Return to Transcripts main page


Reality Show Star Denies Husband Had Affair; Miss California Could Lose Crown

Aired May 7, 2009 - 19:00:00   ET



JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, real drama for a reality show that`s getting ready scandalous. What do you do when your husband is accused of acting like a scoundrel? You make the media rounds. Kate Gosselin, star of the hit reality show "Jon & Kate Plus 8," refutes stunning claims that her husband, father of eight, is cheating.

Also the Edwards sex scandal hits a crescendo. Elizabeth, wife of former presidential candidate John Edwards, spills to Oprah about her husband`s affair and possible love child. Can these women heal their marriages when their dirty laundry is this public?

Then, a second semi-nude photo showing Miss California hugging her breasts is released. This after she reportedly told pageant officials in writing that the first photo was the only one. Did she just seal her fate?

And celebrity demons coming out of the woodwork. Kiefer Sutherland set to turn himself in after allegedly head-butting a designer at a swanky New York party.

Plus, stunning new updates in the frantic searches for two missing children. A dramatic new lead could have cops closing in on one of the men who abducted adorable 3-year-old Briant Rodriguez. And I`ll tell you if there`s a break in the search for Madeleine McCann. The little angel has been missing for two years. But cops now release a sketch of the suspect.

ISSUES starts now.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight, twin torments for two very different women, both riding out very public, very salacious scandals plaguing their marriages.

One woman is an established reality TV star. The other? She wanted to be first lady.

Viewers of the reality show "Jon & Kate Plus 8" are intimately familiar with the couple and their eight young kids. Now "Us Weekly" claims Jon, who is portrayed in the series as a devoted dad and husband, has been intimate with another woman. The 23-year-old alleged paramour denies the affair, and so does Jon. Quote, "These allegations are false and just plain hurtful. I did not cheat on Kate. I am sorry for putting my family" -- there it is -- "in this awkward position."

The shocking charges of infidelity leveled by the woman`s brother. Just wait until you hear what he says about his sister`s alleged affair.

And then there`s Kate, the self-described control freak. She appeared on NBC`s "Today Show" this morning.


KATE GOSSELIN, REALITY TV STAR: I`m very hesitant to believe any of it. It goes with the territory. And, you know, we`re dealing with it just like everybody else does.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Like it or not, that woman has become a media magnet. That tends to happen when you turn your family life into a reality TV show for all to see. Meredith Vieira asked her about the so-called tabloid media.


GOSSELIN: It goes with the territory. We knew to expect it. Are we, you know, any more comfortable than the next person? No. You have to remember, take it with a grain of salt. Tabloids pay thousands of dollars for stories. The juicier the story, the more they`re paying. So, you know, when you pick up those sort of magazines, you know, is it believable? I don`t know. Ask yourself. People are being paid to talk.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Meantime, there is no doubt about the dalliances of John Edwards, the one-time presidential hopeful admitted to cheating on his wife Elizabeth. As her interview with Oprah goes to air, reports that Edwards` former paramour is a tad upset and may seek a paternity test to determine if he is the father of her baby. Oh, my word.

Imagine though, seriously, what this is like having the sex scandals play out in a public way. I can`t even imagine. Ouch!

Let`s get to the bottom of both stories with my fantastic panel: Ashleigh Banfield, anchor at the legal network In Session; Karen Stewart, political psychologist; Wendy Murphy, former prosecutor and author of "And Justice for Some"; and Natalie Thomas, deputy editor of "Us Weekly" magazine.

Natalie, break down the "Jon & Kate Plus 8" drama for us. Jon says it ain`t so. Why do you maintain that he did have an affair?

NATALIE THOMAS, DEPUTY EDITOR, "US WEEKLY": We maintain he did have an affair because we spoke to five independent sources, and two relatives of this young woman, Deanna Hummel, who admitted the facts. We have photos. We have video. We have pretty damning evidence that he has been, in fact, carrying on an affair with this young woman for three months now.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And what about Kate saying, "Well, they pay for interviews?"

THOMAS: "Us Weekly" does not pay for any information. No person who spoke to us received any information -- any payment for their information. We simply do not do it.

So there was no real motive or gain for them. Her brother, Jason Hummel, who spoke to us and gave us lots of information, is concerned about his sister. He thinks that she`s running around with this bad guy and she`s really gotten herself into a bad situation. He said that she is not a home wrecker, she is not a bad girl. She`s a schoolteacher. But she`s a good kid. But that`s just it, she`s a kid.

And she got involved with this celebrity, who is kind of taking advantage of the situation, and she`s caught up in, you know, the limelight of it all.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And apparently, you have photos that are in your magazine of them lounging together. Does that prove anything, though, really?

THOMAS: The photos of them lounging together, you know, no, that doesn`t necessarily lead to them having a relationship. It could be a friendship, as he`s -- as he`s assuming.

However, like I said, we have five different sources, two family members, admitting that they`re carrying on a relationship. Tons of townsfolk there that are speaking to this relationship. We have, you know, gifts that he`s purchased for her, receipts. Messages that they sent. So it`s definitely, I mean -- it`s a little, you know...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You`re standing by your story, let`s say that.

THOMAS: Exactly.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. All right. Jon Gosselin says there`s no affair, but the other woman`s brother, as you just heard, a different story. Here`s what he told "Us Weekly."

The two, quote, "pretty much stay locked away like two teenagers. It was weird. He`s a grown man. A lot of the time it was pretty gross listening to her -- you know, how do I say this -- the walls are thin. Let`s just say that, I mean, no one wants to hear his sister having sex, let alone with a married dude who`s, like, almost twice her age and who has eight kids and maybe a crazy wife. Ick. Nast." End quote.

That`s not me saying it; it`s the brother. Let`s just be totally clear.

OK. For her part, the young woman says her brother is a liar and has a shady past.

You know, Wendy Murphy, you`re -- you`re a prosecutor. And you`ve covered many, many cases. When you hear this, I know there`s nothing criminal about this. But what is your take on this "Jon & Kate Plus 8" scandal?

WENDY MURPHY, LAW PROFESSOR: I don`t even know where to start with this. First of all, I heard what Kate said. I didn`t hear her say, Jane, that she was going to sue anybody for libel or slander. And that`s a very deafening silence coming from her. She should be suing somebody if it`s a big fat lie.

But look, for the brother, my God, I should be having noisy sex so close to my brother, and yuck! The brother describing the bed is shaking and the noises and the groaning. OK. So Jon is in the bedroom doing something where there`s groaning and bed shaking going on. I think it`s fair to infer they were doing the nasty.

And what I can`t understand about a woman like Kate is, you`re not an idiot. You`re incredibly, you know, important for a lot of people. They`re watching you. You`re a role model. You`re raising this family. Dump the guy. Snap out of it. This is not a mystery.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. But how it would affect their show, Ashleigh Banfield. I mean, there are -- I`ve even heard speculation, and not informed speculation, just people said, "Well, maybe they created this to boost the ratings."

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, ANCHOR, IN SESSION: I have no idea. I really would highly doubt that. Because reality shows may not be entirely real, but there`s a lot of reality in them. And when you`re talking about messing around with a story line like this, where eight children are involved who are too young to be -- to have it explained to them, I really highly doubt that.

But I think the troublesome thing here is us. I think that we, as Americans, seem to crave these stories for some weird reason. They get shunned for it or something. But we kind of want them to be our monkeys. I know they offer themselves to us. But they don`t offer 100 percent of themselves to us. And yet we kind of demand it. I`m on the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) end of this argument, I know.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know what? I think that when you put -- you commoditize your families and you turn your kids into commodities and you put them on television for all the world to see, and they`re too young to have an informed opinion to say yes or no, yea or nay, I think you`re asking for a karma kickback.

BANFIELD: In a way, you are. You are. But I also don`t believe that they should endure the same scrutiny that someone like a public official like John Edwards should endure. Listen, she`s not my moral compass; he`s not my moral compass. I choose to live my life according to other mores that I don`t find on television.

But I just think that we should really step back for a minute and say how much are we enjoying this and asking for more and begging for further parts of the story that we may not deserve?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, but I think sometimes there`s a hypocrisy issue here. Kate appeared on NBC`s "Today Show" to promote her latest book. She co-wrote her first book with her husband Jon. It was called "Multiple Blessings." The description on includes references to God.

The second book, written just by Kate, features, quote, "themes like trust, perseverance, joy, encouragement and topical scripture verses."

So she`s promoting a book, Karen Stewart -- as a psychologist, I want to ask you this -- based on the premise of family values and faith. And yet, maybe your husband didn`t get the family values memo.

KAREN STEWART, PSYCHOLOGIST: Well, maybe he didn`t get the family memo. The main thing I keep thinking about is, where`s the relationship? Where`s the marriage with these people? She went on and on about what a great father he is, what a great family man he is, where`s the relationship and where`s the marriage. You know, we don`t talk about that aspect of it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You turn a marriage into a business. Can you keep it as an intimate affair? And I have to ask you that, Karen?

STEWART: You know, I don`t see these guys being intimate anytime soon, and I don`t think they`ve probably been intimate anytime soon. I mean, look, they`re raising eight children together. Eight little ones. Imagine even having a regular family, two or three kids at home, how intimate can you be?

I think they need to focus on their marriage and quit focusing on the media, quit focusing on their children for a minute.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Wendy, can you focus on a marriage when your marriage is a TV show? And it`s essentially a business? It`s a profit-making enterprise?

MURPHY: You know, I don`t know. I haven`t ever done it. I won`t ever do it. But I know you can`t have it both ways. You can`t make a fortune letting people watch you in your underpants, and then say, "Oh, but, don`t look when my husband is sleeping with some chicky down the road."

I know it`s -- you know, I know how busy their lives are. I`ve caught the show once in a while. But what I`m wondering is, what are they going to do now with the story? You know, they sometimes take the kids to the zoo and they go, "Oh, little Susie, let`s look at the goat." And what are they going to do, go, "Let`s go see that -- that place where Daddy was sleeping with that babe."

VELEZ-MITCHELL: No! Don`t say that!

MURPHY: I want to see it.

BANFIELD: Let`s bring the legal element in here. No one`s committed a crime. No one`s committed a crime. But if we`re going to use a legal barometer here, they at least deserve some benefit of the doubt, some presumption of innocence, the benefit of the doubt.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Absolutely. I mean, we`re just presenting both sides. More on these scandalous stories in a moment. I want your take on infidelity in America. Call 1-877-JVM-SAYS, 1-877-586-7297. Sound off.

Then, Kiefer Sutherland allegedly head butts a fashion designer at a New York City gala after-party. I`ll tell you what charges he could be facing.

Then the John Edwards sex scandal heats up. His mistress, former mistress, agrees to take a paternity test. Of course, Mr. Edwards isn`t the first American politician to get tangled up in a nasty affair.


BILL CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.




JOHN EDWARDS, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Elizabeth and I have talked at length about this already, talked with our children about it. We`ve been confronted with these kind of traumas and struggles already in our lives. When this happens, you have a choice. You can go cower in the corner and hide, or you can be tough and go out there and stand up for what you believe in.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: That was John Edwards talking about news of his wife`s diagnosis with terminal breast cancer. But saying they`d continue with his presidential campaign in spite of it. The couple would soon be faced with another struggle. A sex scandal.

We`re back talking about how Elizabeth Edwards is publicly coping with her husband`s admitted infidelity.

But before we get to that story, let`s get some general calls on the infidelity issue. Cheryl in Ohio, your question or thought, ma`am?

CALLER: I want to put a thought out there to the public. This is a reality show. Affairs and marriages, a lot of times this is the reality. Just a message to Kate. Be like Hillary, baby. Stand by your man just like Tammy Wynette`s song. Stand by your man. You`ll make it through, and you stay on the air, because we love you.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. Wendy Murphy, (singing) stand by your man.

MURPHY: Stand by your man? Whack him in the head with a pan. That`s my song. Are you kidding me?

No, you know what? Look, some people work this out. But the bottom line is, it`s like batterers. Once you start beating your wife, you don`t tend to stop. You cheat on your wife, I just don`t think you`re going to...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Infidelity is often a part of a lot of marriages. And I think maybe the psychologists will agree with me. What you need to do is go to couples therapy, and you need to find out why you feel the need to stray, what you`re not getting out of the relationship, what you`re looking for is somewhere else, yada, yada, yada.

STEWART: Right. I think you`re exactly right. I think that this is about escapism for Jon. He is dealing with a stressful situation, a stressful wife, and he ran away. So he need a little break from...

MURPHY: He could have gone golfing. Come on.

STEWART: Yes, he could have gone golfing. But it doesn`t have the same effect, unfortunately.

BANFIELD: Why anybody thinks that celebrities have fewer hormones than the rest of the population, I don`t know. But you know, even Joyce Brothers have said upwards of about 50 percent of women, and 50 percent of men have cheated on their spouses before.

So before we go off and attack this guy, the reality is, he is a reality. Just like the caller said. Most people don`t do this to be mean. They`re not necessarily mean people. They just lack self-control.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Right. I just want to see how they`re going to incorporate this into the show. Because if it is a reality show, they`ve got to deal with the reality of the scandal, whether or not it`s even true. I know you maintain it is. But don`t they have to deal with this on the show?

STEWART: They do to some extent. And they kind of teased it. You know, word was coming out about this towards the end of last season. They kind of teased it. They said in, you know, advertisements and promos that they were going to, you know, see what happened. It`s very public that Kate wants to continue with the show, and Jon does not. And that`s creating a lot of tension, as well.

MURPHY: Could we also just point out the gender disparity here? People want to have an open marriage and sleep around, I don`t have a problem with that. Grownups can do what they want. But let`s not say the guy has needs. She`s a cute lady. She can go get her own hottie. You know?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, maybe that will happen in season whatever.

OK. Let`s move on to Elizabeth Edwards. She wrote a book about why she stood by her man in the wake of -- and it`s a very serious situation because she`s going through some health issues. His cheating scandal. Listen to what she told Oprah about he -- how he described that very first encounter with the other woman, Rielle Hunter.


ELIZABETH EDWARDS, WIFE OF JOHN EDWARDS: When he walked back she was standing in front of the hotel and said to him, "You are so hot," I can`t deliver it, because I don`t know how to deliver such a line. But "you are so hot" are the words she said to him. And it started...

OPRAH WINFREY, TALK SHOW HOST: I think she probably said it a little differently...

EDWARDS: You think so?

WINFREY: ... than "you are so hot." Yes.

EDWARDS: You want to try? No. I`m not going there anyway.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ashleigh Banfield, apparently Rielle Hunter, the other woman, is not pleased with how she`s being portrayed in these interviews and in the new book by Elizabeth Edwards, "Resilience." And she is reportedly going to seek, or may seek a paternity test to determine whether her baby is fathered by John Edwards. This has become a real mess.

BANFIELD: Well, you can give it any number of, you know, cute expressions you can. A can of worms, the domino effect, whatever it is. I think it`s pretty clear from this story that the cover-up is always worse than the crime.


BANFIELD: And here`s the weirdest thing. Maybe I`m nuts, and please don`t say it on national TV, but I kind of feel like, if John Edwards had come out and addressed this and apologized and showed contrition, he might actually still have been in that race. I really feel like we`d have all embraced him and loved him.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I have never agreed with you more. Because A, I think you`re right. I think the cover-up absolutely, Wendy Murphy, is worse than the crime. And I think that people understand to a certain degree -- he`s a very good looking guy. He`s charismatic. He was seeking the presidency. Women are going to be attracted to him. And he`s going to be faced with a lot of temptation.

And if he simply had admitted it, I think people might have been willing -- America loves when people admit they`ve made a mistake and apologize.

MURPHY: Yes. I mean, count the celebrities who have gotten in trouble, and they`ve apologized and gotten incredible benefits out of that.

Look, I agree. Because here`s the thing: if he wants everyone to think he`s such a cutie -- and he is cute -- that women were just falling all over him -- and I don`t buy the idea that he was victimized by this woman who hunted him down.

BANFIELD: I don`t either.


MURPHY: ... at fault. But you know, he`s a real man, and this is what makes women feel OK about this sort of stuff. A real guy does take responsibility. And might say, "Look, I failed. I got -- you know, I was on the trail. These women were all over me. I made a mistake. I love my wife. And I want to move on." That`s what a real man does. The fact that he tried to hide it makes him look like a big wimp.


BANFIELD: PR firm`s backing up on the strategy, by the way. If PR firms out there, resignations (ph) out there, who don`t seem to be advising their clients to do this.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I agree. You know, it`s not the act itself; it`s the lying. It`s the hypocrisy that offends so many people. I want to thank my excellent panel.

Madeleine McMann, missing for two years. Her parents were on Oprah this week. And today, new sketches of a suspect. Is it a break in a heart-wrenching case?

And authorities furiously searching for 3-year-old Briant Rodriguez. New tips, major new breaking news just in. I`m going to update you in a moment.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: In the spotlight tonight, a second seminude photo of Miss California USA, Carrie Prejean, hits the Web. We are going to show you the photo from briefly so you can get a look at it. Here it is.

This is the second photo of her hugging her breasts, seminude. Now here`s the problem. After the first photo broke, Prejean reportedly told the Miss California pageant there was only one photo.

OK, now you`re looking at the first photo, seen right here. So you`ve just seen two. TMZ says there`s even more. Prejean said it was a modeling photo and expressed regrets. The issue, if she signed a pageant contract with a morality clause promising no nude or seminude photos in her past.

So as pageant officials huddle to decide whether to yank her crown, did Prejean just seal her fate with a lie?

With me, Mike Walters, assignment manager at TMZ. Mike, what is the very latest?

MIKE WALTERS, ASSIGNMENT MANAGER, TMZ: Well, here we go again, Jane. Pageant girls and scandal.

Carrie Prejean, I can tell you for a fact, four photos. Not one like she said. Four.

And here`s the thing. Sites like, they`re going to get their hands on these kinds of photos. Obviously, they`ve now posted two of them. She still stands by that there`s one, which obviously there`s more than one. But here`s the reality here. She signed a contract which says she would have never posed for nude or seminude photos.

Now, she`s challenging the fact that it`s seminude. And if you look at the photo like you just did, that`s what we call in the TMZ newsroom side boob, which I think sort of falls in the category as seminude. She claims, and probably the fight`s going to be whether or not those were actually seminude photos.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Because she`s covering herself.

WALTERS: Right. Remember...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: She`s hugging her breasts with her arms. And so she`s saying that that`s not seminude?

WALTERS: Right. OK. But remember, here`s the big scandal with her is that she answered the question to Perez Hilton on the pageant that she believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. So this is the one that the Christian right and that kind of stuff, so this is even a bigger deal now because she`s topless posing for photos.

And whether or not she`s seminude or not, I don`t think people care. It`s that this is out there now and whether or not she`s going to lose her crown because of this.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, yes. Reports are the Miss California pageant committee might yank her crown. Part of the equation, as they decide, might be that second photo that popped up. This is a problem, as we mentioned, because she reportedly told the pageant that there was only one photo of her modeling underwear.

But you know, if she does lose, apparently her runner-up, Miss Malibu, told "Access Hollywood" she`s ready to step up.


TAMI FARRELL, MISS CALIFORNIA RUNNER-UP: I would be honored to represent the state of California. So I`m just going to be hearing if they need me. My responsibility as first runner-up, I wouldn`t have any trouble stepping into the spotlight.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Sounds like she`s angling for a chance there.

Now, Mike, TMZ has spoken to the executive director of Miss California USA. What are you hearing about when we`re going to get the final answer whether she`s going to lose her crown or not?

WALTERS: Well, I`ll tell you what, breaking news at this point, I just heard as I walked over here to talk to you, Jane, that probably we`ll hear something Monday. Donald Trump is preparing something for Tuesday. But it`s weird, because of who owns it and who actually is on the board. I don`t know how all of that works. The bottom line is somebody`s going to say something on Monday, I`m told. Whether or not Trump is involved, I don`t know.

But remember, Trump backed up his last one, Conner -- Tara Conner -- when she had the scandal. So who knows? I mean, maybe Donald will get behind her. But the reality is that I think we`ll hear Monday whether or not this happens.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right, Mike.

WALTERS: So we`ll see.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Mike, thanks for the great reporting. We`ll cover this again on Monday, obviously.

More scandal on the way. Hollywood celebs and their personal demons. A head-butting Kiefer Sutherland, allegedly. And a booty-shaking Paula Abdul, next.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Stunning updates in the frantic search for adorable 3-year-old Briant Rodriguez, a dramatic new lead could have cops closing in on one of the gunman who snatched the boy from his home.

And celebrity demons coming out of the woodwork, Kiefer Sutherland set to turn himself in after allegedly head butting a designer at a swanky New York party.

We`ve got breaking news just in to our newsroom as we speak. We`re going to get more in-depth into it in a moment. But it`s a biggie.

You`ve probably followed the Drew Peterson case for a long time.

Well, I hope you`re sitting down. Reports are Drew Peterson just arrested for the alleged murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. You may remember that she fell in the tub. And initially they said it was an accidental death, and then after wife number four, Stacey Peterson disappeared, they re-exhumed the body and they did another autopsy and they determined it was a homicide.

Well, we`re just hearing Drew Peterson, the onetime cop, arrested in the death of wife number three. That`s big news. We`re going to get more into it in a moment.

Now, more breaking news tonight in the frightening disappearance of an adorable 3-year-old child. Moments ago police released this photo image of the two men suspected of abducting adorable little Briant Rodriguez from his California home, this Sunday.

Look at these guys. Just eyeball them. See if you know them. Cops say the men were caught on surveillance video two days before they busted into Rodriguez`s home, ransacked it, tied up the whole family and kidnapped the 3-year-old child.

Authorities also say they may know the exact type of vehicle the suspects are driving. You may be looking at it. It could be this green Ford Bronco, also caught on surveillance video. These are huge breaks in this case.

Meantime, police also circulating these sketches of the two men believed responsible for the little boy`s abduction. Promising leads. Yesterday, turned out to produce nothing of value. But boy, did we just get some big breaking news with those surveillance photos, and the video of the car. His mom who speaks Spanish is absolutely distraught.


MARIA ROSALINA MILLAN, 3-YEAR-OLD SON ABDUCTED (through translator): This is my son`s T-shirt. My boy is my life; my boy is a beautiful boy.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: What a heartache. The puzzling thing here, there appears to be no motive behind the shocking kidnapping. The gunmen also left expensive items behind, like a flat screen TV. What`s up with this case? Why did they take this little boy? How can we help find him?

Straight to my excellent panel: back with me Thomas Ruskin, and Casey Jordan and joining us by phone, Stacia Glenn, crime reporter for the "San Bernardino Sun."

Stacia, what is the very latest?

STACIA GLENN, SAN BERNARDINO SUN CRIME REPORTER: Well, they had a press conference this afternoon, and investigators released this surveillance footage showing the two man that they believed kidnapped Briant Rodriguez and the green Ford Bronco they believe they were driving.


GLENN: One interesting thing to know...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, go ahead...

GLENN: One interesting thing to note is that one of the surveillance videos was taken at 7:45 in the morning on Friday, inside of a local business, and it shows the two kidnappers buying the same tape that they allegedly tied the family up on Sunday, during the home invasion robbery.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: So Thomas Ruskin, does this imply that these guys are local guys? Because there was some speculation maybe they were part of a drug cartel from Mexico. And they had taken the kid to Mexico. But there they are two days before in a store near the home buying the materials to tie this family up.

THOMAS RUSKIN, FMR. NYPD DETECTIVE: It would seem like the police have some very good leads here. And that they`re going to follow up on those leads. They probably are now looking for the places where they stayed. They may even be able to do the forensics on that -- on those places, by getting fingerprints and other forensic, DNA evidence that they`ll be able tie these people.

It wouldn`t be surprising to me if they sent the photo of the Bronco to the FBI or someone else to be able to enhance the possible plate on that car.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Casey Jordan, as a criminologist, what do the authorities do next to try to track this vehicle down, to try to track these individuals down?

CASEY JORDAN, FMR. CRIMINAL PROFILER: These are really good leads. And I have to assume that they have completely exhausted the interviewing process with the family, because the family is going to be the very first starting point.

Do you have any enemies? Have you ever been related to anyone involved in drug activity? Something really interesting is that they`ve only lived in this apartment three months.

So one theory is, that maybe this family was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Maybe they targeted that apartment thinking a different family lived there. And this family happened to be there.

But the police have got to -- they`ve made great inroads just in the last few days. They`ve got to follow up on the vehicle, all the tape and putting it on television is their best bet to get somebody to identify those two guys to call in.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Stacia, you`re covering this for the "San Bernardino Sun." What do we know about this family? I mean, this is a modest home that was invaded. It`s not like they were going into some mansion. And apparently the dad was off at work?

GLENN: That`s right. Both parents live in the home. There are six children total that live there. The oldest is 16. And Briant, the 3-year- old, is the youngest.

The mother was home with the five children. And they were getting ready to leave for the park, actually, which is just across the street when the two gunmen broke into their house.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I have to ask you, Tom Ruskin, what do you make of these two guys? I mean, do you think that because they were there two days earlier they`re from the neighborhood? Or do you think they came up from Mexico? What do you think?

RUSKIN: I don`t think we`ll know that for quite a long time. It looks to me like they`re locals, they`re hanging out for a long time. Normally, people who come up from Mexico to do a crime like this historically don`t stick around.

They come in, they do what they want to do and they, as Casey said, they probably picked the wrong apartment, if this guy has no criminal history or is not involved in any kind of criminality.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: So Bradford Cohen, briefly, why not let the child go then? If you made a mistake and let the child go and disappear, why hang on of the kid?

BRADFORD COHEN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, what I think is, and you look at these typically in these type of situations. A lot of times what happens is, there`s some sort of a revenge, some sort of inroad that they`re making in terms of someone did someone wrong, and that`s why they are looking at this drug deal.

There was a case a little while back where a grandfather did something wrong with the drug dealers, and they kidnapped his child and then what they did was they ended -- I think they ended up murdering the kid.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: No, no, the child was released.

COHEN: Oh, they -- ok, sure.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: The child was released and found safely four days later. Thank you.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Thank you Stacia. Turning now to another desperate search for an adorable child -- stunning developments to the case of beautiful British toddler, Madeleine McCann.

A possible break in the case as private investigators release details about a man they say may have abducted the angelic child from a Portuguese resort two years ago.

Witnesses say, take a look at this, this man described as ugly, and I mean ugly, with pock-marked skin, hanging around the McCanns` hotel room and acting suspiciously in the days before little Madeleine`s disappearance.

Madeleine McCann`s parents, now ruled out as suspects, told Oprah just this week, they believe their daughter was abducted by somebody who was watching them. Listen.


OPRAH WINFREY, OPRAH HOST: Do you think that somebody was watching your family?


WINFREY: Do you think somebody was watching you over a period of days?

MCCANN: Yes, which is horrible. I mean, it makes you feel sick actually when you think about it.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: That poor lady. You see the pain etched on her face.

So now, on the two-year anniversary of this precious child`s abduction, could there finally be a break in the case and what took investigators so long?

Straight to my expert panel: Bradford Cohen, criminal defense attorney; Casey Jordan, criminologist and former criminal profiler; Thomas Ruskin, former NYPD detective and president of TMG Protective and Investigative Group.

Tom, aside from the sketch, somebody in the McCann party said they saw a man leaving the area with a child in his arms, but they didn`t see the child`s face so at the time they didn`t think anything of it.

Is all of this coming way too late to be effective? It happened two years ago.

RUSKIN: It would have been much more effective had the police done what they should have done. And you know I stick up for the police the majority of the time. I think the police here dropped the ball.

If they want to concentrate on the family, they want to concentrate on the mother and father, that`s great. But you have to do the evidence and you have to set up the Amber Alerts and the alerts at the train station.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Amber alerts, I don`t know that they have Amber Alerts in Portugal.

RUSKIN: Well, but like a symbolic Amber Alert. What you do is send out the alert to the trains, the airports, and you set up road blocks. And you look for this child at the time. They should have -- they questioned these four witnesses who private investigators now have gotten this photo from.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Right, the images of the potential suspect has just been released two years after this child vanished. Apparently this man was seen by, as you just heard, four different witnesses, each of whom gave statements to the Portuguese police.

But it was the McCann`s private investigators who actually linked the account and then had the sketch drawn. The Portuguese police say they are no longer investigating this case.

Casey Jordan, criminologist, to me that`s an outrage. Why the heck didn`t the Portuguese police put these pieces together and release this sketch two years ago.

JORDAN: This is a problem, because the disappearance of a child from a room is so high risk that it is natural that the police want to look at the family and the parents first.

But I absolutely agree, you can be investigating the family while you have a whole different team investigating every single other lead, that it could be, rare as it is, a stranger abduction.

And it`s really unfortunate what the McCanns have been through now that they`re no longer suspects, that they have to put all their own time and money into private investigators to do the police work for them. But I think that only really just confirms the fact that they truly are innocent and that they`re not going to give up until every stone is unturned to find this guy.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well Bradford Cohen, should they take -- is there any way to take international legal action? They`re from Britain and this happened in Portugal. They had to hire their own translators...


VELEZ-MITCHELL: translate the police witness interviews, and that`s where they came up with this description, after reviewing the transcripts.

COHEN: You`re talking about a civil case. It would be very difficult because there are immunity issues, there`s all kinds of things that are going on in terms of a police department in itself not even getting into the fact that you`re talking Portugal and England.

So that would be very difficult to do. They dropped the ball; the Portuguese police dropped the ball. And I appreciate Tom standing up for cops. And there`s a lot of good cops out there. But the Portuguese police dropped the ball on this.

Originally, all they did was focus in on the family, they ended up getting two other suspects but they didn`t really follow through with those two suspects. They dropped the case against the parents and then this case just turned cold. It`s a shame.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: It`s an obscenity, it`s an obscenity.

COHEN: It really is.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Thank you to my panel for their fantastic insights.

Breaking news to report, Drew Peterson arrested, hauled into custody in connection with the death of his third wife. I`ll have more on the shocking developments.

And Kiefer Sutherland has another run-in with the law. This time, he`s accused of head butting a fashion designer at a gala after party in New York. Maybe he got confused and thought it was an episode of "24." What`s your take on celebrity demons? Call 1-877-JVM-SAYS, 1-877-586-7297. Sound off.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: From Kiefer Sutherland to Paula Abdul, stars and their demons bombarding the headlines. I`ll try to figure out what the heck is going on in Hollywood.

But first, "Top of the Block."

Some big breaking news to tell you about: ex-cop Drew Peterson whose fourth wife Stacey has been missing since 2007 has been arrested -- yes, arrested -- in connection with the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. Savio, you may recall mysteriously found dead in an empty bathtub back in 2004. The cause of death was originally ruled drowning.

And Drew Peterson was not named a suspect in the death at that time. But then there was a re-exhumation and there was a new autopsy, and then it was ruled a homicide. And now he`s arrested. He is now in custody.

Details still coming in here on ISSUES; we will have so much more on these absolutely stunning developments tomorrow. Do not miss it tomorrow. Complete and full coverage of the Drew Peterson arrest tomorrow night here on ISSUES.

That is tonight`s "Top of the Block."

More breaking news tonight in the real life drama of actor Kiefer Sutherland: the "24" star just charged with misdemeanor assaults stemming from an incident early Tuesday morning. He allegedly head-butted fashion designer, Jack McCollough.

Wow, excuse me, a neck pain just to imitate that, Sutherland`s camp claims he was defending actress Brooke Shields. But Shields and the victim say the "Jack Bauer" style head-butt was unprovoked.

So why did Sutherland allegedly act out. Is life imitating art? Did he get confused and think he was on the set of "24." Or could the actor be sliding down a slippery slope?

Plus, "Ladies Home Journal" reports American Idol judge, Paula Abdul, says she`s kicked painkillers. But just when we were getting ready to applaud her, she made another about-face today. She now insists she was misquoted and has never been addicted to painkillers.

Say what? Rumors swirled about her alleged drug use when she appeared on a Fox affiliate in 2007.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What are you looking forward to this season?

PAULA ABDUL, AMERICAN IDOL JUDGE: How about a lot of you coming in? It`s a wild party where you are.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, that`s what we hear.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Come on. She looked a little loopy there, didn`t she? Last night, Abdul, however, gave an amazing performance on American Idol.

Way to go, girlfriend. If she did kick meds, why wouldn`t she be proud of that? Battling demons in the media is all part of the job description in Hollywood these days.

Straight to my fantastic expert panel: I`m so delighted to have with us Dr. Drew Pinsky, author, "The Mirror Effect: How Narcissism is Seducing America" and board certified addiction specialist, you also know Dr. Drew from that hit show "Celebrity Rehab;" and Dawn Yanek, editor-at-large for "Life & Style Weekly."

Dawn, what`s the latest on Kiefer Sutherland. What happened today?

DAWN YANEK, LIFE & STYLE WEEKLY: Well, the latest that we know from "Life and Style Weekly" is that he did indeed turn himself in to the New York City authorities earlier this afternoon and he was booked on one count of misdemeanor assault.

Now, the big question remains, what happened and how does this affect his prior probation? He was on probation for a 2007 DUI, which he served 48 days in jail for just last year.

So will this be handled separately or will it somehow affect that probation charge in L.A. and will he have to serve more jail time?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well Dr. Drew, it`s kind of like deja vu all over again except with a different celebrity this time. We know Kiefer Sutherland failed, that he failed sobriety test in 2004 and then he was arrested for DUI in 2007 as you just heard and he did 48 days in jail. How would you analyze this latest alleged acting out?

DR. DREW PINSKY, HOST, "CELEBRITY REHAB": Well, you know, where there`s smoke there`s fire. And Kiefer has been struggling with alcoholism for a long time. He was at a party. I don`t know if he was intoxicated or not.

But when there are strange behaviors with someone who has a history of addiction in alcoholism, you can pretty much bet that there`s something about their addictive disease figuring into the process somehow.

And, you know, I really, again, this is a big struggle he`s in with this condition. Obviously he`s got legal consequences from it. And this is going to compound those legal consequences no doubt.

My wish, my hope is that an enlightened judge or a lawyer that appropriately represents him will have mandated treatment over a long period of time as part of the consequence.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, Kiefer Sutherland stars of course as bad-ass CTU agent "Jack Bauer" on Fox hit "24." Let`s take a look at him in action.

Bauer gets very physical with his enemies, choking, kicking, tackling, the list goes on and on. Now he`s accused of in real life head butting.

So do you think, Dawn Yanek, that he might be identifying too much with his character? I think they call it professional deformation. When use like I ask too many questions in my personal life because I`m a reporter? Or maybe he`s -- he`s getting a little too physical because of all this?

YANEK: I don`t know if it`s the ultimate in method acting that we`re dealing with here. You know from what we`ve heard Kiefer is always the ultimate professional, the consummate professional on set. He`s a pleasure to work with.

But off-camera he definitely parties very hard. And as Dr. Drew mentioned, these barroom antics and these incidents off-screen that have to do with alcohol are nothing new, unfortunately.

There were the numerous DUI`s he was -- there was a video of him attacking a Christmas tree in a lobby just a few years ago that made the rounds on the Internet and this does seem like a problem that he is struggling with constantly.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, Dr. Drew, what are we going to do about Paula Abdul? She reportedly told "Ladies Home Journal" that she have this long struggle with medication, she wore a patch that delivered pain medication 80 times more potent than morphine.

And now she`s saying she was totally misquoted. Who do you believe, "Ladies Home Journal" which is not exactly a tabloid or Paula Abdul?

PINSKY: Well, this is sort of a common scenario. The Fentanyl Patch is what she`s referring to. This is the story of chronic pain and opiate addiction. The question is does she have legitimate chronic pain need and are the opiates being overused?

It`s a very serious epistemological struggle that goes on in medicine, in what to do with somebody with a lot of pain who gets going too far with opioids (ph)?

The fact is, what probably happened is she probably indeed that was fed up with the opiates and the consequences she was having. She de-toxed then when she was off opiates and yet she realized she still had pains and went back to the doctors that originally prescribing who said you`re not an addict. Take these medicines and don`t worry about that.


PINSKY: And there she is again.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Good analysis, we`ll have more of it in just a moment. Stay right there.



DAVID HASSELHOFF, ACTOR/REALITY TV STAR: I had a few drinks, but there was no police involved.

MIKE WALTERS, TMZ: And like, did you go to the hospital?

HASSELHOFF: I went to the hospital, but not for that.

WALTERS: Not for that?

HASSELHOFF: No I went for a stomach ache.

WALTERS: So you passed out or...



VELEZ-MITCHELL: Actor David Hasselhoff explaining his relapse last weekend. So many stories and so many ISSUES.

Back with my fantastic panel and the phone lines lighting up.

Anthony in New York, your question or thought?

ANTHONY IN NEW YORK (via telephone): Jane, yes. Should Kiefer do more jail time now if he was found guilty or pleads guilty?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right, well, what`s the latest on that, Dawn Yanek? Was he on probation?

YANEK: He was on probation, but in Los Angeles. So it`s unclear right now whether or not this incident in New York will affect that probation or whether it will be handled completely separately.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right, Regina in Tennessee, your question or thought, ma`am.

REGINA IN TENNESSEE (via telephone): Yes, Jane, I have always taught my kids not to aspire to be on the Jerry Springer Show. It would be nice if the stars would take the same advice. There are a lot of people, young people mostly that emulate the stars.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. Dr. Drew, listen, I`m not going to cast stones as you know, I mention all the time I`m a recovering alcoholic with 14 years of sobriety there, but for the grace of God go I. But you wonder whether something about Hollywood seems to enable stars to act out more and to give license to their disease.

PINSKY: That`s right. One of two or three things, one is that the kind of person that wants to be a celebrity and my research has shown conclusively has a higher degree of narcissism, has as a higher degree of childhood trauma and has a higher degree of potential for addiction.

It`s not as though being a celebrity makes them that way. They arrive with their celebrity status with these pathologies.

However, being a celebrity surrounded by sycophants, surrounded by people that say yes all the time gives them the opportunity to accelerate their behaviors and that`s what this caller is complaining about.

And then we, as viewers like looking at it and sitting in disdain of them. It`s us that participate in, if we would turn away from the magazines, turn away from these conversations a little bit perhaps there wouldn`t be so much of it out there in the media.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: But aren`t we fascinated? Because on one level we are jealous of them and we aspire to be like them in a way?

PINSKY: Jane, it`s more than jealousy, it`s envy, it`s our own narcissistic impulses. We want to knock them down to our size and that`s a pretty nasty trait that we have, envy. It`s not a good thing.

YANEK: Well, I think that`s definitely part of it but I think that people are just fascinated by celebrity in general especially at this time in entertainment history. And so whether they`re experiencing their ups and downs, I mean, people are following it and no matter what`s happened.

PINSKY: But why do we elevate this kind of person to celebrity is what`s interesting. It`s a different time and different kind of celebrity at this period of history.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: It is fascinating and I think we are all somewhat to blame. Thank you, fabulous panel. At least I can speak for myself.

Got a question or comment? Give me a holler,