tv The Situation Room With Wolf Blitzer CNN November 7, 2011 4:00pm-6:00pm EST
that with dosy and what did that mean as far as who administered it, how the body metabolized it. and despite the education of the jurors, it was still complicated. i think it comes down to what they believe happened here. >> the jurors sorting through the science. as we now know, reaching a verdict in the trial of conrad murray. thanks to the folks who joined me. i'm brooke baldwin, we will it ton follow this story with my colleague, wolf blitzer. wolf? >> thank you. happening now, breaking news. >> dr. murray, you are charged in count one of this felony. >> he is not breathing? >> yes be he is not breathing sir. >> you did unlawfully and without malice kill michael joseph jackson, a human being. >> anyone there? >> just the doctor, sir. the doctor is the only one here. >> i told the truth. >> is all bs. dr. murray is the fall guy. >> this is involuntary manslaughter. >> he is not responding to anything. >> maximum penalty for this
offense is four years in state prison. >> daddy has been the best father you could ever imagine. >> i am a innocent. i definitely plead not guilty. >> in just minute, we'll find out the verdict in the manslaughter trial of michael jackson's doctor. more breaking news, a fourth woman is now making allegations of sexual harassment against republican presidential candidate herman cain. she is speaking out about them in explicit detail. lots of news happening today. we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer, you're in "the situation room." >> this is cnn, breaking news. >> we're following breaking news this hour. a verdict to be announced any minute now in the involuntary manslaughter trial of dr. conrad murray, michael jack scene personal physician, who was with the sixther when he died from the overdose of the powerful anesthet
anesthetic. you are looking at live pictures outside the courthouse. we learned dr. murray is inside the courthouse. momentarily, we will get the verdict, innocent or guilty. let's got courthouse in los angeles. cnn's casey is there. set the scene for us casey, right now mp momentarily, cameras will be inside. we will get the verdict. >> absolutely, wolf. attorneys on both sierds in the courtroom. dr. conrad murray is in the courtroom. and my colleague, ted rowlands is in the courtroom. he will give us updates on that verdict when it comes. but we will be able to see that live. here outside the courthouse, you can see behind me, hundreds of people have gathered now. most of them, michael jackson fans, awaiting news of this verdict. they are very, very anxious. very, very excited though that this verdict has come down. many of them are shouting things like murderer. many of them believe murray was undercharged in this case.
the specific charge he is facing is involuntary manslaughter. prosecution claims that dr. conrad murray injected michael jackson with fatal dose of the powerful anesthetic propofol. they say that he was using that drug in a home setting outside of a hospital to treat michael jackson's insomnia, which is not what that drug is intended for. the defense claimed throughout the case that michael jackson was a drug add wloikt could have very likely injected the propofol them self. prosecution countered that even if michael jackson injected himself, conrad murray is still libel for his death because he is a doctor who should have known not to provide michael jackson with such a powerful drug. now, this case has lasted since late september. jurors heard from 49 different witnesses and they listened by all accounts, very carefully, to all that testimony. i was in the courtroom for some of the time. other of my colleagues who were in there for longer than me, watched the jury very closely,
and said that they seemed to be a very tight-knit group. paid very close attention. they are not at all surprised that this verdict was reached in a total of ten hours of deliberation time over just two days, wolf. >> what are the experts there suggesting? ten hours the jury deliberating in case like this. does that seem to suggest they will find him innocent or guilty? >> well, of course you never know in these cases, as we have seen in high profile cases in the past. but they do suggest that the fact that deliberations took less than two days. the fact that the jury did not request any testimony to be read back. the jury did not have any questions for the judge. the experts are saying that that probably indicates a guilty verdict, but you never know. >> let me ask jeffrey, standing by, our senior political analyst. we have been stunned many times in the past, jeff. >> it certainly has.
i was quite wrong on the date of o.j. simpson verdict when they came back after all those months of testimony. after just a couple of hours of deliberation. you remember we waited overnight. they said they reached a verdict. we all had all night to speculate. i thought they were going to convict. i was, of course, wrong. here, given the way the evidence went in. given the smooth deliberations. usually that suggests a guilty verdict. but except when it doesn't. we just can't predict. >> let me play for our viewers, who weren't following it minute by minute. some of the closing arguments we heard in recent days from both sides. listen to this. >> as i said, at the outset of this, this morning. michael jackson trusted conrad murray. he trusted him with his life. he paid with his life.
conrad murray, in multiple instances, deceived, lied, obscured. but more importantly, conrad murray acted with criminal negligence. conrad murray looked out for himself, and himself alone. he wanted this employment. he didn't want to lose the employment sew had to say yes. but that's not what a doctor does. that is not what a doctor does. that is to the legal obligation, ethical obligation, legal duty of a doctor. conrad murray's actions directly caused the death of michael jackson. but the people do not need to prove that. all that needs to be proven to find criminal liability on the part of dr. murray is that he was a substantial factor in the death.
and as it relates during intervening causation as already explained, it was not extraordinary, it was not unforeseeable. even if you accept the defense version of the facts, even if one of you accepts that version of the facts, conrad murray is criminally guilty of involuntary manslaughter. because he was a substantial factor and any consequences that rose out of that were entirely ordinary and foreseeable. defense counsel will have an opportunity to speak and then i will have an opportunity to speak again briefly after that. i want to thank you for your attention. i want to assure you, as i do now and as i will at the close of my closing argument, i will be asking that you return with a verdict of guilty as to the sole count of involuntary manslaughter. because conrad murray caused the death of michael jackson.
conrad murray abandoned michael jackson. conrad murray gave him propofol and abandoned him. conrad murray is criminally liable, justice demands a guilty verdict. >> i understand, it's a touchy thing to say. no one wants to say it. and i want you to take this case out of michael jackson. take it away from michael jackson. think about that. take it away. let's put it somewhere else. let's put it in a psych hospital. some patient kills himself. put it in a hospital where some patient breaks into a cabinet.
put it in family situation where somebody overdoses. put it anywhere you like. but at least if you make -- if you're going to hold dr. murray responsible, don't do it because it's michael jackson. this is not a reality show. it's reality. and the decision you make isn't making good tv, it's how it affects real human beings and people that love them. so i hope that you do the right thing and find dr. murray not guilty. >> ed chernoff, the defense attorney, david walgren, the prosecutor in this case. er with waiting momentarily. the judge will come out. the judge michael pastor. and have the verdict from the jury, jeffrey toobin is watching
all this unfold. explain, jeffrey, the burden of proof, involuntary manslaughter, if proven, eligible for up to four years in prison. but explain the burden of proof as far as conviction is concerned. >> involuntary is the keyword here. er with used to murder cases, homicide cases, where the charge is intentional killing. the l.a. district attorney's office did not decide to make that charge. they are charging involuntary manslaughter, which only requires that the government prove that conrad murray acted recklessly and caused michael jackson's death. it is not a case about intending to kill michael jackson. no one argues that conrad murray intentionally killed him. all the prosecution has to show is that he behaved recklessly, that his behavior was well
outside the standard of care and that his bad doctoring killed michael jackson. those two things. bad -- reckless behavior plus cause ache. the defense challenged both of those things. they said, he did not behave recklessly. his care was not great but within the ordinary cares of course of care and michael jackson's own behavior, rather than conrad murray, was the cause of his death. that is really what this case is being fought about. >> but there was a lot of expert testimony, jeffrey, from other doctors, saying, just administering this anesthetic propofol inside a private bedroom outside of a hospital, that that in and of itself is enough to convict. >> right. and that's why most of us who have followed this case think he is going to be convicted.
given conrad murray's statement to investigators that he was trying to wean michael jackson off of propofol, when you compare that that he bought effectively bathtubs full of propofol, this extremely unusual dangerous powerful narcotic, he bought all this enormous amount of it, and administered it and made it available it michael jackson, that's why conrad murray's argument is very hard it make, is because on one hand he says he is weaning it. on the other hand, he bought all of this. and have you experts saying, propofol is not a responsible drug to administer when you are in a home setting like this. >> we have our own expert, dr. sanjay gupta, our medical correspondent is watching all of this unfold. the argument is that he just was reckless in giving him this anesthetic inside a bedroom as opposed to inside a hospital. >> yeah. absolutely. and i think, wolf, you were the
first person i talked to when this happened two years ago now. i think the conversation went with me saying, this just sounds so bizarre, wolf, because i hadn't heard of propofol used in that way. so yeah, and i think that that, you know, remained true over the last two years. no one has come out and said, actually that is fairly normal thing to do. because it is not. and so, i think that alone is obviously very serious. and they made the case specifically, like it was administering propofol, a lack of resuscitation women, lack of monitoring equipment, not being present at the time propofol was administ administered, which is a requirement when you administer propofol. the second part as jeffrey was talking about as well, is who administered the lethal dose? was it dr. murray or as the defense is asserting, was it michael jackson himself? i don't know how crucial a pint that is going to be. but it is curious how much the jurors will fix ate on that. >> by the way, i want to point out to viewers, that great saefl california that we are showing in the upper right hand corner,
there it is the there, that's the video feed coming from inside the courtroom. once they release that, that means we are getting toward make the announcement of the verdict, the judge michael pastor, will begin that process. once we see that seal go way, we know we are only literally seconds away from the start of this final stage. so you have heard a lot of the evidence, sanjay. walk us through -- walk us through what you're thinking right now as we set the scene. because most people probably believe he is going to be convicted of involuntary manslaughter, but it is by no means a done deal. >> yeah. it is interesting wolf. i'll preface some of the science bay saying, i don't know how much of the science penetrated or jurors paid attention to this. but the whole notion that no one is disagreeing that propofol was administered in the home, what some of the science is exactly what happens to that propofol, once it is administered. we know it lasts a very short
time for example. the body. which means it is hard to trace in the blood after a certain period of time has gone by. so you know, a blood samples taken at the time he arrived at the hospital. again at the time of autopsy and levels of propofol for example were so high, they weren't consistent with dr. conrad murray was saying, he only administered 25 milligrams, so it painted this picture, did michael jackson himself inject even more than that. or as the defense say, at the time he gave him this medication, he passed away. and wolf, i think i see the judge there standing in front of the courtroom. >> right. the seal has began away. there is the judge. judge michael pastor. he is getting ready to begin this process. they are watching it. the jury is now walking in, we're told. we won't see pictures of the men and women of the jury. but let's listen under to the judge as we begins this process. >> this is the case of people versus conrad robert murray, case sa 073164.
dr. murray is present in court with council. mr. chernoff, mr. flanagan, mr. walgren and ms. brazil. all alternates are present, all members of the jury are present. to everybody, good afternoon. >> good afternoon. >> ladies and gentlemen of the jury, i'm advised the jury has reached a verdict. who is the forperson of the jury? >> i am your honor. >> juror number three, thank you. is that in fact correct? yes. >> the jury reached a verdict. >> yes. >> has the jury through the forperson signed the appropriate verdict form? >> yes, sir. >> do you have all of the verdict forms with you? >> yes. >> could you provide the verdict forms to deputy jones, who will then present them to me?
courts has reviewed the verdict form and ladies and gentlemen, there is a typo in terms of the date of the alleged dins dent. it was written june 9 wsh 2009. and juror number to nub number three, you have corrected that to june 25 and you put squibllys. >> gentlemen. >> i have passed this to the court clerk and ms. benson will publish the verdict. >> superior court of california, los angeles county. the people of the state of california plaintiff, versus conrad robert murray, defendant. case number fa-073164. title of court in cause. we, the jury in the above entitled action, find the defendant conrad robert murray,
guilty of the crime of involuntary manslaughter. in violation of penal code section 192 subsection b. alleged victim, michael joseph jackson, alleged date of june 25, 2009. as charged in count one of the information. the 7th day of november, 2011, forperson juror id number 145 seat number three. is this your verdict? is this your individual and personal verdict, so say you one, so say you all? >> all jurors indicate in the affirmative. ladies and gentlemen, i'm going to ask you whether this is your individual and personal verdict. i'm going to be asking you individually if this is correct. if it is your individual and personal verdict, say yes. if it is not your individual and personal verdict, say no. is this your individual and personal verdict, juror one? >> yes, sir.
juror two? >> es. >> juror three? >> yes. >> juror four? >> yes, sir. >> juror five? >> yes. >> juror six? >> yes. >> juror seven? >> yes. >> juror eight? >> yes. >> juror nine? >> yes. >> juror ten in. >> yes, sir. >> juror number 11. >> yes. >> juror 12? >> yes, sir. >> all jurors having indicated the affirmative, the court check is directed to record the verdict. do counsel wave further reading of the verdict as recorded, mr. walgren? >> yes, sir. >> mr. cler november? >> yes. >> thank you. ladies and gentlemen of the jury, i will now read to you final instructions upon discharge of jurors. you now have completed your jury service on this case. on behalf of all of the employees of the los angeles superior court and parties in this case, and others involved in this case, please accept my thanks for your time and effort. throughout this trial, i have
admonished each of you not to speak of anything about this case with anyone other than fellow juror during deliberations in the jury room. that order is lifted and vacated. which means from now on you have the absolute right either to discuss or not to discuss anything about this case with anyone else. if you want to talk about the case, that decision is appropriate. if you do not want to talk about this case, the decision is appropriate bp. the decision is yours and yours alone. i repeat. the decision is yours and yours alone. i remind you that under california law, you must wait at least 90 days before negotiating or agreeing to accept any payment or benefit in exchange for providing any information about the case. let me advise you of some rules.
the law puts in place for your convenience and protection. the lawyers in this case, the defendant or their representatives, now may talk to you about the case, including your deliberations or verdict. those discussions must occur at a reasonable time and place and only with your consent. please immediately report to the courtney unreasonable contact made without nur consent by the lawyers in this case, the defendant, or the representatives. a lawyer, defendant or representative who violate these rules, violate a court order may be fined. i here by order that the court's record of personal juror identifying information, including names, addresses and telephone numbers, be sealed until further order of this court. if in the future, the court is asked to decide whether this information will be released, notice will be sent to any juror
whose information is involved. you may oppose the release of this information and ask that any hearing on the release be closed to the public. the court will decide whether and under what conditions any information may be disclosed. i do order that the confidential emergency contact information forms you completed and provided to the court staff, be destroyed. on a personal note. i remember way back when in early september when first we met. i advised you at that time that you were being asked as all jurors are asked, to accept the responsibility of citizenship in this great country. and i told you i understood that serving on a case would be a hardship, an inconvenience and burden on you. because you have your own lives outside of this courtroom. you have responsibilities to your jobs, to your profession, and to your families.
you have undertaken the responsibility of jury duty in a remarkable fashion. as do jurors everyday throughout this great country. you have made sacrifices. and you certainly have had to endure burdens and impositions. delays, and a case that ran over what i told you you would have to serve. throughout this trial, you have been remarkable. in terms of your patience, in terms of your conscientiousness and your dedication. you've never been late. you've been here and you have had a wonderful disposition. you always have been respectful to those of us in the courtroom. and we are genuinely appreciative of it. i certainly know and appreciate that serving on a case of this sort has interfered with your everyday lives. but you undertook the responsibility in good faith. and i again, want to indicate, on behalf of our courtroom family as well as shows involves in the case, thank you for your time and your efforts.
i want to single out the alternates in this case. if you recall when we met the first time, the only way to aanalogize the rule of an alternate is of a spare tire. most of the time you never need the spare, but when do you need it, you really need it. we didn't need spares because the regular jurors were conscientious but the alternates also were, and i want to thank you for performing your civic duty. i want to ask that you accommodate us a little more and go back to the jury room and relax for a few minutes. i, and some of our staff members, want to go in and thank you individually for your sacrifices. once again, on behalf of those involved in the case, thank you for being jurors in this case. and again, i want to wish you the very best. we stand for jurors in this courtroom. and it's not standing for them in terms of tolerating them. we actually stand up for jurors.
and people want to know why we do that. we do it because we respect you. and because we appreciate you. and that's why at every session in this case, we have stood for jurors and why now again, those of us will stand for you as well. my defendant wishes. you are discharged and excused. >> so the jurors are leaf leaving the courtroom. there you see dr. conrad murray. guilty. one count involuntary manslaughter. the judge is continuing. >> with regard it further proceedings in this case. mr. chernoff? would you like to be heard? >> judge, you're asking about
sentencing? >> any motion and probation and sentencing? dr. murray has a stat story right to speedy sentencing within 20 days after today's date which means on or before december 8, 2011. i do not believe we have a probation report. we may, but i haven't reviewed any documentation on that. i don't think we do. so it is up to you what date -- >> we were discussing the sentencing. possible sentencing dates and we were talking about three weeks. >> if you have a date that you are suggesting, let me know so then i can turn to the people. >> please.
defense counsel has conferred. >> just want to point out what is going on there. you see the defense team, lead off, criminal defense attorney for dr. conrad murray there. they are looking at the calendar to see preep proepate date for sentencing. he could serve up to four years, one count involuntary manslaughter. we will hear a date on this. one of the things i'm anxious to hear is what wl he will stay out of prison on bail. let's see what they will say. >> what about the 22nd? is that something you can do? >> i can. >> is that sufficient time? >> 28th if that's possible, your
honor. >> what is the schedule of probation? >> two to three weeks. it is very difficult to get a report within a two-week timeframe. my suggestion is that it be the week thereafter. the problem i have, is i'm starting a major case on the 29th. if it means i have to go to the 30th, i will do that. if we can start on the 29th. i can adjust thecate. case . >> judge, i'm sorry, you said you are starting on the 29th a case? >> i was. i can do probation and sentencing on this case on the 29th as 13 of 20 if you want me to. >> yes, judge, that will fit everyone's schedule and mr. walgren, i believe, seems to be okay with that. >> let me just ask before we go to the next step. is tuesday the 29th of november acceptable for the people? >> it is, your honor.
>> thank you. >> with regard to further proceedings in this case, and dr. murray's status, do you want to be heard on that, mr. walgren? >> i would, your honor. >> you may. >> i at this time, the people would ask that that the defendant be remanded into custody. as the court is aware, he has had approximately two and half years to prepare for today's date. sea che is a convicted fellon ad has been deemed a factor in michael jackson's death. at this time we ask he is remanded with no bail pending sentencing on november 29, 2011. thank you. >> thank you, mr. walgren. mr. chernoff i will hear from you. >> all of the cause of factors do not apply in this case. for 18 months dr. murray has been on bail. has not violated any of the rules of the court. has not been a flight risk. has not been m a danger to the community. he continues that way.
he has family obligations that he has it take care of. the fact that this was a possibility doesn't mean that those obligations don't need to be taken care of. there is no reason to remand him under the circumstances. and we ask that you release him until the sentencing date of 29th of november. >> is the matter submitted mr. cler november? >> it is. >> mr. walgren? >> yes, sir. >> thank you. the court takes into account the factors in sections 1166 of the penal code and 1272. throughout this trial, dr. murray was presumed innocent and certainly there is a constitutional guarantee of bail to preconviction status. dr. murray has been convicted by the jury. of a felony by the jury. the jurors found beyond a reasonable doubt unanimously that dr. murray is in fact guilty of the crime of
involuntary manslaughter. there is no statutory right to bail based upon this felony conviction. the court does evaluate the defense request for continued release on or and bail to penal code sections to which i referred. the defendant shall be committed to the proper custody of county to await judgment of the court upon the general verdict, unless upon considering certain factors the evidence supports a decision to allow dr. murray it remain out of custody on bond. the first factor is the protection of the public. quite frankly, i feel that that is a significant and demonstratable factor in this case and public protection, as far as i'm concerned, dictates that the defendant be remanded without bail np. in few of the fact that dr. murray has been convicted of a
crime involving homicide. this is not a crime involving mistake of judgment. this is not a crime involving administration of drugs per se. this is a crime where the end result was the death of a human being. that factor demonstrates rather dramatically that the public should be protected. secondly, the seriously of the offense charged and proven. the offense charged and proven in this case is a homicide. and the homicide is predicated upon criminal negligence of this case. as far as i'm concerned, that factor is a significant factor in terms of remand. third, the previous criminal record of the defendant. as far as i know, that criminal record is nonexistent and that is a factor which would indicate to court that dr. murray should remain on his posted bond.
the fourth factor is probability of the defendant failing to appear for the judgment of the court upon the verdict. dr. murray has made all of his court appearances. he has been represented by counsel. he has made appearances in the past. quite frankly, i don't know if dr. murray would in fact make those appearances in the future since he now is a convicted fellon and dr. murray has significant ties outside of the state of california. so i genuinely am not sure about this factor and the fifth factor, is once again, an overriding consideration, and that is public safety. dr. murray's reckless conduct in this case posees a demonstratable risk to the safety of the public. if dr. murray remains out of custody on bond, and even though dr. murray is a medical doctor, and even though he has been practicing public safety demands he be remanded. based upon my evaluation of all of these factors, i conclude
that remand is appropriate. dr. murray is remanded to the custody of the los angeles sheriff with no bail. and in the interim he is to be kept in care and custody of the sheriff and ordered to appear for further proceedings and formal probation and sentencing on 29, november, 2011 at 8:30 a.m. in this department. i expect that the people will have specific restitution -- we can wait a few moments. specific restitution-related incidents in this case pursuant to the provisions of 120.24 and be prepared to address any matters of restitution. certainly counsel are aware of reassignment act and provisions of a penal code section 1170 subdivision h. i do want sentencing memoranda filed by people and defense in this case. is there anything else to address at this juncture, mr. walgren? >> no thank you, your honor.
>> mr. chernoff? >> no thank you. >> mr. murray is remanded. the court will take a few moments to talk with jurors and members of the court staff will be talking to jurors as well. we are in recess. we are adjourned. >> -- media contact still in effect? >> no. >> so there you have it. dr. conrad murray. you just saw him handcuffed. he is about to go to jail. no more bail for him. his criminal defense attorney is saying something, let's just listen in. >> those orders are vacated. >> your honor, on november 16, can appear 977 for the doctor. >> no. between now and then if the the court wants to adjust, it will. but there is a special proceeding with mr. alfred.
their appearance is necessary at this point, unless we go to the next step. okay? thank you. >> so there it is. dr. conrad murray will be escorted to jail right now until his formal sentencing on tuesday november 29. he had been out on bail. but now, the judge deciding that that would be inproappropriate, judge michael pastor, explaining why he decided he should be sent to jail right now, awaiting sentencing on november 29. lots to digest here. well get reaction from outside the courtroom, from reporters inside. i want to bring in jeffrey toobin and sunny hostin to get their sense. i guess we shouldn't have been surprised by any of this, jeffrey. looked like pretty much of a slam dunk as far as conviction is concerned given the evidence brought forward. >> i don't know if it was a slam dunk but certainly not something to challenge the jury a great deal. they deliberated a reasonable amount of time but certainly an long time.
they didn't ask to see any of the evidence. i have to say i'm a little surprised he was remanded without bail. the two factors, and the judge talked about a bunch of factors, but the two key factors are risk of flight. is this person a risk of flight and danger to the community. given the circumstances here, i didn't think he was either much after risk of flight or much of a danger to the community. but as the judge pointed out, this was a very serious crime and it involved the death of a human being. he is someone who lives in texas, not in california. so he doesn't have a lot of ties to the california community. which relates to the flight issue, so he remanded him. that was a tough thing to do. but an understandable one. but i could see other judges making a decision on that. >> one other footnote, a sensitive point that you bring up, whether or not he should have been allowed to stand bail until sentencing or sent it jail as we just saw that he was. david walgren, the prosecutor, i
don't know if you know this, but he was a prosecutor in the roman polanski case. and speaking about risk of flight, we know what happened in the roman polansky case and after all, conrad murray was born in grenada and has a the lot of contact outside of california and i suspect a high profile case like this, the judge didn't want to take any chances at all. let me bring in sunny hostin to get her reaction it what we just saw unfold. were you convinced he would be found guilty, sunny? >> well you never know so i wasn't convinced, but i certainly believed, wolf, that prosecution proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt. i thought the case was very significant against dr. murray. i agree with jeff, i was very surprised they remanded dr. murray. that is something that didn't always happen. it is up to the judge. but certainly i think, in my experience, what is usually considered as the risk of flight. and i didn't think that that was -- there was a grave risk of
flight in this case. but it was up to the judge and the judge used his discretion. so i guess we will find out what his sentence will be. i think what is interesting though is that because of the overcrowding situation, in los angeles, i wonder even if he is given four years in prison, whether or not he will serve that amount of time. i mean, slirn someone that has a felony conviction but no priors would be eligible for less time. so i wonder what will happen when we see what he is sentenced to. >> walk us through, sunny, quickly, how that decision is made. he could serve up to four years but not necessarily get four years. how is that decision made? >> that's right. my understanding is that off then times the decision is made by the bureau of prisons. it is quite possible if he goes los angeles county jail, he may only look at two years and he could serve part of that prison sentence at home with a home
monitoring device. this is a decision that will be made but it happens all the time. remember lindsay lohan just was sentenced to 30 days and she spent about four and half hours in prison. so dr. conrad murray, even given four years, may not get that time. >> he is 57 years old, 58 almost. looking at four years potentially in prison. stand by. casey wian is outside the courthouse. what was the reaction? we saw sh pictures. but describe what happened when the guilty verdict was announce. >> well, as soon as that guilty verdict was announced these hundreds of people behind me, mostly michael jackson fans, erupted in shouts of jubilation. many of the folks told us they believe that dr. conrad murray should have been charged with serious crimes. but they are happy tonight he is convicted of involuntary
manslaughter. if i request just offer one other observation, watch from here, some fans were watching it as well, dr. conrad murray looked like about the most surprised person in the room when sheriff's deputies walked up behind him and put the handcuffs on him so quickly. seemed like he was not expecting to be remanded in custody as quickly ease was, as sunny and jeffrey had both mentioned, wolf. >> what happens now as far as the crowd is concerned? are they staying there? waiting for other news conferences? we expect to hear at this point from the prosecutors, defense attorneys, well get reaction. we assume from michael jackson's family as well. is that what we are waiting for outside the courthouse? >> absolutely. i think this crowd, who many of them have been here throughout this trial, standing in line for lotteries, for the eight seats available in the courtroom, i think they will want to hear from the jury and prosecutors. but my sense is what they really
want is to see the jackson family walk out and express their thanks for this verdict. they are waiting, i think, for the jackson family to applaud them for what they think is justice served in this case, wolf. >> there are microphones. there is an area where they can all go and make statements to the news media. is that right? >> that's right. it was our understanding that the prosecutors would not be meeting with the news media if the verdict was not guilty. but that they do plan to, since the verdict was guilty. we are waiting to see whether the jurors, of course as the judge mentioned, it is voluntary pour for the jurors to speak to the media. we will be waiting to see if they will agree or do so. >> i want to play for the viewers, the reaction wbs once that guilty verdict was announced from outside the courthouse. listen to this. >> guilty. [ cheers and applause ] >> guilty.
>> you see most of those people, they're excited he was convicted, found guilty. one count involuntary manslaughter, eligible for up to fours years in prison. you saw him handcuffed, dr. conrad murray, and taken to jail. that's where he's going to be until november 29th, the day the judge announced would be the sentencing of dr. conrad murray. the whole notion, casey, we are going to get some of our reporters from inside as well. i know ted rowlands was inside the courtroom, randy inside the courtroom. well get their eyewitness reaction of what was going on inside. family members were inside as well. as we await some of the statements that we expect to be made by the defense attorneys, the prosecutors, the jurors can come out. you heard the judge say the jurors, if they want to come out
and make a statement they certainly can as well. it'll continue for a while in los angeles. the unfolding of this drama. >> absolutely. and some sort of celebratory atmosphere you see going on behind me, really speaks to the fact that michael jackson more than two years after his death still has a lot of very, very devoted and dedicated fans. and if we think back to the closing arguments that prosecutor delivered, one of the more emotional moments, was when he came out and said that as a result of dr. conrad murray's actions, in this case, michael jackson's children were left without a father. and we can remember back to michael jackson's funeral when his children made what, for many people, was their first public appearance. and it really humanized this performer. i think that this crowd here devoted to him, shows the humanity that this man had. especially in the eyes of his devoted fans, wolf.
>> all right. i want everybody to stand by. i want to reset for viewers right now. we think inside that truck, dr. conrad murray is being taken away it a jail in los angeles. the judge announcing he would not be eligible to continue to be out on bail. he could be potentially be a flight risk or threat to others. so he is going to jail right now awaiting sentencing on november 29. ted rowlands is joining us now. our correspondent inside the courtroom when the verdict was announced, what was it like in there, ted? >> well, as you can imagine, wolf, very intense during that moment right before the court clerk read the verdict. and then afterwards, i don't know if you could hear it over the court audio, but a couple members of the jackson family and kathy hilton who was also sitting with the jackson family, let out an outburst basically a celebratory one and that got a stern reaction from bailiffs. murray's side, obviously, the
opposite. conrad murray wheb they put the handcuff owns him, he turned around and locked at his daughter who was crying, and his mother. anna nicole alvarez, who has been staying in l.a. since the trial, said i love you, as they carted him in handcuffs out of the courtroom. the jackson family, for the most part, besides the outburst was very quiet. the family show and katherine jackson, showed no reaction as the verdict was read. she did in a very poignant moment lead the prosecutor, david walgren, who walked over to the second row as the jackson family walked out. to answer your question, as you can imagine, emotional intensity, i guess is the way i would describe the scene inside the courtroom.
>> ted, we saw dr. conrad murray a few times during the course of the trial, break down, wipe away tears from his face. i was looking closely at the shots, i don't know if you could see his face during sentencing or after, but deactually see tears come down? debreak down? how emotional did he get? that video we just showed, by the way, was old video. wasn't from today. go ahead, ted. >> right. he did not shed a tear as far as i saw. i was sitting behind him in a very good vantage point of him. i can tell you this. he was prepared for this eventuality. i could tell you that his security card, jeff, driver, who spent time with him everyday, when they walked in, it appeared to me they had been crying anticipating this possibility. clearly the way this jury came back with ten hours of deliberating, the defense knew, murray knew in his heart, this
is likely the outcome. and he new because his defense attorneys told him he would likely be led away in handcuffs. while it was still a very emotional verdict for them, it was one that they fully expected given the deliberation time of this jury. >> is that standard operating procedure there in los angeles? you have spent a lot of time in l.a. over the years, ted. that they immediately handcuff the defendant? how the convicted -- the man convicted of this crime, and immediately whisk him away. >> it is standard operating procedure if the judge remand the defendant to custody. a lost people didn't think that murray would be remanded because he didn't have a criminal record. and one would think, looking at him, he would not be a flight risk or especially a danger to society. however, the judge, as you heard, disagreed with that. saying because of the nature of the crime that he could be a danger to society and used that really for the bulk of his decision on this.
but the answer is, yes, when a judge says, he is remanded, immediately the bailiffs behind get behind the chair and put the handcuffs on them. which is what you saw take place in that courtroom this morning. or this afternoon. >> my sense is that the judge, judge michael pastor, didn't want to take any chances in a high profile case like this. even if the chance was tiny, that dr. conrad murray would flee or whatever, try to escape, get out of the country in some sort of way thap that would have been obviously a very embarrassing moment to the judge, who is obviously not taking any chances whatsoever. i'm just guess wlag is going through his mind. you've been watching this trial from day one. he seems like a ilike a no-nonsense kind of judge. >> absolutely. he is tough, but consistent. sitting in the courtroom, you know the rules. and when someone violate them, he does not hesitate to call
them out in court, whether a family member or attorney. even a couple witnesses have been reprimanded. one, dr. paul white is coming back for contempt hearing. i think after the cameras stopped recording or showing live testimony, one of the lawyers, michael flanagan said to the judge, do we still have to bring dr. white back for the contempt hearing. and he said, absolutely. he is very, very strict but consistent, i would say. >> so, the next stage and you have been speaking to the criminal defense attorneys. have you been speaking to the prosecutors. >> well we don't know if they are going to come out. they know that microphones are here waiting for them. it is my understanding they are going to talk with dr. conrad murray's family fliiar initiall here. and we don't know if the entire defense team will come down or not. we do expect a statement made.
it'll be a live event. quickly turned around. we expect it to be a very short statement from lead prosecutor, david wall green. then it is the jackson family's decision too, to speak. there are cameras set up outside here and security is set up, if they would with wish to speak and again the jury will also be given an opportunity to address the public, through the media, as to what led to their decision et cetera. a lot of questions for this jury. if they are so inclined to speak. >> and if they come out, we will hear what they have to say. the jackson family and others. ted, stand by. dr. sanjay gupta watched this unfold also. sanjay, we walk talked about this over the last year or two, as long as this has been going on, the doctor administering anesthetic propofol inside a bedroom. highly extraordinary. now the jury convicted him of
involuntary manslaughter. >> yes. it was extraordinary when we talked about this and no one said actual that actually this is something more common than we think. no one ever said that. it was bizarre, i think, was the adjective i used with you when you described this to me more than two years ago. when i was watching this case, out in los angeles for some time, i thought they would try to make the case with experts that this is not that unusual. propofol is used in hospitals but also in clinics and could also be used in other settings. they never made that case. dr. paul white focused more on the idea that maybe michael jackson injected himself. in the end, we know how the jurors interpreted all that. >> propofol, correct me in i'm wrong, sanjay, something a physician would give if you're getting a colon os ka pi or something like that be to put you to sleep. but they are carefully monitor
nd a situation like that. >> yeah. there are very specific requirements. first of all, propofol is used in operating rooms for general anesthesia. used in intensive care units for people getting treatments in for example, icu. for minor things where patients need to be out for a little bit of time. this is not sleep per se. this is literally ans inty sized. so this idea that someone needs to be present, you have to have resuscitation equipment around, monitoring equipment around. the patient needs to be monitorered the entime time on propofol are standard procedures. obviously many of those things weren't followed here. >> i can't tell you how many doctors over the past couple of years said they were outraged when they heard about use of propofol getting michael jackson to sleep.
i never spoke to one doctor. the notion of involuntary manslaughter and i think the medical profession and colleagues out there and doctors watching who watch this closely, they are getting a lesson from this, an important message sent out there. >> well, yeah. but i think most doctors as the public sort of you know, thought what you are describing, though, wolf, i'm not sure what the lesson was for most doctors. because it was outrages then and remains outrageous now. just to give you an idea of just how strain thj is, propofol is a substance is not even considered a controlled substances in the way that many narcotics are. pain killers we are talking about. in part because no one could imagine or enjigs a situation where it is abused in this way. it a drug abused in hospitals for example. even by anesthesiologists but to abuse it in this way outside a hospital or clinical setting, i don't think anyone considered that as a possibility.
>> the notion he was getting paid by michael jackson, $150,000 a month, to be his personal physician, i don't know if that played any role in the jurors minds or whatever. but it was clearly out there. >> yeah. i think so. and you know, it is obviously a lot of money. it seems somewhat outrageous especially as the prosecution tried to make the case. and in order to do this he left some of his previous patients. now, many of the patients, wolf, as you know listening to testimony, they had nice things to say about dr. murray really credit him with saving their lives. so prosecution focused on this idea he was taking care of patients but he left, then abandoned them for the money to take care of just one patient. you know, that was the sort of negative portrayal they are aiming for wolf. >> if you are convicted, i don't know if you know the answer. if you are convicted and know involuntary manslaughter, going to jail, on his way it jail, handcuffed. he will serve up to four years,
do you automatically lose your medical license. can you never practice medicine in the united states again? or is that something that is open to challenge? >> it is surprising but it is open to challenge. and i know jeffrey has talked about this as well. we look this up. it is interesting the court cannot determine, court itself cannot determine, if someone loses their medical license. that is something by the individual state boards to do. there no question, this is a huge factor. but he is licensed in four different states. at time the trial was going on, his liens in california was suspended. in hawaii is expired but he still had a medical license, albeit without the ability to prescribe medication any more. so this is something determined at the state board level. again, this is a huge determinent in. >> it would be shocking in a doctor convicted of involuntary
manslaughter is aallowed to practice. but technically it is possible that someone can serve time and get back into the business of being a doctor. >> yes. absolutely. and the state board, even at the time of conviction, depending on specifically what conviction is for, reserves the right not to strip the person of their medical license. again, that's a state board decision. as opposed to courts. >> i guess we can just conclude that jurors, all 12 of them, never really bought this notion that michael jackson himself, administered the appropriate fall when dr. murray walked out of that room. >> you know, i don't know the answer to that, wolf pip think what the prosecution was really trying to say as they listened closely, especially for closing arguments, is the idea who administered it while important wasn't entirely relevant. >> because the situation in and of itself administering propofol in the home, having it sitting out, doing all these things dr. murray is doing, that in and of
itself was criminal. the idea who administered it while they both talked about it in closing arguments, you get the sense they are trying to paint that as less relevant. >> is it normal right now as we look at this, that there will be some reviews, some memoranda that will go out to the medical community based on this high profile case telling doctors, anesthesiologists, others that you know what, we all watch this. here is what you got to learn, lessons to learn from this. >> i think some of that is happening. there with is a meeting for national sew site of the anesthesiologists where this topic came up. think i the idea that propofol wasn't a controlled substance has already been a movement to try and control a substance and making it not as easily accessible as you heard. dr. murray is able to buy, as they said, bathtubs full of this stuff. so i think some of that will come about as a result. again, the whole notion that propofol is, you can't use it outside the home, i guess the assumption was that all doctors
knew that. and maybe dr. murray did as well. i'm sure that there will be a strong message sent about that as well. >> can't use it outside the hospital you met. not outside the home. >> outside the hospital, that's correct. >> you need proper security and precaution. stand by for a moment. sunny hostin is still with us. sunny, walk us through wh happens between now and november 29, the day of sentencing. >> sure, wolf. certainly, it has been remanded, dr. conrad murray, will be remanded hp his attorneys will start working on presentencing report. their job right now is to keep him out of that jail bed. the prosecution will also be working on their recommendations. they of course want him sentenced to four years in prison. and then the probation department will also render sort after recommendation as to whether or not they feel it is appropriate for him to serve probation or up to four years in prois yn. ultimately wolf, it'll be up to judge to determine sentencing.
again, because of jail overcrowding in los angeles, i think it is quite possible that even if sentenced by this judge to four years in prison, conrad murray could very well serve less than that. but it is not up to the judge in terms of how much of the sentence he spends in prison. only the sentence is up to the judge. >> the man in the sent are of the skren is joe jackson, father of michael jackson. he and his wife, katherine, are leaving. other members of the family are as well. can you see the huge crowd of camera photographers, and media outside the jackson family leaving. i wonder if they will stop off and say anything. right new it looks like they are just leaving, trying to get through the reporters, photographers, media and just folks who gathered outside the courtroom right there. well watch it very closely. just want to update our viewers who may just be tuning in. we are here in "the situation room." we want to welcome our viewers
in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer reporting. we have a guilty verdict. dr. conrad murray convicted of one count of involuntary manslaughter. he will be sentenced for the death of michael jackson. we are waiting it hear from the jackson family. some members of the family. maybe we will hear from some of the jurors. well have breaking news coverage. we are also watching other important news here in the united states. including an ugly new allegation of sexual misconduct by herman cain. this time the woman is publicly telling her story. i will speak this hour with the accusers lawyer, gloria allred. all straight ahead. we are watching all of the breaking news. but let's go back it los angeles. here, the prosecution team is about to make a statement. let's listen in. >> you ready? >> yes. >> all right.
very good. michael jackson died on june 25, 2009, our major crimes division, working with the los angeles police department and county coroner person toll determine what had happened. the coroner ruled the death a homicide. lapd investigators secured and then poured through evidence to see where it led. it led to dr. conrad murray. after an exhaustive review of all of the evidence and consideration of the following standards employed by this office, it was determined that dr. murray would be charged with involuntary manslaughter. deputy district attorneys david walgren and deborah brazil, trial attorneys, worked the lengthy investigation. they consulted with a wide variety of experts.
they put together a compelling case based upon competent evidence. their presentation of the evidence in the court was superb. walgren and brazil show discipline of the prosecutors of the los angeles district attorney's office. they are a model for others. we are grtfide the jurors saw the evidence and it led to one conclusion, the doctor is guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the death of michael jackson. we thank the jurors for their hard work and thoughtful deliberations. we also want to acknowledge the court, judge pastor in particular, court personnel, bailiffs and many others who assisted in ensuring that beth sides this this cased a fair trial. finally, we want to extend our personal sympathies to the jackson family. especially to prince, paris and blanket. they have lost a beloved father.
nothing can make up for that loss. now deputy d.a.'s walgren and brazil like all other district attorney personnel take their ethical obligation as prosecutors seriously. they believe it is not appropriate and and believe that justice has been completed. they will be more available obviously when conrad murray is sentenced and that will take place as the judge indicated on november 29th. with that, we will answer any questions if we can. >> for those out there who say that this is a lot of effort on the part of your office, with very little pay off, that this person may not see state prison, may not see county jail, though he is seeing some today, respond to that. the importance of this case, despite the fact that he won't get much time in state prison. >> well, there was a homicide. someone lost their life. three children lost their time with their father because of
someone's criminal negligence. so the effort in that regard was worth it just to make that point and pre that point. but you make a point also. a b-109 that will eliminate potential for traditional state prison sentence in state prison in this case, because this case is one of the so-called nonviolent nonserious nonsex offense. a b-109 wab i have been speaking out against it since it was first proposed. unfortunately wbt governor and legislature and some others who have embraced it have gone on the course and this is probably the first of many, many, many poster children cases that will reveal how 109 is a potentially a complete failure. criminal justice disaster. and will impact public safety. >> sorry, one follow-up.
what degree was this case a message to physicians because doctor shopping is an issue, particularly in hollywood. individuals looking for physicians to do their bidding. to what extent does this send a message to them. >> a very strong and powerful message that this sort of conduct does rise to the level of criminal negligence and to the extent someone dies as a result of them playing the role as dr. feelgood, they will be held accountable. unfortunately, death from prescriptions, prescribed medications, is the number one cause of death in the united states of america this year. it used to be automobile accidents. now it is prescribed medications. in this particular town, while we see many examples of high profile people sue coming, giving up their lives, because of addiction to prescribe medications. off then time aided and abetted by unscrupulous corrupt doctors. so fair warning to them.
>> you have been through this everyday, your thoughts at this point? >> the only thing i would say at this point, is i just want to thank judge part offer for overseeing a very fair and well-run trial. and i would also thank most important lit jury for being so conscientious in their duties as a judge indicated in court. they are so diligent rb punctual and respectful of the process and system, they did this at great sacrifice to themselves. at this point wib just thank the jury and our sympathies go out to the jackson fa family at this time, for the loss they suffered. not a pop icon but a son and brother. that's most important to keep in mind today. >> deborah? >> tho, thank you. >> all right. >> the notion of of dr. murray
may not do much jail time, does the suspension of a medical license, which i think is part of a possible sentence, does that stand like a smoky hold on the landscape for those with a medical profession? >> it is my understanding that given the context of this sort of negligence will result in the automatic suspension of his medical license. he will lose his medical license? >> is that just here or in other states as well? >> i hope that other states will honor california's conviction. they won't have a clans to see the consequences of the doctor's actions. >> does that send a message though? >> i have a question. >> sure. >> i have heard commentators throughout the trial talk about how this is a medical malpractice case. but quite frankly, in view of of evidence quits nicely into murder. can you talk about that decision -- i understand it --
[ inaudible ] >> there is a theory of second degree murder based upon implied malice that the doctor's conduct was so reckless that in the amount of two malice in this context. this theory of murder was examined carefully based upon the evidence gathered by lapd and coroner's findings. many lawyers in our office reviewed that as possible al tern piff. after careful consideration we thought of involuntary man slaughter as the most accurate charge of the doctor's misconduct. this was clearly medical malpractice but it also resulted in criminal homicide. >> steve, there's been a number of high profile cases under your watch, obviously -- >> we will continue to monitor what is going on with the prosecution team. they are explaining what is going on. but they clearly said that he would lose his medical license, abill to practice in california. and hopes also states follow suit.
you saw it all unfold live here in "the situation room." dr. conrad murray led off to jail in handcuffs without bail moments after he was convicted in the death of the one of the most famous performers in history. >> the jury in the above entitled action find the defendant conrad robert murray guilty of the crime of involuntary manslaughter. in violation of penal code section 192 subsection b. alleged victim, michael joseph jackson. alleged date of june 25, 2009. as charged in count one of the information. this 7th dave november, 2011, forperson juror id number 145 seat number three. >> there it is, guilty ver difkt trial of michael jackson's physician, dr. conrad murray. ted rowlands was inside the courtroom when the verdict was read. let's bring in ted right now.
it was pretty dramatic when the police, they came up to him, sortly thereafter and put handcuffs on him and basically escorted him. he is on his way it jail. >> yeah, well the whole thing was dramatic, as you might imagine wolf. inside the courtroom you had not only jurors filing in but you had murray sitting there to hear his fate, but you had so much anticipation from the general public. cameras rolling and the jackson family with the largest contingency it date. 17 members of the jackson family, there awaiting the reading of this verdict. then have you dr. murray's family. his sister, daughter, mother. and his girlfriend as well. mother of his child. all waiting desperately for this verdict. one way or another. the emotional, as you can imagine, extremely incredible. jackson family, their reaction, we we got some audible reaction
from latoya jackson. but for the most part, most of the family was fairly somber. they looked at each other and smiled a bit. walgren hugged a couple members of the jackson family, including jermaine and the katherine jackson. we found out that dr. conrad murray would not go out on bail. his attorneys argued he was an flight risk but the judge said no way, he is remanded to custody. and they put the handcuffs on him at that point. >> public protection as far as i'm concerned, dictates that the defendant be remanded without bail. in view of the fact that dr. murray has been convicted of a crime involving homicide. this is not a crime involving mistake of judgment. this is not a crime involving administration of drugs per se. this is a crime where the end
result was the death of a human being. that factor demonstrates rather dramatically that public should be protected. >> and right after that, a few minutes after conrad murray was led away, wolf, the bailiff came out with his clothes, his suit and handed conrad murray's suit to his mother. who was waiting in courtroom to take that. we will see conrad murray back in the courtroom in front of judge pastor at the end of november. the 29th is the date set up for his formal sentencing. >> as you point had out, he certainly knew this was a real possibility he would not leave the courtroom if he were convicted. he would be immediately sent to jail which is exactly what happened. ted, stand by. jeffrey to be ain, our senior legal analyst. why did the judge consider him such a flight risk? >> well as i said earlier, i'm surprised by that decision to take bill away and remand him to
prison. we start with the fact as we have been discussing, both because of the nature of the crime and because of this new rule in effect, because of california's terrible fiscal problems, he might not get a substantial prison sentence at all. remanding him decides the sentencing issue in advance. the two things that the judge considered, risk of flight and danger to the community. you know, given the way i've seen those decisions made in the past, he did not seem like much after risk of flight. he is now a major public figure. he has a substantial bail keeping him in california. he has no ties to grenada where he is from any more. he's been in the united states for many, many years. and danger to the community, he is not practicing medicine any more. he is not a violent criminal. i was surprised by the decision to remand him. i don't think it was irrational. i don't think it was a terribly
wrong decision, but i think a lost judges would have seen it another way. >> you have heard the judge say, he has had a lot of time to get ready for this possibility. and of course that possibility did occur. stand by for a moment. sanjay gupta, our chief medical correspondent is with us. sanjay, the prosecution put an anesthesiologist on the stand. this is what he said about the drugs that dr. murray was using to try to help michael jackson sleep. listen to this. >> so, had conrad murray been at the head of the bed, head of the bed is irrelevant. if he was with the patient, with michael jackson during period of time, he would have seen the slowed breathing. and the compromise in the flow of air into michael jackson's lungs. and he could easily have just turned off the propofol infusion, done some chin lift, maybe put an n an oral airway. in worsed case, bag, mask, ventilation. he could have easily done these
things and there would have been no injury to michael jackson. >> very dramatic moment in the trial of dr. steven shafer, anesthesiologist making that point. that seemed to me, and i was watching it on and off, as certainly one of the most damn be pieces of evidence against conrad murray. >> he basically said this was a totally preventable death. even at the point where the medicine had been given. maybe a dose that was too much had been given. even if you got all the way up to that point, he was making this the case, this was still preventable if someone had been there. if someone was actually monitoring the patient in this case, michael jackson. what happenes with propofol, because it suppresses your drive it breath on your own, as he was saying, simply opening up the airway, letting the medication obviously wear off, giving oxygen, supplemental oxygen if necessary. but pretty simple measures, wolf, i think is the point he was making. >> and if someone is taking
propofol, you never leave that patient totally unmonitored as he apparently did. >> yeah. that is very basic in people trained to use this medication. which, by the way, there a training process to use this medication as well. as typically as you might guess, wolf, administered by anesthesiologist, but other doctors can train to use the medication. but one of the things they tell you is the person has to be monitored and present at all times. and monitoring equipment needs to be present. resuscitation equipment needs to be present. there is a prs says when giving medication like this. >> he did have good medical credentials. medical school. he did have all of the licenses that you need to practice medicine. not only as you point out in california, but oefrnl states as well. >> yeah, and you heard, wolf, that former patients of his, that the defense called up, that talked about the quality of care they received from him. he was -- there was obviously a
connection between some of the patients and dr. murray. they seemed to really like him. these were obviously defense witnesses so it is not a big surprise. but there was a, besides credentials, there is a record the defense is trying to present. a good doctor. someone trying to take care of patients including michael jackson. they were trying to paint him as someone trying to get michael jackson off of the medications which long predated dr. conrad murray. in the end, they did not make that case well enough. >> you heard also, the d.a. in los angeles, just to say, just say right now, he is never going to practice medicine in california again. even after he is released. co-serve up to four years of prison. he is not going to practice medicine in california. they will revoke his license. but he could potentially practice in other states though the d.a. expressed hope that other states would follow california's lead. >> yeah, it is interesting. i got some of the exact language. as you might guess, this is in some ways an obvious decision of someone convicted after crime like this, related to
administering drugs and you know, attempting to practice medicine. it would lead it an immediate suspension of his license. i think as you heard, the d.a. was saying that this is so obviously aligned with the practice of medicine that this particular involuntary manslaughter conviction that there is no way he can practice, and in texas, nevada and hawaii, he is suggesting they follow suit. >> the other thing that is fascinating, if you follow the medical part of this, one thing that autopsy, it wasn't just propofol. there were a lot of other drugs they found that michael jackson was using. >> absolutely. and it was interesting because you know, between the autopsy results and the first information from the autopsy results and what we learned in the trial, there was new information emerging, wolf, i thought it was interesting. that became part of the narrative by the defense as well, that in fact michael jackson had had received some of the propofol at the hands of dr.
murray, but then it had worn off. dr. murray was out of room. michael jackson got up. again according to the defense. took other pills also present in his room, including lorazepam, valium, anti-anxiety medication in pretty high doses and gave himself another dose of propofol. they found evidence of these other medications in his stomach. that was sort of their evidence that that is what happened. >> you know, you kept hearing from michael jackson's family, friends, the prosecutors, that he was rehearsing for a big show. he seemed to be, when he was on the stage, in pretty good shape. but obviously having trouble sleeping at night. >> yeah. they played the recordings, wolf, you remember of him in the state where he sounded in a stooper, but awake. and just at times incoherent. listening to that recording, people sort of interpreted two different ways. some people said, this is man
getting too much medication. you know, just listen to the way he sounds. but the defense was playing the tape to make the case that despite the medication, he is still awake. this is man who cannot sleep. dr. murray was trying to help him sleep by giving him propofol. that is again, the story they were painting. >> sanjay, stand by. because i'm going to come back to you. we are following the breaking news. dr. conrad murray convicted. one count involuntary manslaughter. he is now in jail. he will be sentenced november 29. could serve four years in prison. more breaking coverage after this. also we are following a another huge development today. a fourth woman has come forward with allegations of sexual harassment against republican presidential front-runner herman cain. we will update on you that. well speak with that woman's attorney, gloria allred, all of that coming up in "the situation room."
these dogs wake up too early! you know what else is early? medicare open enrollment. now through december 7th. can i stick with my old medicare plan? sure! or find a new plan with better coverage, less cost, or both. medicare plans give you free cancer screenings and wellness visits and 50% off on brand-name prescriptions when you're in the doughnut hole. it's part of the healthcare law. so it's time to look, compare... and choose the right plan for you. learn more at 1-800-medicare or medicare.gov.
hi, you saw the news, dr. conrad murray convicted. one count involuntary man slaughter in los angeles. for the death of michael jackson. the crowds outside the los angeles county superior court as the verdict was read, they were excited. they were very -- here it is, watch this. [ cheers and applause ]
all right. you can see they are happy he was convicted of involuntary manslaughter. we just got statement from the lead attorney for dr. conrad murray. ed chernoff spoke with our own alan duke as he was leaving the courthouse. this is what chernoff said. he said what matters right now is trying to keep dr. murray from taking up a prison sell in this community. that's what we are focusing on right now and we'll deal with an appeal of that. there is another breaking news story we are following in the sexual harassment allegations against republican presidential front-runner, herman cain. a chicago woman went public today with a very specific claim that she was groped by herman cain when he was head of the national restaurant association here in washington. arizona a and she was asking him for help getting a job. she is foushlgfourth accuser, f
public. with you were at the news conference today, set the scene because we will be speaking with her attorney in a moment. but mary, tell us what happened. >> well, wolf, first of all, the news conference was jam-packed. we should point out this woman's claim is so specific, we want to warn our viewers about the sexual explicit description in her account before we air it. the accuser says she wants tab face and voice to other women who cannot or do not wish to come forward and have been sexually harassed. even before her press conference was over this afternoon, the cain campaign came out to say the allegations are completely false. her name is sharon and she is the first woman to publicly step forward and accuse republican presidential candidate herman cain of sexually inappropriate conduct. with her new attorney, gloria allred by her said, violet a registered republican, detailed an alleged encounter in july of
1997 when cain was then head of the national restaurant association. she says the two went out for dinner and that afterward cain allegedly told her he was taking her to the offices of the nra. >> instead of going into the offices, he suddenly reached over, and he put his hand on my leg. under my skirt. and reached for hi genitals. he also grabbed my head and brought it towards his crotch. i was very, very surprised and very shocked. i said, what are you doing? you know i have a boyfriend. this isn't what i came here for. mr. cain said, you want a job, right? i asked him to stop. and he did. i asked him it take my back it my hotel, which he did, right away. >> she did not take any questions and cnn cannot independently verify her story. describe now as full-time single mother, she says she asked to meet cain in 1997 because she
had recently bin fired from her job at the education foundation of the nra. and needed a job. the nra confirms she wormed there between december 1996 through june of 197 but would not comment further. she said she knew cain from meeting him at an nra convention in chicago. she did not report the incident to the nra because she no longer worked there, but alleges she told two other people of the incident at the time. so why is she making these allegations now 14 years later? she said this in her statement. >> i really didn't want to be here today and wouldn't have been here if it had not been for the three other women who alleged sexual harassment against mr. cain. i want you, mr. cain, to come clean, just admit what you did. >> herman cain's campaign is denying all of the allegations and in a statement, said just as the country finally begins to
refocus on our crippling $15 trillion national debt, and the unacceptably high unemployment rate, now activist celebrity lawyer, gloria allred is bringing forward more false accusations against the character of republican front-runner herman cain. all allegations of harassment against mr. cain are completely false. mr. cain has never harassed anyone. >> and wolf, we should point out that lawyer for one of cain's other accusers told cnn that he believes sharon's news conference corroborates his client's story alleging it was similar conduct by the same person but did not go into any further detail. we should point out that herman cain is lashing out at the media saying once this kind of nonsense starts, the media's rules say you have to act in a certain way. i'm well aware of the rules and i refuse to play by them. that's in a statement that just
came out a short time ago. wolf? >> that's a very long statement. we just got a copy of -- i will read the last line from the statement, mary. in the media, if the media wants it continue talking about nonsense, that's fine. i'm not going to join them. it doesn't look like the citizens plan to join them either. that's part of the statement, the long statement, from herman cain. let's talk right now fot lawyer representing herman cain's accuser, gloria allred is joining us from new york. gloria, thanks very much for coming in. why did this woman decide to go public right now? because she held this secret except for two of his friends for all these years. since 1997. >> well, because as she said, wolf, that there are three other women who have reportedly made claims of sexual harassment. two allegedly had settlements. one said anonymously to a reporter, i think associated
press they were sexually harassed. no one came forward and put a face on it, gave a voice to it, gave their names. she was willing to do so and she wanted to be supportive of them but she also felt it was time to break the silence about it and i might add, wolf, it is an important fact, she is a registered republican herself. and she liked herman cain. but this is wrong, what he did to her. and she felt that she needed to speak out. and this this country does need a leader who going to come clean, be hon honest and said a moral example. >> is she not only a republican but a tea party activist? would she describe herself as tea party activist? >> she describes herself as a registered republican. and that's who she is. >> but is she affiliated with any of the other republican presidential campaigns?
because you know the allegations that other campaign put her up to it or anything like that? you have had conversationes with her. what has she said to you? >> she said that she specifically has not made any donations to any of the other campaigns. she has not been involved with any of the other campaigns. and that she is speaking out because she alleges that herman cain sexually harassed her. >> is she the same woman who called up joel bennett, attorney here in washington. she mentioned the other day he got a voice mail from a woman who said she was sexually what raesd by herm can yan when she worked at the restaurant association. when he called back, she said never mind tp is this the woman you are rep zebting new? >> would you have to ask mr. bennett who called him. >> mr. ben whoet called who? >> no, i'm saying, if he is saying that someone left a voice mail for him, then he would be the one to identify the person. >> he seems to say that, yes the woman you represent originally left a voice mail for him. >> yeah, i can't comment on who
she may have left voice mails with and whether if she left a voice mail for mr. bennett. >> now can -- >> i just can't comment on that. >> contemporaneously, she says she informed two friends, her boyfriend and another friend, about what happen pepd they signed document now. >> yes she did. >> saying what she said is true. are you releasing those dong snmts. >> no, i'm not. i did read the contents of the two affidavits, which were signed under penalty of perjury. and which i have in my possession. i did read that to some members of the press after the news conference. i did not disclose the name. one is a physician. the other is a businessman. they both independently of each other, sent us declarations which we asked for, to corroborate that she did in fact indicate contemporaneously with, or shortly after the incident, with mr. cain, that she has
alleged, that they were told by her that he was sexually inappropriate with her. and it was very upsetting to her. >> are these two individuals willing to go public? and let their identity be known and speak out? >> not today. i know their identity, our office has spoken with both of them. i have spoken with both of them. and we're not revealing that today. but they're both, i think, very responsible members of the community. they have known her for a long time. they vouch for her honesty, her decency, and that she told them about it. not the details we revealed today. because she was embarrassed and humiliated about the situation at the time. >> is that why she didn't go public at the time? >> i can't say why she didn't go public at the time, but she didn't move ahead. i might add that her motives are pure. she is not suing anybody.
she is not -- she could have sold her story. she has not accepted money for this story. she is not going to accept it. she just wants the truth to come out as she knows it, as she lived it, as she sees it. and that's why she did what she did today. >> are you considering any legal action against herman cain right now, civil or whatever? >> no. she is not intending it file any claim, not intending to file a lawsuit. not asking for criminal charges to be filed. none of that at all. >> and the reason is? why wouldn't she? is there a stat university liis statute of limitations? >> well, there is a statute of limitations for everything under the law except murder. i won't say that statute of limitation says the reason, but i will say that's not her intention and that is not what she is going to do. >> what is your client amessage it herman cain right now?
>> our message simple. i, for one, am dus disgusted gi sexual harassment. if the claims are true, then mr. cain is a serial sexual harasser. whoever is president of the united states is the employer of of united states. that person has to set the standard. that person has to be a leader in every way. and sexual harassment interferes with the enjoyment of equal employment opportunity. and our message is sexual harassment is wrong. it matters. it hurts women. and in the words of my client, it is time for mr. cain to come clean. >> what advice to do you have for the throw other women who don't want to come public for whatever reason. >> we do more sexual harassment
in our private law firm than probably any other private law firm in the nation. and we have for 36 years. there are -- most of the time sexual harassment are settled with nondisclosure clawses. most of the time, in order to accept a monetary settlement, there is a condition of the employer that employee not speak out. now, even if it is waved, it may be that women would like it retain their privacy. obviously, anyone who does speak out, will be attacked. there are attacks on my client already. she understood that was a risk. that she with was going to be attacked and skrcrutinized and many would say it was unfair or inaccurate. it does take a great deal of courage. i admire the women who filed claims of sexual harassment in first place, if they felt there
was a basis. they did assert their rights. i'm glad for those women. if they can speak out, that's great. but if they can't, i'm happy they stood out for themselves in their workplace. >> tell us more about sharon. why she decided to go public right now. i assume when she heard about the other sexual harassment class, that motivated her. but you know better than i tp. >> it did motivate her. it was also disturbing to her in the light of what she alleges occurred. that is what she alleged that mr. cane did to her that mr. cain kept denying it. she felt that if she came forward, that there was a chance that he would finally take responsibility. as i said, she had admired mr. cain for a long time. she thought he was very charismatic speaker, very warm and hospitable to her when she worked for the education foundation for the national restaurant association. but she was very shocked and disturbed by his conduct in the
car app and then, the way he basically brushed off what the women said. he didn't take responsibility last week. and she felt that it was time for someone to have the courage it speak out. and that's what she has done. >> did you ask her, was there ever a sense that he felt that maybe she was leading him on? because when he invited her to come to the capitol hilton hotel in washington, he upgraded they're a beautiful suite. did she say or do anything to suggest to him that you know what, maybe they were going to have an affair or anything like that? >> raabsolutely not be wolf. as a matter of fact, he met her boyfriend, the physician, at an event where, i think the national restaurant association conference. and in fact, even asked them up to an after party. and her boyfriend came with her. so he met her boyfriend. that is why it was her boyfriend
who suggested, after she was no longer working for the national restaurant association, why don't you call mr. cain were herman, and see if maybe he can help you get a job, perhaps on the state level. instead of the national level. and she thought that was a good idea because mr. cain had been very cordial to her and her boyfriend. she met mr. cain on more than one occasion so she thought he would help her. she contacted his secretary. they made the appointment. she thought when she got to her room and it had been upgraded, she thought her boyfriend had done it and surprised her since he made the reservations. only later did she find out from mr. cain, he allegedly said to her that he arranged for the upgrade. so did she come on to him? answerly not. when he made advances toward her as she indicated, you know i have a boyfriend.
would he know that because he had met the boyfriend. so this is not what she came for. she made clear what she came for. and it just was so very disturbing to her. >> why did the national restaurant association fire her? >> you would have to ask the national restaurant association. but part of the reason that she stated today, was that they alleged that she hadn't raised enough money for the foundation. she could not understand that because she alleges that she had raised more than had been raised before. for the foundation. but in any event, she was no longer there. and that is why she was meeting with mr. cain to see if he could help her get a job elsewhere. >> bottom line right now, and i will let you glo, gloria, where do we go from here as far as your client is concerned. what is next from your perspective? >> i think 24 is now in the court of public opinion. i find sharon to be a very
sincere, very credible person. i might add that her two friends that she told of the situation, about the sexually inappropriate behavior that she alleges, also vouched for her honesty and decency. i think now it is for the voters to decide. she is not going to tell the voters to do anything particular. it is just tore them to take this into account. and i'm very proud of her courage because it was a big risk for her. it is a big risk. but she is willing to speak out and i'm glad that she did. >> gloria allred is the attorney representing sharon. gloria, thank you so much for coming in. let's bring in our chief plig political analyst joining us right now. a fourth woman now making ak accusations. what does this put put on herman cain who is arguably the front-runner right now. >> i think it puts a premendous
amount of pressure on him, wolf. these are specific allegations from a specific woman. she claims to have statements from people who say, yes, she told bus this at the time. and we spoke with joel bennett, the lawyer for the first accuser, who called what this woman did today a corroborating evidence, to what his client is claiming. what we have heard from mr. cain today, wolf, is a long statement claiming that the media is pub publishing a bunch of nonsense here, but not specifically responding to this woman's charges. and i just got off the phone with a conservative activist who said to me, mr. cain needs to respond, and some conservatives in iowa, very, very important state for herman cain, are now saying this has essentially become a tipping point. and that he needs to respond specifically to what this woman is claiming.
>> a because a lot of people are asking, can he survive politically in his race for the republican nomination. >> well, i think it is very difficult. look, he had problems prior to this event. he was flip-flopping on the question of abortion, over whether he put muslims in his government, et set rab et cetera. i think he had problems before this wp wolf, one thing to keep in mind, which a conservative reminded me today is that women are the largest number of republican primary goers. he was already not going well with women. this could potentially hurt him. and when you look at the electorate at large, there is a new nbc wall street poll out on just the opinion of herman cain. you can see there, that his unfavorable ratings have about doubled. however, wolf, he is still in the top tier among republicans. but if he doesn't start answering these allegations, more specifically, i think he is
going to start dropping dramatically. >> gloria, stand by. we are going to continue to assess what is going on. very dramatic day in herman cain's quest for the republican presidential nomination. james, alex, they are standing by live. we will get their views on what is going on, their assessment, when we come back. three years from now, a 2011 ford fusion is projected to be worth more than a 2011 toyota camry. any thoughts on this news? are you sure? i'm absolutely positive. fusion is projected to hold its resale value better than camry.
[ tires squeal ] an accident doesn't have to slow you down. with better car replacement, available only from liberty mutual insurance, if your car's totaled, we give you the money to buy a car that's one model-year newer with 15,000 fewer miles on it. there's no other auto insurance product like it. better car replacement, available only from liberty mutual. it's a better policy that gets you a better car. call... or visit one of our local offices today,
harassmen harassme harassment. joining us is james carville and alex cost anno. is there a big deal be a little deal in hammerman cain's quest the nomination. >> my opinion is that he would never be the republican nominee to to reducing something from never. i think a lot of republicans are paying attention to this. and you know, now this is the fourth person. who knows when the fifth one is coming out. i have no idea. by the way, i'm not saying that herman cain is not telling the truth or this woman is not telling the truth. i have no idea. i've experienced this kind of thing before. as these mount up, it takes a pretty good toll. i suspect we'll see this toll be taken here in the week or so. >> it's been a little more than a weak since the accusations first came out. reported first by politico. >> he's raided more than $2 million. that's almost as much as he raise in the week and weeks going into this accusation.
so financially and in tex poll numbers, he seems to be weathering it at least so far. >> until this point, that's right. he frame this as a debate really between herman cain and the news media. pick which one you believe is telling the truthful he cannot do that anymore. now there's a witness out there. there's human evidence. and it is much more difficult. i think you can say faye the michael jackson jury found herman cain guilty in the court of public opinion today. the dots now, you don't have to connect them. they're beginning to connect themselves. this is a blow to the campaign. i talked to the herman cain campaign and they weren't expecting this. they were talking about how they'll move on to the next chapter. get back to policy. and tax cuts and those kinds of things. i think now clearly this is something they'll to have address which is not what they had been expecting to do. >> he issued a long statement. i'll read a bit of it and get your reaction.
he said contrary to the belief of experts, so wise and learned in the ways of politics, i do not, i do know what the established rules say i am supposed to do. i simply refuse to do it. that's because the rules ridiculous themselves produce leaders like own obama. he goes on to say if the media want to continue talking about nonsense, that's fine. i'm not going to join them. a statement like that. is that going to be enough? >> again, i understand what he's doing. i think politically he's doing what is available to him. no question that the media is not popular. among the people he needs to get the vote for him. having said that, they will say this is the fourth. when will the fifth come? even if everybody is lying, does it become that he can't talk about the things he wants to? i would reiterate what i've thought from the beginning. i never thought he was in any way, was going to be the
republican nomineeism certainly didn't think so before and i certainly don't now. >> who benefits among the other candidates? >> probably all of the other second tier candidates. but probably a candidate like night gingrich benefits the most. right now romney is on one tier. he is the candidate that republicans are not passionate about but they know he can stand up to a debate. and then the second tier candidates who haven't quite matured enough. it may be their first lap around the track. but they have the passion of the party even if they, the party is not confident that they would make the best nominee. if romney collapses, any of the second tier nominees koend up being the no, ma'am neefl i disagree with james. there was a path for herman cain. i think right now it is much more dill. james' point is dead on. you can't have as a campaign
slogan, everybody is like but me. and at some point where this is just too much of this, it begins to create a pattern that tells you something about the character of a candidate. people begin to look at it and say wait a minute. even if i believe it, i'm not sure that others will in a general election against barack obama. so this is at a serious point now. and i think what cain is doing saying, i'm going to ignore this. this is an evil conspiracy against me. that won't get him there. >> we'll see what happens. thanks very much. james and alex, good analysis. more news coming up including the bizarre gaffes that helped make the career of italy's embattled prime minister. look, every day we're using more and more energy.
that's why right here, in australia, chevron is building one of the biggest natural gas projects in the world. enough power for a city the size of singapore for 50 years. what's it going to do to the planet? natural gas is the cleanest conventional fuel there is. we've got to be smart about this. it's a smart way to go. ♪
if italian prime minister berlusconi leaves, who will get caught on camera telling offensive jokes? who else is going to call president obama sun tanned? even when he stops talking, there's never a dull moment with berlusconi. what other world leader inspires list after list of his worst gaffes? rate the biggest blunder. put his top ten to music. ♪ when the moon hits your eye like a big pizza pie ♪ >> gaffes like when he arrived at a summit with his cell phone plastered to his ear leaving his hostess angela merkel on hold. true, he was trying to iron out a sum sticking point with turkey's prime. by looked like a turkey talking and talking and talking. while chancellor merkel greeted other leaders and waited. after about eight and a half minutes, she left.
then there was the recording phone conversation in which berlusconi allegedly called merkel, well, we can't even begin to say it on have the have the. the two words that will be forever associated with berlusconi are actually one word. >> bunga-bunga. this is a masked pairedy. like ruby the heart stealer. party so heart in. >> his bungabunga party. >> it became a very different evening. it was like, i have to go. no, where are you going? it's going to be a party. no, i got to go. >> his dirty old man image is such that he gets blamed for pranks he didn't pull. for instance this come from a film as far as featuring an actor portraying berlusconi. yet