together, this has nothing to do with that alleged conspiracy to take that boy that accused Michael Jackson and his family out of the country? KING: Well, I hate to dash your hopes, but it was Argentina. DIMOND: Oh darn. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now you tell us. Mr. King, I`m reading the wire copy. This is by Linda Deutsche of the AP, the senior member of the press corps out there. Everyone greatly respects her. And it says that Schaffel was asked about the $300,000 today, do you have a receipt? He said he did. He handed the paper to a lawyer, but after a private conference with the judge it was not shown to the jurors. So is there a receipt for this or not? KING: Yeah, that was before lunch. Things changed. DIMOND: Gotcha. KING: After lunch it came in. DIMOND: Welcome to the world of Michael Jackson. VELEZ-MITCHELL: One thing doesn`t change, though, and that is "What More Can I Give" has not yet been officially released. Let`s hear another fascinating clip about Michael Jackson talking about the saga of the charity album, the charity project, "What More Can I Give." (BEGIN AUDIOTAPE) MICHAEL JACKSON: Marc, call Al first thing in the morning about my orders. You tell him the single has to come out now, what more can I give? They are planning other anthems, we have to be first. And I want Sony, they gotta go to Sony (INAUDIBLE) and it has to enter at number one and stay there for like, um. No, no, no, no to make a record, we want to have it like two months. Cause people want to do something because sympathy USA for Iraq, it`s a beautiful thing to do. Okay? We gotta do this Marc. It`s important. You went through all that work, I went through all that work of writing the songs. (INAUDIBLE) putting the film together. I`m putting the film together. You know, I want, you gotta send me Marc, all the outtakes or else I`m not approving it. I`m not going to let it come out unless I see all the outtakes. Don`t be holding anything back at your house. I want to see everything. Okay? Get on this first thing in the morning, it`s important. Thank you. (END OF AUDIOTAPE) VELEZ-MITCHELL: Alright. Well, we have to go straight out to Jackson family attorney Brian Oxman. It would seem that Michael Jackson sort of lurches from tragedy to tragedy, crisis to crisis, that we are all experiencing as a nation saying, hey, I`m going to come out with a charity project but doesn`t seem to get it to fruition. We`re talking about the 9/11 tragedy. Then we have the Iraq war. Then we have Katrina, and he has hasn`t delivered on these. Why not? OXMAN: Who you utilize to make these projects happen is all-important and it is the determining factor. In this particular case it was apparently Mr. Schaffel who was being the one utilized, and nothing ever happened as a result. So your choice of promoter and your choice of your distributor as to who`s going to make this happen determines whether it does happen, and in fact what you`re saying is true. The selections have not been very good. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Howard King, how do you feel about your client being blamed for these charity projects not being released? KING: Well, listen, the record was done. I`ve heard it. It`s beautiful. Sony would not consent to its release. Probably having something to do with the fact Michael Jackson called Tommy Mottola, the head of the label, a racist. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Alright. Well, we have a caller from -- Mark, he is from Nevada. He`s been waiting patiently. Your question, Mark. MARK: Yeah, why is it that Michael Jackson made all of his money and popularity singing pop music and he doesn`t do -- he does everything but pop music now? VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, I mean, this is a broader question that maybe I could ask our favorite psychoanalyst Bethany Marshall, why is it that these stars, when they get into their late 40s can`t simply retire gracefully and exit the stage? Why do they have to keep promising -- and he`s not the only one. We`re inundated with all this -- we`re killing a lot of trees so that people`s egos can stay elevated. MARSHALL: Well, I mean, I think that what happens over time is the person`s identity, self-esteem, maybe even their narcissism, if you want to use the clinical term, kind of gets tied to the camera. And so their self esteem kind of rises and falls on the smiles or frowns of others and they sort of get addicted to the spotlight. But I think we also can take a look at, I mean Michael Jackson took a huge blow even though he was acquitted. And it might be that he`s not really generative or productive in terms of new albums and works at this point because he really is trying to psychologically recover, even though he didn`t really experience the consequence of a conviction, he is experiencing psychological consequences at this point. VELEZ-MITCHELL: And there are a whole bunch of plans that we`ve been hearing about. Diane Dimond, we hear that he`s going to be moving to Europe, he`s been spotted in Paris, he`s been in Ireland. What do you make of this? I know you have said publicly you don`t think he`s ever coming back to the United States. DIMOND: I don`t think so. Too many child protective services people, too many subpoena servers. I don`t think he`s coming back here. Where will he land? I don`t know. But I think if he really wants to feel protected it should be a country with no extradition treaty to the U.S. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Which is Bahrain, right? DIMOND: Yes. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) VELEZ-MITCHELL: You can`t have a conversation about Michael Jackson without talking about Neverland. Everybody`s wondering what`s up with Neverland? Jackson family attorney Brian Oxman, we got word and we were very happy to report last night that the -- at least some of the animals, some of the big cats have been taken to Tippie Hedren`s sanctuary. She of course Melanie Griffith`s mom. So they`re in good hands. They`re looking for good homes for the other animals. But what`s going to happen with Neverland? Is he going to sell it? Is it shuttered now? Is there anybody working there? OXMAN: Well, all I can say is that those cats must be in pretty good heaven because with Melanie Griffith around I`d like to be with them too. No question about it. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Very good way of sidestepping the question. Brian what`s happening with Neverland? OXMAN: Neverland is doing just fine. It is not in the full-scale production that it was prior to the trial. Michael is undecided as to exactly what`s going to happen with it. And we`re all waiting for him to make a decision. And when he does he will tell the world. But we don`t know any particular plans that he has other than just to maintain it in its present condition. VELEZ-MITCHELL: And Howard King, Marc Schaffel`s attorney, is this a vortex you`ve gotten into? I mean, after all there is a countersuit. Do you really think even in the best case scenario you`ll ever see any money or could you end up, I wish I`d never gone there? KING: I`ll invite you out to Neverland once we own it. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ooh. Diane Dimond, I`m going to give you the last word on that one. DIMOND: You know, I have some sources that know Mr. Schaffel very well, and they have always said that he would love to own Neverland, he would love to subdivide it, make a winery, have a bed and breakfast, you know, take all those beautiful cars out there, the Bentleys and whatnot, and sell them for more than they`re worth. So his answer does not surprise me at all. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Wow. I love ending with a cliff-hanger because that`s exactly what it is. We`re going to have to see what happens to Neverland, who`s going to own it, who`s going to throw the next party there. Alright. We are out of time. Always fascinating to have Diane Dimond and Michael Jackson in the same conversation. DIMOND: My pleasure. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight we remember Army National Guard Specialist Mark Melcher, just 34, killed in Iraq. Melcher, from Mount Lebanon, Pennsylvania, enlisted in the army shortly after graduating from North Catholic High School. Melcher enjoyed rooting for his favorite Pittsburgh teams including the Steelers. Melcher leaves behind his mom, dad, brother. Mark Melcher, an American hero. We would like to thank all of our guests for their insight. And thanks to you at home for helping us track these very important cases. See you right here tomorrow night, 8:00 sharp eastern. Until then have an absolutely wonderful evening. END http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0607/06/ng.01.html

catmj

脑壳都大了。。。

NANCY GRACE TRANSCRIPT Aired July 7, 2006 - 20:00:00 ET VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell, sitting in for Nancy Grace. Pop star Michael Jackson on the defense in a civil lawsuit in Santa Monica, California. We will play clips from Michael Jackson`s video-taped deposition for you tonight. The question, will it convince jurists he does not owe his former business associate more than $1.5 million. Let`s go straight out to "Inside Edition`s chief correspondent Jim Moret who was in court today. Jim what is the latest? JIM MORET, CHIEF CORRESPONDENT, INSIDE EDITION: You know I was afraid you were going to come to me first. Basically what`s happened is, Marc Schaffel a former business associate of Michael Jackson`s. He`s suing Michael Jackson first for 3.8 million, that number has now been reduced to $1.6 million for unpaid receipts and various work he did. The reason the amount has been reduced and it`s been reduced in the last 24 hours is because apparently Marc Schaffel didn`t keep enough receipts to support the claim of $3.8 million owing. Basically the plaintiff`s case has rested today and the defense case is beginning. So Michael Jackson`s lawyers will get to now take the helm and produce their witnesses to say that in fact Michael Jackson not only does not owe Marc Schaffel money, but they came Schaffel owes him money. VELEZ-MITCHELL: So it could boomerang on them. Now there are some aptly fascinating clips from the deposition that Michael Jackson gave last fall in London. It starts out with a rather dramatic encounter. Let`s take a look. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: First thing I`m going to do Mr. Jackson is let the record reflect that I`m going to hand you a subpoena requiring your attendance in trial next month in Los Angeles. Okay. Just for the record Michael just so you know, that subpoena is ineffective. MICHAEL JACKSON: OK, I know. That doesn`t mean a thing. That`s just (INAUDIBLE) trying to intimidate you and throw you off. It`s the sort of thing he does. You can take this and just tear it up. Let the record reflect that Mr. Mendell has torn up the trial subpoena I just served. That`s right. Where is your place of residence? Now Bahrain. (END OF VIDEO CLIP) VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now this looks like something more out of a TV show or a reality show like "Punk`d" than it does a deposition. We`re going to go right out to Howard King, Marc Schaffel`s attorney, the man who is suing Jackson. I believe you were the voice there that says here`s the subpoena. Just paint a picture of what it was like, a surreal moment to hand Michael Jackson a subpoena and then have his attorney rip it up? HOWARD KING, MARC SCHAFFEL`S ATTORNEY: Listen, lawyers do that at the beginning of depositions to try to prove who`s the biggest dog, so, we`ll see who`s the biggest dog later. But yet it was surreal. We`re sitting in a luxury suite in London and he`s there. And you know, I want him to know, just like the jury`s going to hear over and over again, you know he should be here in Santa Monica. VELEZ-MITCHELL: And why were you not able to ultimately get him to appear in person? Because in a civil suit, theoretically, if you ask somebody, subpoena them to appear, they are supposed to appear. KING: Well it depends on whether or not he`s a California resident. If he`s truly not a resident, he doesn`t have to honor a subpoena. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Alright. Well that`s why we have Jackson Family attorney Brian Oxman with us tonight. Who by the way is also being called as a witness in this case. Brian, why did Michael Jackson not want to appear in Santa Monica to set the record straight, if he feels he`s done nothing wrong? Was it simply that he didn`t want to take a trip from Bahrain where he apparently was at the time, living most of the time, to Santa Monica? BRIAN OXMAN, JACKSON FAMILY ATTORNEY: Jane, this is an accounting case. And this involves accountants. It involves checks, receipts, documents, none of which Michael really had any dealings with during the course of his time when all this took place. So his contribution to this particular matter is really very limited. And I think that`s what came out in court today. He is not the one who can tell you what happened in this case, the documents and the accounts tell you what happened in this case. VELEZ-MITCHELL: And by the way, while we have you there, let`s try to pin you down. Where is Michael Jackson as we speak? We`ve heard that he`s shown up in Paris, we`ve heard Ireland. And that he might be moving to Europe, permanently? OXMAN: Well the last we heard he was in Ireland and he was enjoying himself there. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Doing what? OXMAN: Michael just goes from place to place as he sees fit. And he does his business and meets with people as he wants to. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Alright. But I mean was he doing an Irish jig? Was he meeting with Bob Dylan? What was going on there? OXMAN: There was lots of discussion of him meeting with Bob Dylan. And we really don`t know whether that took place. Hadn`t heard. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Alright. As always, a mystery. Let`s hear and see what Michael Jackson said during his deposition about this much-discussed charity album. Or charity project. What more can I give? (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) Did you direct somebody to make sure that since you were disassociating from Marc Schaffel that you wanted to do it in a kind and humane matter? Manner that somebody make sure that Mr. Schaffel was reimbursed for whatever expenses he had laid out on the song "What More Can I Give"? JACKSON: At the time, I remember juggling probably 200 different compositions in my head. Writing them, working in the middle of an album. Also visualizing short films for each song. And something like this to just be my main focus of attention, I can`t imagine, no. (END OF VIDEO CLIP) VELEZ-MITCHELL: Jim Moret, what is the reaction these tapes had in court? What`s the reaction of the jurors and those in the gallery? MORET: Well sitting in this morning, one thing that struck me and Howard King did a very good job with this I thought. And that was the fact that he would ask Michael Jackson in the series of these depositions about various business relationships that he had. And Michael Jackson would invariably say he didn`t recall. And then a document would be produced and so forth. What struck me specifically about this charity project was the fact that in the deposition, Michael Jackson seemed to be saying he didn`t even know what the charity was. He just knew it was for charity. And so it would be for the good of mankind or for public awareness. You know some things just don`t seem to make sense. Yes, we know Michael Jackson is very creative. Maybe he`s disassociated with certain business affairs on a day-to-day basis. But there would be things that would be brought up, for example, a million-dollar loan. A $2 million loan. Michael Jackson simply wouldn`t have any recollection of. And I think that for the jurors, you know, those of us who work on a normal job, that`s a lot of money. It`s hard to imagine not remembering that stuff. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Psychologist Patricia Saunders, doesn`t Michael Jackson operate at another level? He`s an artist. He`s working subliminally. I think at the time right after he was charged in the criminal case and arraigned, he went out and jumped on his SUV and did a little dance. Which to me was sending a signal to the whole world, don`t take this seriously, it`s a big joke. Look at me, ha ha. SAUNDERS: Because somebody shows poor judgment or acts in a weird way doesn`t mean that they`re operating in a different world or in a different plane. In fact I doubt that Mr. Jackson was able to juggle 200 compositions in his head. I read the deposition, Jane. And I saw somebody who was extremely intelligent, cagey, and thoughtful. Asking the attorney to define what he meant. Answering in very general and cautious terms. It was impressive. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well I agree with you. I think he`s extremely intelligent and cagey. That was precisely my point. He`s very, very cagey. Dawn, Pennsylvania, your question, ma`am? DAWN: Yes. Michael Jackson is supposedly broke, where would the money come from if Marc Schaffel would win a judgment? VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well that is an excellent, excellent question because we`ve all been wondering will Marc Schaffel ever see money, Howard King. So many people have sued Michael Jackson and walked away empty handed. KING: Well, Michael Jackson`s actually extremely wealthy. He has no cash. But the value of his ownership in the Beatles catalog is probably worth $200 million. His real estate holdings are probably worth $20 or $30 million. God knows how many antiques and artifacts he owns. He`s a high net worth individual with no cash. VELEZ-MITCHELL: It must have been completely surreal for you to do this deposition. When we come back, I want to ask you about what it was like to actually interview and depose Michael Jackson. Stay with us. We`ll be right back. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you ever have a cash flow problem in 2003 where you wanted to spend money on something or you needed to spend money on something and didn`t have it? JACKSON: I`d be guessing, I don`t know. 2003 -- I don`t know. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Have you ever had a cash flow problem in your adult life? JACKSON: I`ve heard of some cash flow problems. But I`m not sure if it was accurate or not. (END VIDEO CLIP) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell filling in for Nancy Grace. We are talking Michael Jackson who is being sued in a Santa Monica, California courtroom. And he has not appeared in person, rather on videotape via a deposition that was done last fall in London. Now part of the controversy surrounding this case involves the background of the man suing Jackson. That man`s name is Marc Schaffel. Let`s hear what Michael Jackson has to say about that. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You learned at some point and time about Mr. Schaffel`s background and what you call gay pornography? JACKSON: Not what I call, that`s what it was. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was gay pornography? JACKSON: Yes. I was shown a videotape by the lawyer and I was shocked at what I saw. Because I didn`t want to believe when he told me. Then he said well you have to see this. Because I was surprised that he was in that business which he never told me. And it was something that is not appropriate from what I was projecting with my work. So it just didn`t match. (END VIDEO CLIP) VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, by the way for clarification. Brian Oxman, who we`ve been talking to tonight, is a Jackson family attorney. There is another attorney who actually represents Michael Jackson in the Santa Monica courtroom. And he said today, quote, I think Michael came across as sympathetic, credible and the kind of individual who could easily be taken advantage of by somebody like Marc Schaffel. Defense attorney Courtney Anderson, you have been watching and listening to this depo. Do you think Michael Jackson came across as sympathetic? ANDERSON: I think viewed in light of the case last year, I think yes. I think last year with the resolution of his criminal trial, many people felt that he was taken advantage of by these unscrupulous people who were greedy and out to cause him harm. And I think that this case falls right in line. And I think that the deposition shows that he is busy. Maybe he doesn`t have 200 compositions that he`s working on. But maybe he has 20. And I do think he is a creative person. None of us can deny that we`re here talking about him because of what he has done with the entertainment and the music that he`s brought to the world. That`s true. So he certainly earned his status. I think that this ongoing perception of him is someone who really doesn`t understand the day to day. Who is just from -- VELEZ-MITCHELL: But do you buy that? Do you buy that? He is so smart. How could he not remember multimillion dollar deals? ANDERSON: Obviously, with the acquittal he had last year, obviously he was taken advantage of by that family. At least that`s what the jury believed. And if that could happen to him in that situation, people came into his home and took advantage of him, then certainly I could believe in a civil jury that this, in a business situation that this person came into his life pretended to be an appropriate associate. And then Mr. Jackson is stunned to find that this man is actually involved in this kind of seedy underworld and doesn`t want to associate with him. So I think in light of the big picture, I think a lot of people are going to believe that yes, he is taken advantage of. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Marc Schaffel`s attorney Howard King, you conducted the deposition last fall of Michael Jackson. What is it like to question him? Because he is a dancer both literally and metaphorically you might say. I mean he dances around things brilliantly. You have to say that. KING: Well, listen, it`s like extracting teeth. But after 10 hours, I think I got all the teeth out. VELEZ-MITCHELL: So you`re -- you think you`ve won? You think you are winning this? KING: Well, listen, everybody thinks they`re winning their case. I think the case is going very well. I think what the jury heard today was a very cagey individual who signed document after document. And I just don`t think they`re buying that he`s some idiot savant who doesn`t know what`s going on. Especially after they heard 20 telephone messages that he left that were very lucid. VELEZ-MITCHELL: But he`s very careful in these telephone messages to say, hey Marc Schaffel, don`t give me your money. Just give me money. Give me seven, give me ten. He doesn`t say Marc, I`d like to borrow some money from you. KING: Well listen, there`s no claims in the case any longer for borrowed money. I mean the cash that Marc Schaffel delivered, he`s out. He should have got a receipt, he`s an idiot. But he`s owed money. VELEZ-MITCHELL: You`re calling your own client an idiot? KING: He called himself an idiot on the stand for trusting Michael Jackson and not getting receipts. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, we have a full screen graphic of the money that he says he is owed by Michael Jackson. Maybe we can put it up. We don`t want to get too technical here. But let`s go over it very quickly. $675,000 for the rebuttal documentaries. $340,000 for two cars delivered. $300,000 for loans to Jackson which is what we can`t talk about I guess. $200,000 for various expenses totaling $1.6 million. Now you`re saying that he doesn`t really have documentation for any of this? Because if I were to do a job, let`s say, for somebody to do a documentary on a rebuttal, I would get a contract to say hey, I`m going to do this and this is how much I`m going to be paid at XYZ dates. KING: No, he absolutely has a contract for all of that money. He has a specific contract signed by Michael Jackson for that FOX documentary. The jury has seen it. And the only defense is going to be gee, you know, he was in mars, he didn`t know what he was signing. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Or there were no receipts I guess, there were no cancelled checks. So he could say hey, here`s when I paid your client. KING: Well he can`t show he paid. In fact they acknowledge he never paid that money. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Alright so Jim Moret, chief correspondent, "Inside Edition." You`ve covered Michael Jackson for many years, you were in court today. Can you try to give us the big picture here? Because we don`t want to nitpick about every little item on this ledger. But we`re trying to get a sense of A, who`s winning. And what this whole money debate comes down to. MORET: Look, I`ve been a lawyer long enough and a reporter long enough. It`s very difficult to give a scorecard on a day-to-day basis. It generally isn`t worth much because you know things can change quickly. I do want to bring up one point. You played that part of the deposition where Michael Jackson said he was appalled then he discovered that Marc Schaffel was in adult entertainment. And he wanted to severe all of his relationship and business with him at that point. The problem is, and it was pointed out in the deposition, that was in 2001. But in 2003 is when the rebuttal documentary, the rebuttal was made. So, you know, there`s a two-year lapse there. Michael Jackson apparently was doing business with him long after he learned about Marc Schaffel`s past. So I think that argument is really difficult to fly with the jurors. When you really come down to it, a lot of it comes down to credibility. Who are they going to believe? Are there receipts? Sure, there are no receipts for some of the things. But if the jurors ultimately believe that Marc Schaffel is owed money, then he could win. VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well you make a very good point. If you had somebody fired in 2001 because they were a gay porn producer, why are they working for you in 2003 and you`re leaving a whole series of voice mails on their answering machine asking them for money? I would think that that might resonate with the jury, but with Jackson juries, you can never tell, right Jim? MORET: You can never tell. I mean many of us thought with the case last year that it could go either way. But we were frankly stunned that it went so dramatically in one direction. You can certainly analyze it in retrospect. But it`s very difficult going into a case and going forward to know what`s going to happen. This is a jury. These are 12 men and women. And they are going to go by their gut. They`re going to go by the facts that are delivered in the case. It`s just hard to predict. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) VELEZ-MITCHELL: What a week in America`s courtrooms. Take a look at the stories and more important, the people who touched all our lives. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) If she trusted him and she wasn`t afraid of him, she would do that. But if she lived in fear of him, she might have felt that she couldn`t express that horrible thing that she did to her husband. Can this kind of a money problem even, let`s say its involving $17,500, drive somebody to murder their husband? I don`t know what it takes for you to murder your husband. GRACE: It must have been very, very difficult for those three children to visit their mother in jail, see her behind bars, knowing that their father is gone. A registered sex offender named a suspect in the death of a 16-year-old Utah girl. What exactly happened to Samantha? Mr. White has a 16-year-old son and it was through his 16-year-old son that he met Samantha. There are some indications they may have had some kind of long-term thing going on. I guess the big question is how do you think the girl died? Was she assaulted? What his original charge ten years ago, lewdness with a child involved, according to authorities. He put holes in the wall between his apartment and the adjoining apartment so he could watch minor girls in their bedroom. And he also admitted going into an apartment where minor girls lived and stealing their underwear. Of course we`re talking Michael Jackson who is back in the spotlight. Over what else? A lawsuit filed by a former business associate who says the king of pop owes him almost $4 million. Now it`s down to about $1.5 million. It`s already a slime fest. And the only defense to Marc Schaffel`s claim so far have been that he`s an adult film producer. Or as Michael Jackson`s people like to call him, a gay porn producer. It`s the ongoing saga that keeps getting more and more bizarre. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0607/07/ng.01.html