CNN CNN


 

Return to Transcripts main page

DR. DREW

Amanda Knox Goes Free; The Michael Jackson Death Trial, Day Five; Did Michael Jackson Cause His Own Death?

Aired October 3, 2011 - 21:00:00   ET

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


(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DOCTOR DREW PINSKY, HLN HOST (voice-over): In London they waited. In Seattle, they waited. In Italy, they waited. And tonight, after four years of waiting, Amanda Knox goes free. The American student cleared in her roommate`s grisly murder. Questions remain about her behavior, the prosecution`s case, and our fascination with it.

And, across the ocean another dramatic days, more damming evidence on the Michael Jackson death trial. An ER cardiologist reveals Conrad Murray`s shocking omission that painful day.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He never mentioned propofol to you?

DOCTOR THAO NGUYEN, CARDIOLOGIST: Absolutely not.

PINSKY: But the physician that declared Jackson dead throws out a curve ball.

DOCTOR ROCHELLE COOPER, EMERGENCY ROOM PHYSICIAN: Twenty five milligrams of propofol alone in a healthy 60kg. I would not expect that to achieve sedation.

PINSKY: Is the defense suggesting Jackson injected himself?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PINSKY: Tonight, I am coming to you from New York City. We have breaking news. A shocking verdict in Italy, Amanda and her Italian boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, have been acquitted of murder and are going free. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNITEDNTIFIED MALE: Amanda Knox`s murder conviction overturned.

UNITEDNTIFIED FEMALE: Knox, Amanda is free.

UNITEDNTIFIED MALE: After four years in prison is about to become a free woman, also, her former boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito.

UNITEDNTIFIED FEMALE: She spoke in fluent Italian and begged, and begged for mercy.

UNITEDNTIFIED MALE: There is another man, another man unrelated to Amanda Knox and her boyfriend that already admitted this and was convicted of the murder. DNA was everywhere to be found.

UNITEDNTIFIED MALE: When put in prison for 26 of 25 years, respectively, I mean it was utter shock. The DNA evidence, it found the evidence wasn`t reliable, there wasn`t enough DNA to establish an actual presence of Amanda Knox.

UNITEDNTIFIED FEMALE: She will go in through the doors behind me for the last time.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PINSKY: The girl glumly dubbed Foxy Knoxy and also she was called the devil with an angel`s face was convicted of 2009 of sexually assaulting and murdering her roommate, Meredith Kercher. Tonight she won her appeal and that conviction has been overturned. Amanda and Meredith apparently shared a flat while studying abroad in the tiny village of Perugia, Italy. Kercher was stabbed to death, found in the apartment under covered in a pool of blood.

On this show, we talk about of course why people do what they do. Now Amanda is innocent. So, couple of questions. How can you explain her bizarre behavior after Meredith`s death? Apparently there were cart wheels, sizzling pictures alongside of me here. Cart wheels and splits to the police department. There were some inappropriate sort of touching and kissing with her boyfriend. And then she went lingerie shopping the day after her roommate`s body is found in a pool of blood. And of course, she`s been smiling in court and mainly in court sometimes inappropriately. How do we understand these reactions?

Plus, why was the over sellas (ph) prosecutor so eager to lock up Knox and throw away the key? Why did he paint this as a twisted sex game?

Straight now to my guest, attorney for friends of Amanda Knox, Ann Bremner. CNN investigator reporter Drew Griffin is live in Seattle, where Amanda Knox, that`s where she calls home. And CNN Correspondent Paula Newton joins us live from Perugia, Italy.

Paula, can you describe the reaction in Italy for us right now?

PAULA NEWTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Divided is what I would say. It certainly head lined all the news in the evening. There was live coverage across the country. People here still incredibly divided about whether or not Amanda Knox is guilty or innocent. They either call her the angel or the assassin, but truly this case was in credibly complicated from the beginning. And any kind of trite summation would really do Meredith Kercher the victim in this case injustice. It was very difficult and still difficult for Italians to really know who to believe and what to believe.

PINSKY: Is there anyone there in Perugia saying the prosecutor was overzealous, is he in any way being held accountable for all of this?

NEWTON: He will certainly be held accountable because the verdict itself, the one he prosecuted to the endth degree has been overturned. Having said that, there have been some questions from him about prior conduct, but if we leave all of that aside, certainly he spoke very much to the media. He spoke to me sometimes, one time at length more than a couple of hours. Some of this stuff some may think was inappropriate. And that he should have stuck to the evidence that he had at hand and prosecuted the case that way. You know, the media in this case was definitely a third party there in court. And you can feel it. I covered the original trial, covering this now. And it seemed inappropriate really and it interfered with the normal course of justice.

PINSKY: Paula, not only that, I am going to say this probably couple of times as we report this story. But the one thing the prosecutor was claiming happened that is not how people behave. That is not even people that get themselves in that kind of a situation where there`s cutting and murders. What he described does not happen. It just does not happen. And I don`t understand how he gets away with that kind of nonsense.

When the verdict was coming down, the courtroom got so loud, the judge had to shout for everyone to be silent. Amanda naturally sobbed as the judge read the ruling. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEP CLLIP)

UNITEDNTIFIED MALE (through translator): They are acquitted of offense of charges a, b, c, d. We have overturned. So Knox Amanda is free and Sollecito Raffaele as well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: Drew griffin, live in Seattle. We are hearing Amanda might fly back to Seattle as early as tomorrow. What do you know?

DREW GRIFFIN, CNN INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT: That`s about all I know. We understand there was some talk about a private charter, that`s been knocked down by the family. Looking at the time schedules, earliest she could arrive here I would think would be late afternoon Seattle time.

And then, Doctor Drew, we`re not sure if she`s going to speak or not. The family has long said they`re going to leave it up to Amanda to decide. And they are very, very concerned that she is not able to at this time process the amount of media attention she`s likely to face when she`s back here in the states.

PINSKY: And I have gotten a pulse in Perugia, Italy. What`s the pulse there, in Seattle? Aren`t people outraged by this whole thing?

GRIFFIN: I think it has been a slow burn. They`ve seen this happen and develop over the past four years. Quite frankly, when this crime first happened, I think many people were holding back, not quite sure what to think. But when the reports came out about how this prosecution took place, when the reports came out about the DNA evidence, when the independent review came back, I think the outrage started to build. She has had a lot of support in Seattle from the start. Tonight, some jubilation, there`s a lot of relief, I would say.

PINSKY: And Drew, I am going to interrupt you. And I want to say another thing and we have very limited time, I`m sorry to interrupt you. But you know, one of the things I find almost like comical about this is this idea that one girl was promissques (ph) because she was physically intimate with her boyfriend, and the other girl didn`t like it and that was motivation for murder.

If that`s true, my kids are in college. There`s going to be blood in the streets on college campuses. I mean, it is so outrages, it is hard to listen to. I don`t understand why there`s not more outrage in Seattle. Maybe there will be when she gets home. Now, Amanda`s murder thankfully it was overturned today after the 26-year-old tearfully begged the jury to believe in her innocence. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLLIP)

AMANDA KNOX, RELEASED FROM PRISON (through translator): I am not what they say I am. Perversity, violence. I respect life and people and I haven`t done the things that they`re suggesting that I have done.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: Anne, for people out there just catching up with this trial how is the appeal different from the first trial?

ANNE BREMNER, ATTORNEY, FRIENDS OF AMANDA KNOX: Are you talking to me?

PINSKY: I am.

BREMNER: I`m sorry. I though you said "and". Doctor Drew, I do want to say though, I do think there`s more outrage in Seattle that`s just been described. Maybe because I have been more of a vocal supporter of Amanda Knox, in my role with friends of Amanda Knox. My blackberry is about to explode Doctor Drew with people well-wishers you know. I heard from people for years, supporting Amanda Knox.

Getting to you question, the appeal is different because it is really the same, it`s Denovo. So, you hear the evidence again. But, what`s different here and pivotal, there was an independent review of the evidence by forensic scientists, ordered by the judge who expressed reasonable doubt in the verdict, and those findings were that the evidence was unreliable, contaminated, not admissible, it was therefore zero case after that.

PINSKY: Coming up next, why did this prosecutor insist Knox was playing some sort of twisted sex game that ended in murder? I`m going to keep hounding on the fact that this just does not add up for me, did not add up for me. And I`m glad to see it overturned. Please stay with us.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CURT KNOX, AMANDA KNOX`S FATHER: With them coming back and essentially eliminating any of the physical evidence of Amanda and Raffaele in that room under the prosecution scenario, I think that`s probably the biggest piece right there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AMANDA KNOX (through translator): I am the same person that I was four years ago, exactly the same person. The only thing that now separates me from four years ago is my suffering. In four years, I`ve lost my friend in the most terrible and unexplainable way. My trust in the authorities and the police has been damaged.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: Very interesting comments tonight from Amanda Knox. I think one of the key, sorts of elements in this case is that she was extremely naive when these charges were first presented. And now we have a very changed young lady and now a free woman. This American exchange student spent four years behind bars in a prison after having been convicted of murdering and sexually assaulting her studying abroad roommate, Meredith Kercher.

Now again, looking at why people do what they do and understanding this, I mean what already tragedy for this young woman, the fact that her roommate was killed, that she then accused of having killed her. Why did the prosecutor vehemently insist that Amanda was engaging in a sadistic sex game?

Literally he said that Meredith was being taunted with a knife before slashing her throat. Where did he come up with that idea? Because there was no evidence for that having happened, and that`s not the way people behave. I deal with people all the time. And people that get involved in these kinds of behaviors, that`s just not how it goes down the way he described it. It is either a person that`s already into cutting as part of their sort of fetish behavior and things go too far, or it is somebody that has a proclivity to violence in their physical intimacy, and again, it goes too far or starts to, you know, escalate into something. It`s not that. That`s not what we`re seeing here.

Nor, by the way, this business of roommates being jealous because one likes to party. I mean, honest to goodness, guys doesn`t everyone agree with me that college campuses would have a little trouble now? That there would be murders on every campus every freshman year?

BREMNER: Absolutely.

PINSKY: I am sure you agree with this.

BREMNER: Yes, I do. Every day is Halloween to the prosecutor Mignini. I mean that`s the way he looks at life. He was talking to a medium who talk to a priest that have dead for years for his theories. So, I mean his ritualistic slay by the she devil, Foxy Knoxy, that`s what we`re looking at. That`s what went on for four years thin this prosecution.

PINSKY: Many people believe Amanda - yes, it`s unbelievable. And many believe she was convicted for the first time around because of some bizarre behavior. I want to look at this.

She did do some funny stuff. A witness said, again, a witness, said she was doing cartwheels and splits in the police station. As you can see here, she was kissing her boyfriend and lingerie shopping with him the day police found Meredith murdered. Now, to me, I mean it is peculiar, hard to understand. And Ann, I hope we will get an explanation from her when she gets back to Seattle.

Paula, is there anything else we know about this behavior that day?

NEWTON: Well she did admitted that evening she was smoking marijuana. So, that might explain some of the behavior. But you know, you said it yourself, Drew, and you don`t want to excuse too much here because she was an adult and she should have been responsible for her actions, and believe me, she`s been held responsible for her actions, but she`s 20. I think you and I sending our kids out at that age would say yes, she`s a baby, she was naive. Her parents say the same thing. And that was a huge part of it and played a huge role in her bizarre behavior.

Also, though, it comes down to what is expected here in Italy and what is acceptable behavior. And many in Italy felt that she wasn`t mature and that she just didn`t react in the way one would expect. And that got her into a lot of trouble. But you have to remember she was convicted of defamation. She did accuse her former employer of murdering Meredith Kercher. I`m sure she will say she did it out of desperation, but it was a grave mistake, nonetheless.

PINSKY: It was also very cautionary tale for young people heading to other countries to live, assuming that the same freedom, it in the same judicial is going to protect them. It ain`t so. It is naive. It`s again naive to assume that. I am not prepared to call it reefer madness, sorry about that.

But I don`t think that particularly, specifically, fed into the behaviors we`re seeing here. Let`s take a look back with some of the evidence.

Knox and her boyfriend both have turned off their phones on the night of the murder, at 8:40 and then turned them back on again at 6:00 a.m. OK, whatever. Police said the break-in to Amanda`s apartment was staged from the inside. All right. And none of Knox`s DNA was found in the bedroom in which Kercher was stabbed to death. Knox`s DNA was on the hand of the presumed murder weapon, a kitchen knife; of she might be handling well before murder. And of course, Kercher`s DNA was on the blade. Raffaele`s DNA was found on the victim`s bra clasp, but that was something found long after the event and wasn`t really enough DNA to make a real connection. All flimsy evidence, right, Anne?

BREMNER: Absolutely. And of course, the knife and the bra clasp are the items thrown out by independent experts. That bra clasp was not collected for six weeks. I have the footage. I released years ago to the media of this what we called the forensics in this case. And it went from being white to black. It got so dirty kicked around, picked up, dropped, cross contaminated, unbelievable handling of evidence. They even crashed through a window of the house by mistake, the authorities, in trying to conduct you know a pristine search and of course the knife, there`s no DNA there. There`s no match whatsoever, so you`re left with zero evidence in this case, Doctor Drew.

Even her behavior, shopping for underwear when her house is a crime scene, going out for pizza, was probable cause according to the prosecutor, and kissing her boyfriend. You can see in the next frame of that famous picture of that kiss, they`re both looking despondent. But we never see that in the worldwide press in this kind of -

(CROSSTALK)

PINSKY: I hope we have a chance to talk to Amanda about that nonsense, and let her do some explaining, put it in context. And really tell other young people what she has learned. And of course, for whatever reason the Italians decided she was guilty, and the ruling caused a huge reaction. The judge actually had to tell people in the courtroom to pipe down.

Drew Griffin, there they are now. You were in Seattle. Let`s take a look at some reaction there. What is the mood tonight?

GRIFFIN: Well, I think Anne is right to know what the mood is of Amanda`s supporters. Obviously they`re elated this is over with. But I just want to get back to a couple of things when you talk about the behavior, Doctor Drew. I mean, she was being comforted outside a crime scene by her boyfriend in the supposed video where she`s romantically involved I guess? I don`t know. And anything I learned in this case, anything that is quoted by a witness and you don`t have a picture of or video of happening, I simply don`t believe it because so much has been taken out of context or quite simply fabricated by the tabloid press, particularly out of Britain, that I don`t believe a word of it. And like Anne just said, you know she wasn`t lingerie shopping, she was looking for a pair of underwear because her apartment was sealed off as a crime scene.

PINSKY: You know, again this whole thing is so cautionary. When I think that our judicial system isn`t functioning well, we can point at this case. And of course, let`s remember there is a murder victim in this case, despite the jubilation at two young people becoming free, Knox and her boyfriend there was someone whose life was extinguished.

Also tonight, riveting testimony in the Michael Jackson death trial as the defense spars with emergency room doctors who worked on Michael Jackson the day he died. You don`t want to miss this. Please stay with us. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J. MICHAEL FLANAGAN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: We`re not communicating very well, doctor. I asked you a question, 2:00 a.m., 5:00 a.m., 2 milligrams each time. Would you still expect that to be in his blood at 12:00?

UNITEDNTIFIED MALE: Beyond the area of expertise.

UNITEDNTIFIED MALE: If you know or not.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID WALGER, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Now, in your discussions with Conrad Murray, did he ever mention any other narcotics to you other than the Ativan or lorazepam?

NGUYEN: No. I specifically asked and his reply was negative.

WAGER: And he never mentioned propofol to you?

NGUYEN: Absolutely not.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: Tonight in the Michael Jackson death trial, propofol again, the surgical anesthetic that at least figured into the death of the pop icon. It takes center stage as the case unfolds in the Los Angeles courtroom.

Joining me now, Ryan Smith, host of "IN SESSION" on truTV. Can you give us the latest from down there?

RYAN SMITH, HOST, IN SESSION: Well, the big news was two things actually. First, Doctor Murray never mentioning propofol to not one but two doctors in the ER, trying to figure out what was in Michael Jackson`s system in order to save his life. The other thing at least that came out with the first doctor was that Doctor Murray wanted them to continue CPR. This was important for the defense because they wanted to show that even though this doctor, Doctor Rochelle Cooper called the time of death on the scene because from what the paramedics told her, Michael Jackson was already dead, at 12:57, Doctor Murray implored them to keep doing the 911. He wanted to resuscitate the patient. That`s part of what happened.

The other part, phone records. And the prosecution is trying to get into the time line, trying to show that Doctor Murray was on the phone in the minutes before Michael Jackson died, so they had all of these experts talk about the phone calls he was making, six or seven, some as long as 30 minutes long not to long before Jackson died.

PINSKY: Wow, 30 minute phone conversation. And Ryan, you mention this business about potentially him being pronounced in the field. Today, in emergency room cardiologist also testified that Doctor Murray did not want hospital staffs to give up on trying to save Jackson`s life regardless of being fruitless. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NGUYEN: Given the situation, Doctor Murray did ask me one thing, and he repeated the same request to Doctor Cruz that we not give up easily and try to save Mister Michael Jackson`s life.

UNITEDNTIFIED MALE: Is that what you were trying to do?

NGUYEN: Yes. Mister Jackson was under ventilator support at the time, but in Doctor Murray`s mind, if we called it quits at that time, it would be giving up easily.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: Ryan, do you think there was anyone in that emergency room that believed he could have been brought back?

SMITH: No, I don`t think there was anyone. And they all testified about how not only the paramedics on the scene didn`t feel a pulse, but they didn`t feel anything either. And the only person who really felt a pulse was Doctor Murray. Now, the defense really tried to hammer home this point because their point was always to try to show that Doctor Murray was thinking about his patient. That`s why he wanted the doctors to go further than anybody else would. And I guess when you think about it, Drew, when you have a doctor in an emergency room who is really trying to keep the patient alive, I think that`s what a lot of jurors relate to, the idea a doctor never wants to give up on his patient, is trying to keep him alive. And these are other doctors are saying he was already dead. We were just doing it because Doctor Murray insisted he saw signs of life.

PINSKY: Yes. I mean Ryan, we as physicians, there`s a time we know it is just beating up the individual. There`s really no possibility of coming back from certain situations, and it sounds like this was in everyone else`s mind clearly that, long before they even got to the emergency room. So we`re going to try to figure out why he kept insisting on it.

And I want people kept responding to that. Alright, thank you, Ryan.

Up next, is it possible Michael Jackson dosed himself and caused his own death? You`re going to want to hear that discussion. Please stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PINSKY: New details and bomb shell testimonies today in the Michael Jackson death trial.

DR. THAO NGUYEN, CARDIAC FELLOW, UCLA MEDICAL CENTER: He sounded desperate, and he looked devastated.

PINSKY: Is the prosecution sewing up an air tight case against Conrad Murray or did the defense sew seeds of doubt?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Twenty-five milligrams would not be a sufficient dose.

And later, I`m answering critical questions raised by today`s testimony. Should paramedics have been called sooner? Could something besides propofol have killed Michael Jackson? Is it even possible that he injected himself as the defense is claiming? I am separating true from false.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY (on-camera): A devastating scene inside the hospital where Michael Jackson was declared dead as an ER physician checks on the Jackson children. Now, one of the most impactful moments of today`s testimony came in the form of a question, simple question. Was 25 milligrams of propofol enough to put Michael Jackson to sleep? Or was the dosage so low that Jackson could have been potentially awake, alert, and dosed him. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL FLANAGAN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: So, is what you`re saying is that 25 milligrams is a very small amount of propofol to give a patient?

VOICE OF DR. RICHELLE COOPER, UCLA EMERGENCY ROOM PHYSICIAN: A 60 kilogram male, if I wanted to achieve sedation so that I can perform a painful procedure, 25 milligrams would not be a sufficient dose in most patients.

FLANAGAN: But it might be enough to put a person to sleep?

COOPER: I don`t suspect so, but I don`t know. I do not use the medication in those types of doses.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: I`m back with Ryan Smith. He`s the host of "In Session" on truTV. Also with me, criminal defense attorney, Mark Eiglarsh, and Dr. John Dombrowski, he`s an anesthesiologist and addiction specialist.

Dr. John Dombrowski, you, of course, understand the science of propofol. Now, while she`s saying that 25 milligrams of propofol or Diprivan would not be enough to put a 135-pound man to sleep, what about on top of all that, Ativan and Versed. I mean, in my world, you add a barbiturate to massive amounts of benzodiazepine, that`s going to do something, mostly make people not breathe.

DR. JOHN DOMBROWSKI, ANESTHESIOLOGIST: That`s exactly right. That`s why these medications are so incredibly dangerous. When you start mixing medications such as benzodiazepines, the Ativan, the sleeping aids that he ingested, and then on top of that, start infusing the medication of propofol, which is a powerful anesthetic agent to assist with sleep, you start being on very thin ice.

You not only are on thin ice, but you start jumping up and down on that ice. And that`s why you always need to watch that patient so cautiously.

PINSKY: And Dr. Dombrowski, you know, in my world, when I`m taken somebody off a benzo or barbiturate, we never co-prescribe those medication because they are so prone to cause people person when prescribed together to not breathe.

But my question to you is why is everybody making such a big deal about the propofol. Didn`t he get enough a lorazepam and midazolam to cause him not to sleep or at least to aspirate as well?

DOMBROWSKI: Well, I think your point as an addiction specialist, you can understand through Mr. Jackson`s unfortunate career that he had addiction issues with opiates, benzodiazepines, and you`re just changing one problem for another. I deal with this personally myself, so I understand how to manage this patient as an anesthesiologist.

But I think your point is that, you know, with the propofol, let me tell you what 25 milligrams looks like. It looks like this. It`s a very, very small amount. Now, this is not propofol. This is milk that I got from the house before I came to set. But just to give you the idea, this is a very small amount.

I understand that Dr. Murray got gallons of propofol. Figure out how much is in a gallon? It`s 3,800 milliliters. It`s incredibly in the amount that he was giving the patient. So, perhaps, this 25 milligrams that I have right here probably, you know, not all of it, and maybe, he`s not even really being, you know, perhaps, truthful with the amount that he`s saying he gave the patient.

And the other aspect is, too, that we`re finding out in testimony, is that he used the medication inside an IV bag where you have no real concept of how much you`re giving the patient.

PINSKY: Interesting. Now, the prosecution seemed to hammer the defense with ongoing witness testimony stating Conrad Murray did not reveal he injected Jackson with propofol, and by the way, he didn`t mention the midazolam also. We heard from an emergency room physician. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID WALGREN, PROSECUTOR: Can you read that out loud, what you noted on that day?

COOPER: There is no history of drug abuse by the patient as reported by Dr. Murray. The events surrounding the arrest reported by Dr. Murray was that he had placed an IV and given the patient 2 milligrams of lorazepam IV sometime earlier in the day. Dr.; Murray then administered a second 2 milligram IV dose of lorazepam and reports witnessing the patient arrest.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: Then we heard from an ER cardiologist. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WALGREN: Did you specifically ask Dr. Murray then what he had given Michael Jackson?

NGUYEN: I did. He replied four milligrams Ativan iv, meaning intravenously.

WALGREN: OK. And Ativan is another name for lorazepam?

NGUYEN: Exactly.

WALGREN: And did you follow up when he told you the four milligrams of lorazepam, did you follow up with any other questions?

NGUYEN: I asked whether there are, there were other narcotics or sedatives besides Ativan that was given.

WALGREN: OK. And what, if anything, did Dr. Murray say in response to that question about any other narcotics or sedatives?

NGUYEN: Nothing. Nothing else.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: Mark, Dr. Murray never tells the ER docs about Jackson`s substance use that he administered propofol or midazolam. Doesn`t that sound damaging to the defense or at least suggest a consciousness of guilt?

MARK EIGLARSH, CRIMINAL; DEFENSE ATTORNEY: It clearly does. The defense, however, is going to argue that, you know, it doesn`t matter. I mean, -- and the prosecution will argue it doesn`t matter as well because in the statute, if you look, it doesn`t say that the doctor had to have known that what they were doing was wrong.

You just analyze the actions and does it equal gross negligence, that`s what the jury is going to decide. It`s going to make it a lot easier for them to find him guilty if he did actions that shows consciousness of guilt.

PINSKY: And then, there is some negligence, by the way. It`s so, again, outside of the routine, doctors when they are on a scene and the paramedics show up, you`re supposed to tell them everything you know. And then, if you follow that case to the ER, you tell them everything you know.

Now, agreed, the reality was Michael Jackson was probably already dead, and it would not have made any difference in the resuscitation, but the behavior is sort of outside of norm. Now, there was a heated moment in the courtroom today when Dr. Murray`s defense attorneys sparred with the hospital cardiologist about uses of propofol outside of a hospital setting. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NGUYEN: I don`t use propofol when there`s no procedure being done.

FLANAGAN: OK, because you`ve never practiced outside a hospital, have you?

NGUYEN: I do practice outside of the hospital. I have outpatient clinic. I don`t use propofol in the outpatient setting. And even in the inpatient setting, I pointed out to you that I only have it used in the ICU or the procedure rooms.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: Yes, that -- Ryan, I got to tell you, lots of sparring this afternoon. The cardiologist, of course, wasn`t backing down. I`m a little aggravated by that line of questioning, I have to tell you, because it`s just not used outside of a hospital. And anyone who practices medicine knows that, but do you think the defense earned any points with the jury today?

RYAN SMITH, HOST, IN SESSION ON TRUTV: I think they did. And you know, I think it`s the way they`re handling this case that is really working well for them, because this witness is not rehabilitated after that cross examination, not that she said something wrong or the prosecution has ability to come in and clarify her statements, because there are limitations on that.

But when the statements are made, it makes the jury think that, well, maybe you can use propofol outside of a hospital. You also brought it up earlier, there was no real mention about other drugs being in Michael Jackson`s system. The defense got the witnesses took focus on, well, was that enough propofol to put him out. There was no talk of these other drugs.

So, I think one of the problems the prosecution is struggling with right now is they`re eliciting testimony. The defense is hammering these witnesses on cross examination, and the jury is getting the defense picture. That picture of well, maybe this doctor doesn`t know how to use propofol outside of a hospital setting.

Not necessarily that no one should do it. And that`s tough for the prosecution, but they got to get that in front of the juror somehow.

PINSKY: I would think it would be pretty easy to get in front of them. Now, this weekend, Michael Jackson`s children attended the premier of a Cirque De Soleil show featuring their father`s music, and a tribute concert for Michael Jackson is planned for October 8th in Wales.

Last question Ryan to you, the timing of this all is, apparently, causing a rift in the Jackson family. Can you tell us a little bit about that?

SMITH: Yes, it is. You know, the troubling thing here is the trial was originally supposed to happen in March. They started planning this concert not too long after that, and then it got moved to around October. So, Jermaine and others in the family, they didn`t like the fact that they were going to do this concert series while the trial was going on.

They thought it was inappropriate. They thought it wasn`t the right time. But when you think about the timing of it, had the trial happened in March, there wouldn`t be a clash in these two. So, that`s part of what`s going on.

The other part is, I think, Katherine Jackson is trying to get the children away from this trial, and getting them out of the country, getting them focused on their father`s music, on these concerts, on the positive sides of his life, I think, is something that Katherine is thinking of, well, get these kids away from this trial and what`s going on in this courtroom.

So, you can understand both sides, but it`s more because of the trial schedule that forced the concert series to coincide with the trial.

PINSKY: Thank you, Ryan. Thank you, Mark and Dr. Dombrowski.

Coming up, week two is under way in the Michael Jackson death trial. How is the evidence stacking up? When we come back, I`m going to play a little game called true or false as we breakdown Dr. Murray`s claims.

And later, we`re going to talk to my jury and get their reaction of the case, so far. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FLANAGAN: So, Ativan is very effective for insomnia?

NGUYEN: I don`t --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you have expertise in that area?

NGUYEN: I don`t typically use sedatives, narcotics to treat insomnia, sir. I use them for procedures. Yes. Like to put in a line, effective to induce sleep for us to finish our procedures, yes, it is.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: Tonight, we`re reporting on the explosive testimony today in the Michael Jackson death trial. Dr. Conrad Murray faces up to four years for involuntary manslaughter. Now, has Murray displayed consciousness of guilt? Today, doctors testified that Murray told them he only gave Jackson the sedative lorazepam and that he never mentioned midazolam or propofol, a lot of attention on propofol.

Also, questions about whether or not the resuscitation should have continued. He was pronounced dead at 2:26 p.m. at the UCLA Medical Center. Now, before that, though, there was calls from the paramedics in the field maybe to call it in. Listen to this actual transmission from the ambulance when there was some initial declaration by the paramedics that death should be called.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If there`s nothing further, we`re going to call it here. Time of death is 12:57 from our end here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The doctor here wants to definitely transfer. Be aware this is a high profile VIP, and we`ll be there in about ten minutes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: All right. Now, I`m always talking about why people do what they do and helping people understand some of these complex medical situations, and in that situation when there`s a paramedic ready to call it and a cardiologist is there, he can supersede and say, no, we`re going to transfer and keep this thing going. Tonight, though, I want to play a game called true or false and makes sense of what`s going on in this trial.

Straight to my expert panel, I`m back with Ryan Smith. He`s host of "In Session" on truTV, and against visited by Dr. John Dombrowski who is an anesthesiologist and addiction specialist.

Dr. Dombrowski, I want to start with you. If Dr. Murray omitted information about propofol, which it seems like he did, wouldn`t he have thought to himself, you know, we get to autopsy, they`re going to find out what I gave him? True?

DOMBROWSKI: I think that is true. I mean, any time you care for a patient, delivering any care, it`s important that I know about history, I do a physical, and I know what the patient`s taking, because that means vital information to me, whether -- especially when you pass off that care to another provider such as an ER physician.

PINSKY: And as I said earlier, Dr. Dombrowski, you know, it was just a standard of care when somebody hands off, you tell them everything you know. You give them a list of medications. We`ve all done that thousands of times. It seems, well, it`s negligent not to do that, is it not? True?

DOMBROWSKI: Well, I can`t speak to all of the, you know, facts of the case, but in general, as you`re talking about just physician to physician, we`ve handed off cases a lot of times. Anesthesiologists do it all the time, whether going to the PACU, the post anesthesia care unit, picking up a patient. We tell what we`ve given the patient and then we pass that care off to the nurse and the care is there from, you know, from that point on out.

PINSKY: Ryan to you, true or false. Dr. Murray was on the phone with his former girlfriend when he realized Michael Jackson was in dire shape. Is that true?

SMITH: That`s true. I want to give you a slight caveat. I know I want to give you a straight answer, but I`ll tell you what I know. At 12:30 or so, she says this is Sunday ending (ph). She says that she was on the phone with Conrad Murray. They were having a talk. All of a sudden, she hears a loud noise in the background, then coughing, then Murray immediately drops of the phone.

Now, you put that in the timeframe, paramedics calling the time of death at 12:57. There was time between when they were called. It just sounds like he was on the phone with this woman at the time of death, but her testimony is coming up. So, we`ll learn more about actually when they were on the phone.

PINSKY: Wow. That one sounds bad. Ryan, true or false, Dr. Murray tried to collects vials from Michael Jackson`s nightstand before he called 911. Again, consciousness of guilt. True or false?

SMITH: That`s absolutely true. And that`s because Alberto Alvarez was in the bedroom with him and said that he was being directed by Conrad Murray to collect things all over the ground, and this was before 911 was even called. Now, the defense has said that Dr. Murray thought 911 was already being called.

But your question is the real point here. And in that case, that`s what he was doing. He was gathering up those vials, and that`s uncontroverted at this point. That`s clear in the testimony.

PINSKY: And I`m hoping by playing this little game, we`re sort of clarifying a pretty complex situation for people. So, I`m going to go to Dr. Dombrowski now as his turn. Two doses of Ativan, two milligrams each dose of midazolam along with 25 milligrams of propofol is more than sufficient to cause Michael Jackson to stop breathing.

DOMBROWSKI: Again, I can`t really speak to that number because, again, it`s just a number. And we understand that Mr. Jacksons had exposure to previous medications, a lot of them, and he required a lot of medications to get to a level of sedation because he built up tolerance.

This is fairly true. But, obviously, if you put in benzodiazepines with propofol, yes, you will have an apnic, not breathing patient. That`s the world of physician to intervene and correct that.

PINSKY: Dr. Dombrowski, I`m going to step outside my game for just a quick second and just get your opinion on this idea that Michael Jackson drank the propofol. Is there any merit to that idea that he ingested it through his gastrointestinal tract?

DOMBROWSKI: I never heard of that. And if that were the case, it wouldn`t work that way. I mean, it can only work when given it`s given intravenously. It does not work through the, you know, GI system. I`ve never even heard of it that way.

PINSKY: Well, me either. I`ve been wanting to ask somebody that of your sort of training. To me, it`s just -- much was made of that at one time and that seems like he might as well have drank milk, because I don`t see that functioning really at all unless some toxicologist out there can tell me otherwise.

DOMBROWSKI: Again, in the practice that we have, that`s never the way to administer that medication. It`s only effective intravenously. Again, I can`t speak to it, but I`ve never heard of that even having any effect.

PINSKY: Finally another true or false for you Dr. Dombrowski. Propofol is not a drug that is used outside of a hospital setting. We saw the defense arguing with the cardiologist just sort of trying to focus (ph) in that idea. When I heard that this was -- that propofol was used A. for sleep, and B, outside of a hospital, you might as well told me an asteroid hit Wisconsin.

DOMBROWSKI: Right. I mean, to their point, I mean, outside the hospital, what is that definition of hospital, an ambulatory surgical center. Perhaps, the physicians office for sedation for cosmetic surgery or dental procedures, things like that, but there will be attendance of an anesthesiologist in the care of that patient. And to your point, there`s never ever a case where it`s done in a home setting to assist sleep.

PINSKY: Thank you, guys, Dr. Dombrowski and Ryan, of course.

And today, emergency room doctors testified that not knowing what Murray did or not did, they`re not give Michael Jackson before death actually made no difference, and I think that`s actually true, because as we are discussing, probably, he was already gone by the time he got to the emergency room. But we`re going to meet an emergency room nurse next who was one of my jurors, so to speak, to help us understand really what that all meant and why it made no difference.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PINSKY: What a scene in Italy earlier today. Amanda Knox is free. Get the very latest at the top of the hour on Joy Behar. That is 10:00 p.m. eastern.

Much of today`s testimony in the Michael Jackson death trial came from Dr. Nguyen, a UCLA cardiologist who assisted in the efforts to resuscitate Jackson. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NGUYEN: Even before the balloon pump placement, we made an agreement with Dr. Murray that this would be the last attempted procedure on Mr. Jackson. We`d like to prepare Dr. Murray mentally to accept the fact that Mr. Jackson could not be rescued and would allow Mr. Jackson to depart in peace and with dignity.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PINSKY: Very interesting clip. Tonight, my juror is an emergency room nurse. Please welcome Holly Ridings. And Holly, you know, one thing that I admire about nursing is how diligent the profession is at teaching. So, you and I need to tonight do a little teaching for my audience. And how do we help the average person understand what that cardiologist was talking about?

You and I know exactly what she meant, and that they probably should have called this resuscitation in the field. Do you have a way of explaining that? It`s almost like Dr. Murray was a family member that they were trying to explain no, it`s passed. There`s no point. This is futile. Do you agree with that, Holly?

HOLLY RIDINGS, EMERGENCY ROOM NURSE, WAS IN COURT FRIDAY: Oh, I`m sorry, I wasn`t getting the first part. Yes. I do agree that they probably should have called it. And not gone on with the balloon pump.

PINSKY: What I was saying was how do we make the average person understand this? I mean, you and I understand what a balloon pump. And a balloon pump is a terribly aggressive procedure. It`s coming now in hours into this resuscitation attempt. Dr. Murray is behaving like a distraught family member who`s in denial about what`s happening. Can you communicate to my audience a way of helping from the perspective of an ER nurse, what was going on there?

RIDINGS: Well, in my opinion, what was going on was Dr. Murray wanted everything to be done. He knew that Michael Jackson was dead, but by putting it off on the ER doctors and having them do just one more thing, he thought that would take the pressure off of him. That`s my opinion.

PINSKY: So, more people would be sort of pulled into the vortex of this resuscitation attempt.

RIDINGS: Exactly. Like, you know, there was one more thing, and you know, giving the family more hope, because I`m sure they had someone going in and out and reporting to the family what was going on as well.

PINSKY: Holly, I appreciate you coming in. I hope we`ll get to talk to you again, because I think it`s an important perspective that you have, and I do want to share that with my viewers.

Now, before I go, I want to say one thing I mentioned last week and it bears repeating. Michael Jackson is not on trial here. His past is not on trial. His behavior is not on trial. His character is not on trial. Yes, he may have had some issues and behaved in a way that confused us, but the doctor, the physician is on trial here.

And indeed, the medical profession, or at least, that part that does disservice to situations like this. Our job as physicians is to take care of our patients. That didn`t happen in this case. We did him a disservice and that is the issue.

I want to thank you all for watching. We`ll see you next time.

END