Return to Transcripts main page


Jackson Medical Exam Revealed; Sources: DEA Joins Jackson Probe

Aired July 2, 2009 - 17:00   ET


SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: And a large offensive underway in Afghanistan -- 4,000 Marines fighting to take a volatile region out from under the Taliban control.

Wolf Blitzer is off today.

I'm Suzanne Malveaux.


We are following all the latest developments surrounding the death of Michael Jackson. Among them, plans announced for a public memorial service Tuesday at the 20,000 seat Staples Center in Los Angeles.

Also, sources are now telling CNN the Federal Drug Enforcement Agency is joining the investigation into Jackson's death, looking into the possible role of prescription drugs.

And a hearing is set for Monday in Los Angeles. A judge will consider control of Jackson's estate and guardianship of his children.

Now, let's go to CNN's Anderson Cooper in Los Angeles.

He has more on that and just released video of one of Jackson's final concert rehearsals -- Anderson.

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Suzanne, this video was released by officials from AEG Live, the company that was producing Michael Jackson's comeback concerts in London in 50 days he -- that he was to start in July. It shows Michael Jackson's final full length full dress rehearsal. It took place Tuesday night at the Staples Center in Los Angeles, which you're aware Michael Jackson had been rehearsing. They said he had been on stage for about three hours or so that night, had been in the building for several hours that day, looking over a number of technical issues for the show.

This is about minute and 40 clip of Michael Jackson performing. "They Don't Really Care About Us," a song from his History Tour.

Let's listen.


COOPER: Now, that video will be interpreted by people in different ways. Some people who see it will say that it shows Michael Jackson at the top of his form. He looked -- he was able to perform, able to sing. He was not lip syncing there. You see him moving around on the stage.

Others may say well, he wasn't doing any dramatic dance moves. He looked thin.

That's really up to -- to viewers to decide. But AEG Live wanted to put this video out to try to dispel any further rumors that may be swirling around about Michael Jackson's -- Michael Jackson's condition in the last days of his life. AEG officials who we spoke with today said point blank the Michael Jackson that they saw in those final two nights -- on that Tuesday night that the tape was taken and also Wednesday night, before he died -- that he seemed fit, that he seemed optimistic and seemed in good spirits -- Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: Thanks, Anderson.

And now the concert promoter is speaking out for the first time, revealing details of a medical exam that Jackson underwent.

Our Anderson Cooper asked him flat out about drug tests and possible abuse.


COOPER: As part of the business proposition, Michael had to undergo a medical exam to get insurance.


COOPER: Do you have the results of that exam?

Was there a drug test for that exam?

PHILLIPS: Well, what happened is the insurance carrier -- and I know this is important for people to realize. The insurance carrier sent a doctor out to New York named Dr. David Flavin, I believe. And -- independent of us. We had nothing to do with it.

He -- he examined Michael for about five hours at his house. And I think they went somewhere for some other tests. And I'm sure there was a blood test.

We're obviously not privy to the doctor/patient relationship or that information. But the insurance broker told us that he passed with flying colors, OK, and that the only issue was some slight hay fever.

COOPER: So have you been -- as you have been watching over the last several days, allegations come out about drug use, what do you think?

PHILLIPS: Well, you know, I don't know, because I wasn't with him 24/7. I've spent a lot of time with him, OK. All I know is Michael Jackson that hugged me and said good night was a healthy, vibrant human being about to undertake the greatest undertaking of his life, OK. And he -- and something happened between 12:30 when he left us and the morning when I had to rush to the hospital when I got the first call.

COOPER: I've got to ask the question, which I'm sure you've been asking -- each of you has been asking yourselves and other people have been asking you, what happened?

I mean what do you think happened to Michael Jackson?

You saw him the night before he died.

PHILLIPS: We all saw him that night. We finished Wednesday night, 12:30 in the morning. I looked over and he, Kenny and Frank DiLeo, who was managing him in this process, were hugging each other.

I walked him to the car. I was going to my car. And he put his arm around me and with that soft voice of his, he whispered to in my ear,: "Thank you. We're going to get it there together. I know I can do this."


MALVEAUX: You can see more of that interview tonight on "ANDERSON COOPER 360," 10:00 p.m. Eastern.

So are there any clues in the video or in that interview that could help solve the mystery surrounding Jackson's death?

CNN chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, has been watching it all along with us -- and, Sanjay, what do you see, as a doctor, when you take a look at that video?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, I -- I have to say that, first of all, it's very hard to interpret just about anything by looking at a video without seeing a person or a patient right in front of you.

A couple of things that you want to sort of

look for is any evidence of chronic problems. You know, as a doctor, you always want to think about someone's heart and someone's lungs and try and determine whether there was something there that could possibly be causing a problem.

And, you know, I can't tell that there -- there is or there isn't. It is a good sign, certainly, that someone is able to be as active as he is on the stage. You know, he's able to sing on his own, as Anderson mentioned, a good sign of respiratory activity.

But I want to be very cautious here, Suzanne. I think most doctors would not want to make some sort of diagnosis -- or exclude a diagnosis, even, based on looking at a video.

MALVEAUX: And, Sanjay, sometimes we -- we know that people -- generally, when you're on camera, you gain about 10 pounds. You look a little bit bigger. He looks rather small in the video. Does it indicate that perhaps he -- he was even smaller than what we're -- what we're seeing here?

What do you think of his size?

GUPTA: Well, he looks thin. There's no question about that. And I've looked at some of the other video, even when he wasn't performing -- that recent video. And he looks thin there, as well.

But I think the larger question in a situation like, Suzanne, is what does really mean and is he frail?

I think that's the question people really ask -- someone's thin, but are they frail?

And, you know, I get concerned if someone is not able to perform their activities of daily living as a result of their frailty -- not able to get out of bed easily, not able to dress themselves and just conduct those sorts of activities.

So when I look at video like this and he's able to obviously do those things and then get up on stage, dance, obviously, in some sort of coordinated fashion with other dancers, he's singing -- again, on his own. I would not say that he was frail.

But the thing, yes. And again, you know, it's -- it's hard to know what specifically to make of that -- Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: When Michael Jackson went for his physical or someone goes for a -- before a doctor for a physical, can -- can they trick the doctor into thinking that they're better than they really are?

GUPTA: Well, that's a good question. I mean, you know, physical exams or routine physical exams are just that. For the most part, they are routine.

From listening a little bit to the description of the physical, it may have been a little bit more extensive. But, you know, unless you're looking for something specific, it's hard to say for sure that he didn't have some sort of problem. The fact that the -- the people who were conducting the exam said he passed with flying colors, that's obviously a good sign.

Could you trick somebody?

You know, I think that's -- I think, that's hard to say. You know, you might have a little bit more energy on one particular day versus another day. But actually tricking someone -- the tests, for the most part, aren't really going to lie. You take someone's blood pressure, you're going to get a number. You do a scan of the heart, you're going to get an image. If you're looking for something in particular, you're going to find those things.


Sanjay, thank you so much. Jack Cafferty is New York with "The Cafferty File" -- and, Jack, what are you following?

JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: They didn't call it the wild, wild West for nothing. And in a giant step backward in time, guns may soon be allowed in bars in Arizona.

The state senate passed a bill there that would let people with concealed weapons permits carry a gun into a business that serves alcohol. The measure now goes to the Republican governor, Jan Brewer. She hasn't said if she'll sign it, but she is a long time supporter of gun rights.

Critics say guns and alcohol are a dangerous combination.

Oh, really?

Some restaurant and bar owners are worried it would jeopardize public safety, increase employer liability and hurt tourism. They think the bill will, in essence, turn the clock back to those days of the wild West. One Democratic lawmaker who voted against the thing says, "We don't let people drink and drive, why should we let them drink and carry guns?"

But supporters insist they should be able to protect themselves regardless of where they are. One of the bill's sponsors says the most important thing is that people carrying guns into bars are not allowed to drink.

OK. But if the gun is concealed, how do you know who has a weapon and who doesn't?

And by the time you find out, well, it might be too late, mightn't it?

The National Rifle Association says 40 states have similar laws and insist this is all just common sense, since criminal activity happens everywhere.

So here's the question: Is it a good idea to allow guns in bars?

Here's a hint -- I don't think so.

Go to and post a comment on my blog.

There was a time in my younger life I spent a lot of time in those joints. And this is -- this is not a good idea.

MALVEAUX: The big no. The big thumbs down on that one.


MALVEAUX: We'll see what people have to say when they weigh in there. OK.

Well, we're following all the breaking news this hour surrounding the death of Michael Jackson. New details are emerging about his memorial service and what he left his family in his will.


MALVEAUX: Also, he was the judge who broke down and cried during the battle over custody of Anna Nicole Smith's body.

He joins us live with insight into how a celebrity case like Jackson's might unfold.

And federal drug officials are now joining the Jackson probe, as the focus falls on a powerful anesthetic the singer allegedly was begging for. Dr. Sanjay Gupta shows us why it's a potential killer.


MALVEAUX: We are learning new details about the memorial service for Michael Jackson.

Sources tell CNN it will be held Tuesday at the 20,000 seat Staples Center in Los Angeles, starting at 10:00 a.m..

And new details about the trust he established -- 40 percent of it is designated for his mother, 40 percent for his children and 20 percent for charity.

We're learning new details about the memorial service for Michael Jackson. Sources tell CNN it will be held Tuesday at the 20,000-seat Staples Center in Los Angeles starting at 10:00 a.m.

And new details about the trust he established. Forty percent of it is designated for his mother, 40 percent of it for his children and 20 percent for charity.

Jackson's death is setting in motion complex legal proceedings, as well.

Let's get some insight from Larry Seidlin, the retired Florida circuit court judge who presided over the custody battle over guardian Anna Nicole Smith.

Thank you so much for joining us.


Oh, it's a pleasure to be here.

MALVEAUX: Judge Larry. You told me to call you Judge Larry, so.

SEIDLIN: Yes. You can call me that.

MALVEAUX: First and foremost, you were really kind of in the middle of this celebrity case. Obviously, we are seeing so many fast developments in terms of the investigation with Michael Jackson's death.

Is there anything that has surprised you? SEIDLIN: Well, I feel it's -- it's like Anna Nicole, too. It's another situation where a celebrity -- and I -- I think there will be a strong likelihood that she -- that Michael Jackson died from -- from drugs, from too much prescription medicine.

And the fact is in law school, we would say it's on the four corners. It's -- the facts are going to indicate the same facts for Anna Nicole -- doctors writing painkiller medicine. And the body could just take so much medicine and then it just stops. The heart stops ticking.

MALVEAUX: How do you -- how do you actually control what -- what gets out there?

I mean, there now a lot of people who have jumped in. He has -- he's had various attorneys along the way.

How do you actually make sure that the -- that the message that's going out -- whether there is a case that's drug-related or not. You were in the middle of, really, kind of a -- a firestorm of publicity and of like -- and celebrities.

SEIDLIN: Well, I guess I'm no stranger to celebrity death.

But from the Anna Nicole case, I think the L.A. Police now -- they've learned some lessons from the first case. And then you've got the California attorney general...

MALVEAUX: Like what?

SEIDLIN: Well, I think now they're looking at being an enabler. They're looking to see who they can put the -- the button on. And they -- the California authorities, the local police now have called in the Department of Law Enforcement, the federal agency, because I think they want to share the responsibility and not take all the blame if it doesn't work properly. And I think that that's a good move for them.

And it's going to be very tough. They're going to have to look to see who -- who gave these drugs, how much drugs were given and -- and there's a potential manslaughter charge here. Murder without malice is -- is manslaughter.

Were the actions that were taken by these individuals, were they reckless?

And if they're reckless, you could have a manslaughter charge.

MALVEAUX: And you're talking about, potentially, doctors who may have given him prescription drugs?

Is that what you're referring to?

SEIDLIN: Well, I think the attorney general, Jerry Brown, is going to be looking at what charges. They have already a road map from the recent case -- from my Anna Nicole case. MALVEAUX: What...

SEIDLIN: There's a road map on the charges. And I think they're going to be looking again to see if these individuals fit the dimensions of those charges.

MALVEAUX: What do you make of the fact that the D.A. Is now involved in the investigation of the death of Michael Jackson?

SEIDLIN: Well, when a case has such a high profile, it -- a little politics enters the game. And I think the police chief is smart. He wants to share the responsibility and bring in a federal agency.

They're -- they're also very well trained. They have great experience. And he wants them, also, on the playing field.

MALVEAUX: Monday there's going to be the hearing. Obviously, they're going to take a look at the will and the truth.

Is there any -- with what we've learned from the trust, obviously, 40 percent to the mother, 40 percent to the kids, 20 percent to the charities.

Is there any individual who could come forward at that hearing, perhaps, and lay claim and dispute this?

SEIDLIN: There's going to be a lot of people on line with tickets to the courtroom. Right now, what we have is a will. When an individual dies, the will is submitted to the clerk's office...


SEIDLIN: every courthouse in the country. That will is made public. But the trust is a document that is private.

MALVEAUX: We have the details of the trust, as well. We did learn that 40 percent of the estate goes to the mother, 40 percent to the children, 20 percent to the charity. When you actually -- when this all unfolds on Monday, it -- is there an opportunity or a chance for someone who feels wrong or slighted to just totally change the game here?

SEIDLIN: Well, there will be people that -- that challenge the trust. I read -- I read the information about the trust. Being a judge, I want to -- I want to look at that trust. It hasn't been openly distributed yet.


SEIDLIN: There's reports about those numbers that you stated.


SEIDLIN: Right now, you have a will -- it was interesting that Michael Jackson wrote a will. A lot of people don't have wills. So he was -- he was thinking, if I die -- and death may have been on his mind when he wrote it in 2002. And the fact being he wrote that will. I looked at the will like with the microscope. And the will shows that he was thinking about his three children. He shows that he loves his mother and he wants to -- the mother, in the will, takes care of the children, their personal needs and also their financial needs.

MALVEAUX: But does -- Larry, on Monday, is it possible -- like, let's say that -- could Debbie Rowe come and -- and lay claim and say I want either parental rights or I want custody?

Is that something that -- that also is a possibility as a part of these proceedings?

SEIDLIN: Absolutely. What the Jacksons did -- they have had great legal advice. I looked at the team they hired.

They raced to the courthouse. It's called the race to the courthouse. They ran there. They filed their papers first. They immediately took custody and control of the three children and they took custody and control of his property.

So right now, they've got a leg up. They're holding the three children and caring for them well and they took the property. So right now, they're temporary guardians.

Other folks may come in. The mother may come in. Wife number two may come in and say I want these children. I don't know how strong her position will be, because it's shown in the past she's waived her rights two times to these children. But she's got a ticket to that courtroom and she can argue her equities.

MALVEAUX: If you were the judge in this case -- obviously, you were pretty emotional in the custody case regarding the child of Anna Nicole Smith.

What would you say to that -- to that judge who's presiding over these hearings, because, obviously a lot of people -- there's money that's involved and there's obviously these three children?

SEIDLIN: Well, to me, the cases are all about what's in the best interests of the children. Michael Jackson, it was a tragedy. It's sad. It's sickening. But now we have children that are there.

And money is one thing, but I want to do what's in the best interests of the children, like we did with Anna Nicole. At the end of that case, I had everybody holding hands in front of the courthouse. I spent six days trying to soothe, mediate, massage those folks.

This judge has to work very hard to try to get the same resolution, God willing.

MALVEAUX: All right.

Thank you very much, Judge Larry.

We really appreciate it.

SEIDLIN: Well, thank you.

MALVEAUX: All right. Thank you.

Revelations from the grave -- Saddam Hussein was more afraid of Iran than he was of the U.S. We are now learning what he told the FBI.

And South Carolina's governor is cleared in one investigation stemming from his affair. Plus, his wife sends a powerful new message.


MALVEAUX: Brianna Keilar is monitoring the stories that are coming into THE SITUATION ROOM right now -- and, Brianna, what are you following?

KEILAR: Suzanne, North Korea test-fired four short range missiles off its east coast. These tests confirmed by South Korea, as well as a U.S. intelligence official, who say there are no signs North Korea plans a long rain missile test anytime soon.

In Afghanistan, 4,000 U.S. Marines are moving into the very dangerous southern part of the country, supported by Afghan troops. Their mission is to get rid of Taliban insurgents, hold the area and stay there. The U.S. military reports that one Marine was killed in action and several others were wounded today.

Also in Southern Afghanistan, the U.S. military believes a militant group is holding a soldier captured earlier this week. A senior military source tells CNN lower level militants captured the U.S. soldier and three Afghan troops and then sold them to an insurgent clan. It's believed the unidentified American left his small outpost on Tuesday with no apparent means of defending himself.

Embattled South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford and his wife of 20 years, Jenny, are planning to be in Florida with their sons for the holiday. Mrs. Sanford released a statement this afternoon saying while her husband's behavior was inexcusable -- that's a quote -- she is willing to forgive him. A South Carolina police official, meanwhile says an investigation found that Governor Sanford did not improperly use state funds for visits with his mistress in Argentina and therefore did not break any laws -- Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: Thank you, Brianna.


Happening now, Jermaine Jackson speaks out and answers questions about reports of drug use by brother Michael Jackson. We have his emotional interview.

Plus, Jermaine Jackson will be there as CNN's Larry King goes inside Neverland, Michael Jackson's beloved fantasy home. And we talk to former Los Angeles D.A. Marsha Clark about the king of pop's death and the DEA's involvement now -- what does it mean?

I'm Suzanne Malveaux.


Two law enforcement officials are now separately confirming to CNN that the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration is joining the investigation into Michael Jackson's death. Speculation about the possible role of prescription drugs is being fueled by allegations of a former Jackson nurse, who says the singer pleaded for a powerful anesthetic to help him sleep.

CNN's chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, shows us why the drug is a potential killer.


GUPTA (voice-over): Insomnia -- Michael Jackson allegedly complained of it all the time.

CHERILYN LEE, REGISTERED NURSE: Because he was so adamant about, I will pay any amount of money for someone to help me to sleep.

GUPTA: And with that, he joined the nearly one in three Americans who complain of insomnia sometimes -- pretty common. But the way he may have treated his sleeplessness, stunning.

(on camera): Have you ever heard of such a thing?

DR. ZEEV KAIN, DEPARTMENT OF ANESTHESIOLOGY CHAIRMAN, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE: I have heard about abuse of Propofol within the health care settings. I have never heard about Propofol being used or Diprivan being used to -- as a sleep aid medication.

GUPTA: If you had to sort of put this together, how could something like this happen?

KAIN: A very interesting question. One of the possibilities is a mix up within the public about what is sleep and what is general anesthesia. So when you go to the operating room for surgery, you undergo general anesthesia, which is a -- obviously, a physician- induced coma. When you sleep at night in your bed, that's going to sleep.

GUPTA (voice-over): And to understand how it's different, you need to look inside the brain. With an over-the-counter sleep med, the medication typically floods histamine receptors. With a prescription sleeping pill like Ambien, Restoril, Lunesta, they work by hitting even more areas of the brain -- the hypothalamus, the brain stem, the cortex.

But Propofol?

(on camera): So what is Propofol exactly?

KAIN: Propofol is a -- is a central nervous system depressant. It works on your brain. It basically puts the entire brain to sleep. It depends on the dose that you use, now. If you use a touch of Propofol, then you can actually get a high from it. The more Propofol you use, the more you get into general anesthesia.

GUPTA: Take a look at it. This is what it looks like. It almost looks like kind of milk. In fact, in hospitals, they refer it to as milk of amnesia.

(voice-over): Think of it as a turbocharged sleeping agent. It works by essentially putting the whole brain to rest. It's a medically-induced coma.

(on camera): How dangerous is this?

KAIN: As dangerous as it comes. You will die if you will give yourself or if will somebody give you Propofol and you are not in the proper medical hands.

GUPTA: Can you write me a prescription for some Propofol and I can go get some?

KAIN: I don't think so.

GUPTA: Not possible?

KAIN: Not possible. Propofol is injected intravenously. It is not taken orally. So I don't think that the pharmacy will give you intravenous Propofol. You have to go to a hospital.

GUPTA: So, I really wanted to find out for myself, how easy is to get this particular medication?

So we came to this pharmacy in North Hollywood to find out.

If I came in with a prescription for Propofol, is that -- I mean, could I get a prescription for Propofol filled here?


GUPTA: Absolutely not?

(voice-over): Absolutely not, because this drug is not a sleeping medicine. It is a powerful sedative that should never be used outside of a medical setting. And, if used improperly, it can kill.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN, Los Angeles.


MALVEAUX: The widening probe of Michael Jackson's death. We'll talk to a legal expert about the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's involvement. And President Obama says he is deeply concerned about the number of job losses in June. Republicans are pouncing. Can the GOP gain any ground on a foundering economy?





ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

MALVEAUX: We have a major development in the case surrounding the death of Michael Jackson. I want to read what was just handed to me here.

A lawyer for Debbie Rowe -- you may recall Debbie Rowe, the ex- wife of Michael Jackson, the mother of his two oldest children, Debbie Rowe, who has been briefly married to Michael Jackson, will talk to reporters Thursday afternoon. We understand that that's a little bit later, about 6 p.m., perhaps as early as about 30 minutes or so, about whether she will challenge Katherine Jackson for custody of Michael Jackson's two oldest children.

A judge has delayed for a week until July 13 a hearing to decide if Katherine Jackson, Michael Jackson's mother, will remain the temporary guardian of Jackson's children.

So, once again, we are going to be getting some sort of information from Debbie Rowe, the ex-wife of Michael Jackson, and whether or not she is going to be challenging custody of two of the three children.

Now, I want to go to our guests very quickly. Judge Larry Seidlin, he was here earlier. We may bring him back, but we do want to go to USC law professor Ed McCaffrey, who joins us live here live in THE SITUATION ROOM.

What does this mean for Monday's hearing? How does this complicate the situation, if she decides that she wants the children?

ED MCCAFFREY, LAW PROFESSOR, USC: Well, it certainly does complicate things. Now, we were -- I was on a couple days ago, and we were talking about the difference between the financial side of things and the children, the child custody, the guardianship side of things.

This may or may not have much affect on the financial side, but obviously, it throws a big monkey wrench if she decides she is going to challenge the guardianship of the challenge. That's going to complicate that. She -- lots of things can happen if she decides to go forward and challenge it.

MALVEAUX: Well, does she have any legal standing? MCCAFFREY: Sure she has legal standing. I mean, I don't know all the facts myself, so I think there are questions as to whether she was just a surrogate mother or actually gave the egg, the biological mother. But it's someone, you know, who is connected to those children, whether as a surrogate or biologically. She can go into court and say she's an appropriate custodian, in whole or in part.

As we know from many divorces across America, custody can be split. She might be able to see the kids sometimes. That doesn't mean she's going to be able to see the kids all the time.

But a judge is going to listen to what is in the best interest of the children. And if she can really prove that she's a better parental figure, she's a better maternal figure than Katherine, that's something a judge is going to have to listen to. But she certainly has an uphill case to make.

MALVEAUX: What carries more weight: the will of the deceased parent or the biological connection of the surviving parent?

MCCAFFREY: Well, that's a great question, and really, I think it's important for everyone to understand. What carries -- the only thing that carries weight is what's in the best interest of the child and what the judge thinks is in the best interest of the child.

Now, given that these children were living with Michael, he was acting as their father, he's got a will that certainly looks to be appropriate in every way, shape, or form. And he's saying that he wants Michael -- he wants Katherine, his mother, to be the guardian. If there's any problem there, he wants Diana Ross. He wants nothing to do with Debbie. That's going to carry a lot of weight.

So, the fact that Debbie has some biological or other connection to these children will get her into court. From that moment on, she's going to have to convince a judge that this is really the best thing for these children. That's going to be an uphill argument.

MALVEAUX: Sure. I want you to hand on with us. We've brought back Judge Larry Seidlin.

Thanks for joining us again. Obviously, breaking news, this development here, the possibility here that Debbie Rowe may be asking for custody or parental rights or -- she wants a say here in her children's lives.

How does this -- how does this affect what happened at this hearing on Monday?

SEIDLIN: Well, I knew she was going to come to the courthouse. Absolutely was going to come to the courthouse. Her past actions indicated that she had the children from Michael Jackson, and then she resolved giving away the rights to those children for a sum of money.

Therefore, the Jacksons were wise; they were sharp. They ran to that courthouse, and they took custody of the children. So, they're sitting now with temporary custody of those children. The court's going to hear from her attorneys, but the court's not going to make a decision that day. The court's going to say, "All right, the mother will continue to have custody of the children. I'm going to do a home study on Rowe, see how she lives, what type of life she lives, maybe do even a psychological examination." But those -- that takes days and days. That allows the mother, Michael Jackson's mother, to continue to have custody of those children.

MALVEAUX: The longer that takes place, is it less likely that Debbie Rowe will get custody, the longer that those children are with Katherine Jackson?

SEIDLIN: Well, I don't think time is a complete enemy to her, but I believe that the continuity and the stability of these children are of utmost important to the court.

And, therefore, the fact that the mother continues to have custody of those children does help her. That's why the lawyers were very intelligent to file those papers immediately.

Let's go through a couple other points that I think you're going to find very interesting. When you read the will, he says, Michael Jackson, "I want these children to go to my mother. I want my mother to take care of their property and take care of their person, their welfare."


SEIDLIN: But that's not conclusive to the court. That's not going to say he's making the decision for the court. But it is an essential factor. It's a very important factor.

MALVEAUX: Now, the fact that Katherine Jackson, obviously, he wants her to have custody of the children, but she's still -- she's legally married to Joe Jackson. And Michael Jackson had come out before and talked about the physical and the anguish, the mental abuse at the hands of his father.

Does Debbie Rowe have a case? Does she have an argument to make, if these two are connected, if Katherine and Joe Jackson are connected in any way, that it's not a suitable home for those children?

SEIDLIN: Well, Michael Jackson put great thought into this document. I'm curious when the trust comes out, if we ever get to see -- we may never get to see the trust, and theoretically, we may never get to know who the trustee is.

MALVEAUX: But to that question, what do you think?

SEIDLIN: I think the Jacksons are very smart people, and they now have realized that the mother, Michael's mother, is more equipped to be the guardian of these children, and the grandfather, Joe, is going to have rights of visitation. He's not saying he's going to care for the children. He lives in Las Vegas, if I understand correctly. And the mother lives in California. So, he's not going to be supervising these children. He's going to visit with them. And he would be able to do that under any circumstances.

MALVEAUX: I want to go back to Professor McCaffrey very quickly. Do you agree with Judge Larry? Do you think that she has a strong or a weak case here in terms of taking the children, her children?

MCCAFFREY: Is that Debbie or Katherine you're asking about, Suzanne?

MALVEAUX: Does Debbie, does Debbie have?

MCCAFFREY: I think Debbie has a case. I'm not sure it's that strong. I basically agree with the judge.

One thing I want to add, the judge had a nice theme, which was how smart the Jacksons were. I also want to say I think, you know, it's easy to sort of dump on Michael and make a soap opera out of his life and death and so forth.

I think he was not only smart in the sense that this is good legal paperwork; he was also loving. He thought about these children. It looks like he has financially provided for these children. He thought about the issue of guardianship, and I think a judge is going to give that a lot of weight.

Debbie has some questions. I think the question you raised, Suzanne, about what's going on with the father, the grandfather, that's a big question. And it may be that Katherine is going to have to prove that he's either a safe figure to be around these -- these young children, or she's going to stake steps to protect the children from anything that he might do.

So, lots of questions. I think Debbie has standing to go into court, an uphill battle. Lots of things could happen, including a split custody, in which she sees the kids some but not too much of the time.

SEIDLIN: That's right. The professor is right on target. The professor is right on target. This mother will get visitation rights, and then there's the opportunity to settle. Ninety-nine percent of the cases are settled. The textbooks say 90 percent, but it's really 99 percent of the cases that settle.

So, at a point in time the mother has shown a pattern where she accepts a sum of money to resolve this dispute. The Jacksons' attorneys, I'm sure, will be talking to the mother's attorneys.

MALVEAUX: OK. Thank you very much, Judge Larry. Appreciate your coming back with us.

SEIDLIN: Thank you.

MALVEAUX: As well as professor McCaffrey. Appreciate it. Thanks again. MCCAFFREY: Thank you.

MALVEAUX: Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. What did the former Iraqi dictator really think of the world's most wanted terrorist? Newly-revealed FBI interviews contain some surprises.

Plus, Vice President Joe Biden in Iraq. Is he a potential fall guy if things go wrong? Politico contributors Donna Brazile and Mary Matalin are standing by.


MALVEAUX: In newly-declassified FBI records, Saddam Hussein tells why he falsely let the world believe Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Brianna Keilar has been looking into this.

Brianna, what do we know about what the former Iraqi leader has been saying to the FBI?

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, he certainly confirmed to us the image we have of him as an elusive and secretive dictator. He said that, in the 14 years before his capture, he only spoke on the telephone two times, if you can imagine that. But above all, these documents reveal that Saddam Hussein was very afraid of his neighbor and archenemy, Iran.


KEILAR (voice-over): June 11, 2004. Six months after U.S. troops captured Saddam Hussein, he sat down with an Arabic-speaking FBI interrogator. Newly-declassified documents reveal what he told agent George Piro, that he considered Iran to be the most significant threat facing Iraq, much more than the U.S.

Wanting to keep Iran in the dark about his weapons capabilities, or lack thereof, Hussein said he stopped inspectors from checking Iraq for weapons of mass destruction, because he feared U.N. inspectors would have directly identified to the Iranians where to inflict maximum damage to Iraq.

Convinced Iran intended to annex southern Iraq, he bet that keeping the U.N. out was safer than showing Iran he was bluffing.

The new information squares with what Piro told CBS's "60 Minutes" in 2008.

GEORGE PIRO, FBI AGENT: He told me he initially miscalculated President Bush and President Bush's intentions. He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Some kind of an air campaign.

PIRO: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And you could survive that. He survived that once. KEILAR: Hussein told Piro the United States used September 11 as an excuse to invade Iraq and had lost sight of the cause of 9/11, al Qaeda. He called Osama bin Laden a zealot and, despite U.S. claims Iraq had contact with al Qaeda, Hussein said the Iraqi government did not cooperate with bin Laden, that he did not have the same belief or vision as al Qaeda's leader.


MALVEAUX: There are many reports, Brianna, that Saddam Hussein had a body double that would travel from place to place to avoid assassination. He was so paranoid about that. Did he talk about that?

KEILAR: He did. He said that was not reality, that it was complete nonsense. And he said that -- and there were also reports, of course, that his sons used body doubles. He said that was not true at all.

But as to those reports that said he would sleep in a different bed every night to avoid being a target, he said that actually was true.

MALVEAUX: It was true.


MALVEAUX: And then he also -- there -- I guess there was part of the report that said that he actually felt that he lived simply. He was explaining how his lifestyle was. But we have seen this lavish lifestyle. How did -- how did he actually explain that?

KEILAR: Yes. He said that the U.S. had this misconception that he lived this extravagant lifestyle and really he didn't. And he spoke about the palaces. We know there were just a multitude, or there are a multitude that were built under him.

And he said that it was just a show of Iraqi architectural prowess, that it didn't belong to him; it belonged to all of the people of Iraq. And he said that having so many of those palaces was a safety issue, that Iraqi leaders would meet there, and so there needed to be many of them, so they couldn't be targeted by their enemies.

MALVEAUX: Amazing to get the thinking, inside the thinking, the head of Saddam Hussein.

KEILAR: Yes. Very interesting document.

MALVEAUX: OK. Thank you so much, Brianna.

Well, new information on the U.S. job market today. In June, the unemployment rate reached a new high of 9.5 percent. It is the worst number we've seen in 26 years.

While it is high, economists actually expected it to be higher. The number of jobs lost rose for the first time in four months, totaling nearly half a million. Six and a half million jobs have now been lost since the start of the recession in December 2007.

So, how is the economy affecting Americans overall? Our CNN senior political analyst, Bill Schneider, is here with some new polling -- Bill.


BILL SCHNEIDER, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Suzanne, right now, the economy is kind of a good news/bad news story.

(voice-over): Some good news on the economy: the stock market is up for the year. But some bad news on the economy: consumer confidence went down last month. What to make of it? Ask the treasury secretary.

TIMOTHY GEITHNER, TREASURY SECRETARY: These early signs of improvement are encouraging, but the global economy is still operating well below potential. And we still face very acute challenges.

SCHNEIDER: The latest CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll has some good news. The number of people who say the economy is the nation's No. 1 issue has been dropping, from 63 percent in March to 55 percent in April, to 51 percent now.

And, some bad news. Public support for President Obama's economic plan, while still high, has fallen a bit, from 65 percent support in March to 58 percent now.

The plan has faced unrelenting criticism from Republicans.

GOV. TIM PAWLENTY (R), MINNESOTA: So this is a bill that was misdirected and mistargeted and misprioritized.

SCHNEIDER: The criticism may be taking hold as long as people do not see clear signs of a recovery. Do they?

OBAMA: Typically, it takes a while for that employment number to catch up with economic recovery. And we're still not at actual recovery yet.

SCHNEIDER: Only 12 percent of Americans believe the recovery is underway. Nearly half say the recovery has not started but things are not getting worse. Forty percent believe things are getting worse.

(on camera) The prevailing view? We're in a stall -- Suzanne.


Thanks, Bill.

Republicans are seizing on these dismal new job numbers, using them to hammer at President Obama's stimulus package. Joining us to talk about that and much, much more are CNN political contributors, Democratic strategist Donna Brazile and Republican strategist Mary Matalin.

Thanks for joining us. I want to start off. Bad news on the economic front. I want to take a listen here, Republican John Boehner, what he had to say and his reaction today.


JOHN BOEHNER (R): After five months and billions in debt on our kids and grandkids, where are the jobs? We've put the dogs on the money trail to find out.

We went to AIG, where the stimulus meant big bonuses for big executives but no new jobs.

This is Ellie Mae (ph). She hasn't found any stimulus jobs yet and neither have the American people.


MALVEAUX: Is this an effective presentation; is this an effective ad? Is this really getting at the heart of what people are afraid of, which is that all that money out there for these stimulus projects, and people aren't getting back to work yet.

DONNA BRAZILE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, it takes a long time for the job recovery to begin once you are in a deep recession. In 2001, after that recession, it took 47 months. In 1991, that recession, it took 32 months. It's going to take time for the jobs to come back. And the economists predicted back when we -- the recession started that the labor market was deteriorating, and it will take time.

And I think we have to be patient, make sure that this money is getting to the people and that it is spent wisely. We don't need to waste money but try to, you know, solve the problem.

MALVEAUX: We heard from President Obama today. And he was trying to tell folks that this is going to take some time. Does he need to change his message? Does he just need to implore Americans to hang on a little bit longer?

MARY MATALIN, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: He needed not to have said initially what he did, which was -- and his aides were saying that the stimulus would kick in within weeks or months, and that joblessness would peak at 8 percent. Now, it's exceeding 10 percent, and it's going to be going on for a long time.

It's the larger environment, what Bill's numbers are showing. If people are concerned about there are no jobs. There are 78,000 new jobs in the government. But people are really concerned by 2-1 over health care, energy, anything else that he's trying to have on the agenda, about deficit spending, which now stands today just up one budget, not his additions, four times higher than the grade.

This has been an ongoing issue in this country for 15, 20 years. And he's got -- he's gearing up here for a perfect political storm. And he knows it because they are very -- they had to bribe all those Democrats to vote for the energy bill. So it's all of the piece. It's the stimulus spending...

MALVEAUX: Donna, do you have a response to those bribe accusations (ph)?

BRAZILE: I don't think it was a bribe. Because many people believe, and economists believed that the creation of these green jobs will aid in our economic recovery, because manufacturing jobs are being lost. And we don't know if those jobs are coming back.

This recession started in December 2007. We're in the 19th month. President Obama has been in office for six months. I do believe that his plans overall, long term, will help to produce the kind of jobs that we need to get this economy moving.

MALVEAUX: How much time should Americans give him?

BRAZILE: I think the American people should -- should give the president but also give the economy time to come back.

MALVEAUX: Five years (ph)?

BRAZILE: You know, I'm not an economist. I'm a struggling working woman like everybody else. But look, we have to give the economy time to heal itself. The credit markets are now finally moving again. Now, we've got to get the manufacturing jobs back up, the service economy, and get people back to work.

MATALIN: But this is the problem. This is cited, and no one questions it, that these -- this energy plan or alternative energy formation is going to create new green jobs. The president keeps saying it.

There's only been, of economic studies that have been done, for every one job gained, 2.2 are lost. That's not growing jobs. And of the one job gained, it has to be subsidized, and it's short term. That's just false that it's going to create jobs. It's going to lose jobs, because job producers and individuals, taxes and their energy costs are going to go up. That's hurting the economy. That's a long- term drag on the economy.

BRAZILE: Well, we have to do something to end our dependence on foreign oil and to move and transition to a new energy economy. And going back to the old ways will not do it.

MALVEAUX: All right. Thank you so much for joining us in THE SITUATION ROOM.

BRAZILE: No talk on Michael Jackson?

MALVEAUX: Got to go. Sorry. I'm being told I've got to go. Ran out of time.


BRAZILE: Absolutely.

MALVEAUX: A massive public memorial for Michael Jackson now set for Tuesday in Los Angeles. But the city and state both are in financial crisis. Who will foot the bill?


MALVEAUX: Time now to check back in with Jack Cafferty, and Jack, what are you following?

CAFFERTY: Is the -- is it a good idea to allow guns in bars? The Arizona senators voted to allow people with concealed weapons permits to carry their guns into saloons out there.

Roy says, "Uh, no! Alcohol, guns, and men competing for the attention of women, what could possibly go wrong? Anybody who thinks this is a good idea has been standing out in the Arizona sun without a hat for too long!"

Randy in Salt Lake City: "Yes, sure. Instead of drunks getting into brawls with other drunks and then staggering to their trucks to go home and beat their wife and potentially plow that truck into a family of four, killing all of them, they'll just shoot the guy next to them who said the Steelers sucked."

Lynn in Columbia, Missouri: "It's about as good an idea as allowing them in national parks. I think they're trying to lower the census before 2010."

Guy writes, "Criminals don't discriminate on where they can carry a weapon. Most don't even get a permit. So yes, why should law- abiding citizens, such as those who have the proper permit, be prevented from protecting themselves?"

George writes, "Florida has been allowing people to eat and drink in restaurants since 1987 while carrying concealed guns. It hasn't been an issue for the 575,000 people who have permits in Florida or the millions of people who come to Florida from the 32 states that have reciprocity for those gun permits."

Gregory in Miami Beach, "A lot more violence happens in bars than you really know about, not to mention what happens in households when some of the drinkers get home. If you wouldn't put car keys in a drinker's hands, why would you put a gun in them?"

Sandy in Sunnyvale, California: "No, guns should not be allowed in bars without one exception: karaoke bars."

Don in Newton, Pennsylvania: "Jack, be careful if you order a shot in the Scottsdale watering hole."

If you didn't see your e-mail here, you go to my blog at Look for yours there among hundreds of others.

Do you think it's a good idea, Suzanne, to have guns in bars?

MALVEAUX: It sounded like a deadly combination. I don't know. It sounded kind of dangerous, but we'll see.

Well, happening now, breaking news on Michael Jackson. We are standing by to learn if his ex-wife will fight for custody of his children. A lawyer for Debbie Rowe is expected to speak shortly.

Plus, we are going behind the gates of Jackson's fantasy home. Stand by for brand-new pictures of Neverland. CNN's own Larry King is there.

And Jackson, entertaining until the very end. This hour the video of his last dress rehearsal and insight into the legal circus surrounding his death from former O.J. Simpson prosecutor, Marcia Clark.

Welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. Wolf Blitzer is off. I'm Suzanne Malveaux, and you're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

There is lots of new video and breaking news in our Michael Jackson coverage, exactly one week after his stunning death. We are standing by to hear from a lawyer for Debbie Rowe, the birth mother of two of Jackson's children. We're expecting to learn if she's going to fight for custody.