Return to Transcripts main page


Defense Rests

Aired November 1, 2011 - 21:00   ET


DR. DREW PINSKY, HOST: Tonight, the defense rests. What are the chances Conrad Murray is found not guilty in the death of Michael Jackson? Should the defendant have testified?

Plus, Kim K scandal. Will she give the bling back and what will her ex going to get? Is it time to stop keeping up with the Kardashians? Let`s figure this out.

Good evening. And you see, we are live tonight from downtown Los Angeles. That is the city hall that I love referring to.

We have an unbelievable murder for hire story coming up. And later Kim KardaShian`s mom will tell us what Kim will do with all those lovely wedding presents.

But first tonight, the Conrad Murray defense has rested its case. And with that, the great mystery of whether Conrad Murray would take the stand in his own defense was answered. Watch this.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE JUDGE: You have seen and heard all of the evidence in this case.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: Both sides rest their case. Conrad Murray will not testify.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: Crucial milestone in the Michael Jackson death trial. Testimony is finished. All the evidence is in. So has Doctor Conrad Murray`s defense team done their job?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Doctor White has been at the center of this trial. He has taken a lot of criticism. The judge`s held him in contempt. He has been fined $1,000.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This witness was virtually destroyed by the prosecutions.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is that your testimony that again was a detail that was overlooked?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was obviously overlooked.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, it`s not obviously. It also could also be a lie.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The defense view is unreasonable based on the cross examination of Doctor White.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And now it is the lawyers` last chance to make their argument in front of this jury.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do they have to put Michael Jackson on trial?


PINSKY: Was this a critical mistake or perhaps a last ditch life- saving move by Murray and his defense team.

Join me to discuss this, Loni Coombs, who is an attorney and former prosecutor and current criminal defense attorney, Mark Eiglarsh.

And first I want to turn to my friend who is kind enough to sit in for me the past few weeks from "In Session," host, Ryan Smith.

Ryan, please give us the latest.

RYAN SMITH, HOST, IN SESSION: Well, the big deal today, would Conrad Murray testify? I think one of the biggest problems was he waited so long. So, yesterday when the judge, when he told the judge he needed another day, the judge was taken aback, a little stunned because I think everybody thought he wasn`t going to testify but he came up today and said he wouldn`t.

Now, Doctor White wrapped up his testimony. Doctor Shafer who is the prosecutor`s expert on propofol, took the stand, thought Michael Jackson could have more than the big bottle of propofol that went right into his arm and to his bloodstream eventually killing him, leading more credence to the theory that Doctor Murray was the one who caused his death. And now, it is about summation. It`s all about those closing arguments, banging home those final points is to why the Doctor Murray is not guilty or why should be convicted.

PINSKY: So Ryan, let me understand this. It was Doctor Murray equivocating on whether or not he would take the stand or was his team? He, himself?

SMITH: Well, it seemed like he, himself. Because his lawyers seemed to make it clear from the beginning they didn`t want him to testify. He even at one point --

PINSKY: He stepped up, I want to testify, the defense has to allow him.

SMITH: They have to allow him. But the question is who wanted him to, who didn`t want him to. At the very beginning of the trial, Michael Flanagan said he does not need to testify. He is not going to take the stand. But this seems to be like maybe he had thought he might to?

PINSKY: Not only the idea did he need to testify, that police interrogation was de facto him on the stand. And wasn`t that enough nonsense to put him I mean to convince the defense team that he could get himself in a lot of trouble?

SMITH: No, because he had so many inconsistencies in the story, somebody had to explain it. And not only that. Doctor White was getting on the stand saying in many ways he did dip below the standard of care which is what the case was about.

PINSKY: Distinguishing between serious and egregious, whatever it was, it was bad. Also I thought Doctor White sort of caved under cross, don`t you think?

SMITH: He really did. And this prosecutor, Drew, I got to tell you, was so skilled. Took him to task on every single opinion, and really drove home the point that on Doctor Murray`s tape, even if you base it on everything he said, he could be lying, he admitted that. Also would have called 911 sooner. Wouldn`t have ever administered propofol at home. Everything the prosecution wanted, he ended up saying.

PINSKY: I just in my own mind wonder what the defense team told Doctor White as he left the courtroom that day, get out of here, scram.

LONI COOMBS, ATTORNEY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: I think they found him looking for his own taxi on the way out. I think that`s probably -

PINSKY: I mean if he had been your defense witness, wouldn`t you be upset?

COOMBS: He ended up being a prosecution witness at the end, yes.

PINSKY: And there`s a lot of testimony to see the show Doctor Murray doing all the wrong things the day Michael Jackson died. This is from the police interrogation tape. I love this interrogation tape. He says so many things in this tape that were so damning. List tone this.


CONRAD MURRAY, DEPENDANT, MICHAEL JACKSON`S DEATH TRIAL: I did not want him to -- I couldn`t ask him at that time to call 911 because he would want to know what it was about. I have a patient that needs help and I`m trying to assist, and I`m trying to do it the best I can to try to get help.


PINSKY: So Loni, that by itself is bad enough. If he had gotten on the stand and prosecutor had a chance to sort of address these particular statements with him, it would have been a disaster.

COOMBS: Absolutely. They would have crucified him. And you look what David Walgren did with Doctor White. And Conrad Murray, he was stuck with what he already said in that statement. To try to do anything else, he would be digging a hole. And this time he is having a tough attorney examine him. I mean in the police interrogation they let him say what he wanted to say. This time he`d be put on the spot and every single one of those points.

PINSKY: Now Mark, why is it more people who say they`re innocent you don`t take the stand you know what I Mean? You said Murray would have help if he`d been in the stand? Is that your opinion?

MARK EIGLARSH, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: No. He wouldn`t and he would be home.

PINSKY: OK. All right.


EIGLARSH: He has already advanced his interest with a statement given without cross examination, so he did the best that he could at his level of awareness at that moment. Anything more, he would have looked really poor in front of this jury, so no. I advise my clients, even the innocent ones, you know, just keep quiet, let`s make sure they can prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. And Drew, I wouldn`t go running to the victory party just yet. There are definitely plenty of reasons why this jury, if they wanted to, could find the guy not guilty, even though I don`t personally find the same.

PINSKY: I absolutely agree with you. I mean it`s a question between is it gross negligence versus just sort of sub standard care. Is it manslaughter or just bad medical practice?

But Mark, one of the things that always intrigued me I don`t think I had a chance to ask this question of you, maybe I have, but the interrogation report. If you had been the attorney and the police asked for this interrogation report, would you have allowed Doctor Murray if he were your client to do what he did there or even any part of that?

EIGLARSH: Maybe, and I`ll tell you why. I would have called the detective. I would ask listen, are you going to be doing my client, that`s a term we use, are you going to be arresting him. Are you going to? If you are, then at least give us a shot. You have got nothing to lose.

So, you sit down and you craft exactly how you want this to go down. I don`t necessarily agree with defense lawyers who Monday morning quarter back, I would never have done that. That`s bull. The reality is if you know your client is going to be arrested and there`s a chance you can advance this theory which now replaces him having to testify and subject himself to Walgren`s brutal effective cross examination, then I think they did the right thing arguably.

PINSKY: Well Mark, my Monday morning quarterback is in the room with me. We, sort of having a reaction on what you are saying. Let me just put a pose it to both you this way.

My sense is that he convinced his attorney that he had done the right thing. He really believes he did the right thing, and everything he said in the interrogation as a physician looking at it proves to me he was way over his head, didn`t know what he was doing. Until Michael died, then he started knew what he was doing. But he dug a deep grave, dug a deep hole with that.

COOMBS: I agree. And I think perhaps his defense attorneys didn`t understand quite the level of how much Doctor Murray did incorrectly, but I agree with Mark. It is always good to be able to get a statement in front of the jury. Because the defense attorneys can now stand up and say our client went in and talked to the detectives. He had nothing to hide, without having to worry about cross examination on the stand. They have that statement there.

SMITH: But here is the thing. His lawyer could have gone down, met with police, said you know what, we need to talk with Doctor Murray a little bit further and later go down, but that gives the lawyer the chance to get a sense of what the police are going for.

At this point, they believe that they can get Doctor Murray away from any charges on any of this, so they brought him down there I think to really kind a let him do exactly what you say, hey, he didn`t do anything wrong, he`s just talking to you.

Why do that with Murray first? Remember, you can meet with the police, they can call later and say, hey you know what, we need to meet with Conrad Murray and then you make that decision, but they didn`t even know what they were getting into at that point.

PINSKY: Guys, I have to take a break. Go to for all the latest about any story you`re interested in. It`s our new Web site. And it`s very, very good. Wrote an article today and see about the KardaShians.

Next, the high points and low points for the defense and prosecution. What do both sides have to do in their closing arguments to sway these jurors?


DAVID WALGREN, PROSECUTOR: If Michael Jackson had come to you, Doctor White, and indicated that he would like to hire you to administer propofol to him to put him to sleep each night in his bedroom, would you do it?

DOCTOR PAUL WHITE, ANESTHESIOLOGIST: Absolutely not. That would be a job that I would never consider accepting.




WHITE: I can`t comment. I`ll comment after the trial.

CROWD: Justice for Michael!

WHITE: Until the trial is over, I won`t comment. I`m just trying to find a cab.


PINSKY: Wow. Justice for Michael, the big story tonight. The defense, they were at the city hall again, such a beautiful shot. The way we come in and out of that every segment, can`t get over how beautiful the shot is.

So, as long as we are down here across the court house, we are going to let you see what downtown Los Angeles looks like.

The defense in Doctor Conrad Murray`s trial rests without Conrad Murray taking the stand.

Joining us now, Doctor John Dombrowski who is anesthesiologist and medical director of the Washington Pain Center.

Doctor Dombrowski, first, I`ll back out to you. I really think that, I mentioned this in the previous segment that Doctor Murray convinced himself and his attorneys before they had a chance to think better of it, convinced himself and them that he really was doing everything right. Do you agree with me on that?

DOCTOR JOHN DOMBROWSKI, MEDICAL DIRECTOR, THE WASHINGTON PAIN CENTER: Well, of course. Any physician that cares for a patient has to believe in their heart and their mind that they`re doing the right thing for the patient. Unfortunately, what can kind of happen like in this scenario, he just was led down the wrong path because the propofol looked so simple to use, we use it all the time, but he didn`t really appreciate the tragedy that could lay with that medication. And that was the problem. He took the responsibility. He took the right to use that medication but didn`t take that responsibility. He just thought anyone could do it. And he truly believed that in his heart he could handle it.

PINSKY: Right. Doctor Dombrowski, I was telling Loni and Ryan here in the room that, as a cardiologist, I could see how he could get cavalier because they using that medication for cardiac aversion and cardiac procedures. You know they keep people out for a couple minutes, they bring them up, they lighten them with the propofol. They don`t really understand the complexities that what the anesthesiologist would appreciate it.

DOMBROWSKI: Well, that`s true I mean. And we as anesthesiologists I mean sometimes we even train other physicians that are not anesthesiologists how to use this medication. But we always have to train them how to rescue the patient.

One thing that always intrigued me about this case, what`s the antidote for propofol? That`s the physician who can manage the patient, to breathe for the patient, manage the patient`s airway so they can survive until the propofol basically wears off the patient. They kind a come to again.

PINSKY: Right. So, I want to be sure the audience heard what you said. For the midazolam and lorazepam, the antidote is the flopazdoen, which Doctor Murray gave appropriately. But the antidote for the propofol was really the failure of his role as a physician because he was outside the room. The antidote was gone, right?

DOMBROWSKI: That`s exactly right. That`s the reason you always must be in attendance for the patient. You never know when you give a dose of propofol. He gave himself the dose, Doctor Murray gave the dose, somebody gave the dose. You always have to be attendant with this type of medication. Because it is such a powerful anesthetic agent. It does a wonderful job, but you have to make sure no harm comes to the patient.

PINSKY: Now, Loni and Ryan, here we are as discussing some of the nuances of the medical issues. But you were saying to me that you think some of that may go over the jury and really what is going to determine Doctor Murray`s fate on these closing arguments.

SMITH: Yes. These closing arguments are about three words. Keep it simple. Very, very simple. And the discussion that you and Doctor Dombrowski just had, that needs to be channeled into the prosecution`s closing argument because I have to tell you guys, I don`t always hear that when I hear the testimony.

This was heavily dense, medical testimony, very difficult to understand at times. You have two experts, both very smart, maybe contradicting each other in many ways. It has to be explained in a simple way so people understand. Make it real for them.

COOMBS: That`s what the closing arguments supports, where they can make it human, making it emotional. Be passionate, but really make it simple like what does an anesthesiologist do, they sit by the patient and watch their chest go up and down until they come back to, to make sure that they live through it. And that`s what Doctor Murray didn`t do. He abandoned him. He left him. And that`s how he failed the standard of care.

PINSKY: But by the same token, I imagine the defense will try to pull on the cords of emotion with like for instance this one moment you may recall, he had a friend, a patient I guess, Ruby. Watch this.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you think Doctor Murray`s greedy?



MOSLEY: No. If this man had been greedy, he never would have come to an area, a community of acreage home, 75 percent of them poor.


PINSKY: So Loni, there`s a lot of character testimony like this.


PINSKY: On the part of the defense. Is that what they`re going to grand stand on?

COOMBS: Absolutely. They are going to hit that hole. They are going to make Conrad Murray look like a human being, a loving, caring doctor. And the prosecution has to hit that hard and say maybe for Ruby, he was. But in this situation, on this night, with Michael Jackson, he didn`t do that. He wasn`t paying attention. He was off on the phone. He was doing other things.

And look at his behavior afterwards. When he saw that Michael Jackson is in on trouble, did he call 911? Did he be honest about the propofol?

All of the things he did afterwards to show that contraceptive guilt, he knew what he did, it was reckless and wrong.

PINSKY: I didn`t hear them discussed consciousness of quilt in anytime during the trial. I don`t recall it anyway. Is that what we are going to hear about in the closing argument?

COOMBS: I think you will.

SMITH: There were suggestions of that. But you know from the defense side, they are going to talk about Michael Jackson being addicted. They are going to try to get that Demerol. They want to show that Michael Jackson could have done this to himself. That is where they can lie.

PINSKY: So, they are going to put it on the patient.


PINSKY: So, Doctor Dombrowski, let`s go back to you and I here as doctors, is it fair to lay this at - I mean you want to go that all this time and all the time, and the exclude things that you know sometimes you want - don`t see my whole responsible for the recovery. I don`t hold them responsible for their lying and the story. They can do is to accept when they are in the disease.

Is it for anyone to lie this at the foot of Michael Jackson?

DOMBROWSKI: I mean it`s very unfortunately very convenient to have your testimony against a person who is dead. They cannot say no, that`s not what had happen. That`s very tragic. At the end of the day, the patient of physician never the leaves the patient, never. That`s the reason he ended up the way that the he did. These are easily restroville (ph) situation.

The patient stops breathing, this is easily fixable even a cardiologist, anyone can do this. New once interns can do this. It`s managing someone`s airway, breathing in circulation. This is recoverable but you have to be there to that.

PINSKY: Yes, until you hit that point of no return. And the point I made looking at his interrogation with the police, that interview with the police, he made a valued attempt to resuscitation but it was just too late.

So, my question to both of you guys is, what does defense need to do to get out from all of this? Is there something that you either of you think they could do to bring this to a close in a way that`s good for Conrad Murray.

SMITH: Absolutely. They have to get this jury to believe that Michael Jackson was addicted to drugs, that these pain killer, excuse me, or Demerol or whatever it was, and that he clenched that needle into himself and that was caused the death.

PINSKY: Doctor Murray left it at the bedside.

SMITH: Doesn`t matter. He then would be the cause of his death. That`s what they`re going to say, except for foreseability.

PINSKY: It may not matter. I am out of time.


PINSKY: Thank you for joining me. Thank you Ryan. Thank you Loni. Doctor Dombrowski, thanks again for joining me. Check out the HLN 10 on Right now, the Murray trial is number four.

Next, this is really interesting. We have a few minutes to dig into it but it a sordid love triangle that turned into a murder for hire plot. You want to see this. Stay with us.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Here is the man, on the witness stand, that she in fact did hire Damian Flores to kill Yvonne Stern.




YVONNE STERN, TARGET IN MURDER FOR HIRE PLOT: I love my husband. I believe in him wholeheartedly, of his innocence. He had nothing to do with this. We are victims of a fatal attraction.


PINSKY: There`s that beautiful shot again. But I`m listening to the wife of Houston attorney Jeffrey Stern, her name is Yvonne Stern, standing by her man. I`m always amazed when men misbehave and women stand by their man and blame the other woman. It`s her fault, the fatal attraction. It nothing to do with him in his affair.

Now, Jeffrey has been indicted, that`s her husband, has been indicted on solicitation of murder charges against his wife, but she believes he`s innocent. It is her, she`s the problem. Jeffrey did have an affair with a woman by the name Michelle Geyser, and Michelle has admitted to hiring a hit man to kill Yvonne. This is craziness.

In fact, Michelle testified today in the murder trial of Damian Flores who she had paid thousands of dollars to kill Yvonne. Now, is this a love triangle turn deadly or as Yvonne, the wife attorney`s suggesting a case of fatal attraction.

On the phone, Houston chronicle reporter Brian Rogers. You were in court today, Brian, can you bring us up to date?

BRIAN ROGERS, REPORTER, HOUSTON CHRONICLE (via telephone): Sure. Today`s testimony was centered on Michelle Geyser. Now, she is the former mistress of the attorney Jeffrey Stern, and said she put together not one but two murder for hire schemes to kill Yvonne Stern.

Now, there`s a plot included a drive-by shooting and then man who rang her doorbell at the dinner hour and shot through a glass door at her and her son, now this third case we`re hearing about now, this is Damien Flores, and he`s accused of waiting in her parking garage for her, middle of the morning, 10:30 in the morning, as she came to get in the car charging her with a gun and ultimately shooting her in the stomach.

Now, she survived. And now, Michelle Geyser is saying that she put all these plots together. Now, we didn`t hear anything about --

PINSKY: She put - wait Brian, yes, that`s my question. She put these together on behalf of the attorney of Jeffrey? Or she put it on her own as part of some psychotic stalking.

ROGERS: That`s a great question. We don`t know the answer. We know Jeffrey Stern has been indicted. He is charged with solicitation of capital murder, but there was no testimony today that he was connected in any way of this. It was like he wasn`t even involved. So prosecutors are probably going to wait to show that evidence when he goes to trial, which is scheduled early next year.

PINSKY: So the question is was Jeffrey also involved in hiring a hit man to kill his wife. That`s really the question that`s out there. Damian Flores, roll the prompter please for me, I could read the rest. OK. Attorney doesn`t think so. Take a look at this.


SAM CAMMACK, DAMIAN FLORES` DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I don`t represent Jeffrey Stern. I think Michelle Geyser, she is the sole perpetrator in the whole murder for hire plot.


PINSKY: Now, Brian, why is Damian Flores` attorney defending Jeffrey Stern?

ROGERS: I think more than anything, he`s just trying to make sure that jurors and whoever believe Michelle Geyser, acted alone and did all these things. He wants to persuade people that Damian Flores isn`t involved with this at all, that Michelle Geyser was looking at a life sentence for solicitation of capital murder and just threw Damian Flores` name out there, that`s what he`s trying to prove.

PINSKY: Wow. OK. Listen, Brian, thank you for joining us. I`ll have you back, no doubt. Tune in tomorrow night. We`ll have much more on this story. This is crazy. I am interested and try to figure out why people do what they do. We have a lot to figure on this one.

Now, why was a pregnant mom busted for a sandwich? Answer on our Web site, Check it out. Stay with us.


PINSKY (voice-over): Coming up, the Kardashian divorce fallout after that lavish wedding on E! What happens to the family empire now? And what about us (ph)? Will Kim and Kris` split cause a public backlash?

And next, I`ve got a one-on-one interview with the paparazzo who took the last known photo of Michael Jackson.


PINSKY (on-camera): That`s right. His name is Ben Evenstad, and this is an interesting interview. I spoke with him about how he got the picture and how it`s still paying off for him years later. Want to know more about the day Michael Jackson died, well, just watch this.


PINSKY: Before the tragedy, what was it like here?

BEN EVENSTAD, NATIONAL PHOTO GROUP: In the months before he passed away, there would often times be as many as 10 to 15 fans.

PINSKY: Standing right here?

EVENSTAD: They would park there, then, when Michael would come out, they would come up, mostly females from Europe, Japan, and Michael was incredibly gracious. He would always stop, roll down the window, and visit with them. Take any letters or gifts that they had.

And then, they would follow to wherever Michael went. In the years before his death, he wasn`t the huge pop icon he became the day after he died.

PINSKY: So, when you were following him before his death as a paparazzo, it was more because of his peculiarities and his unusual behavior.

EVENSTAD: Made for great photos, and his photos didn`t even generally sell that well in the U.S. In Europe, we did very well. So, his daily visits to the dermatologists, when he would go shopping at night sometimes, those pictures always did well for us.

PINSKY: So, when you would come here, you would position one of your photographers here, what kinds of stuff were you looking for before all the tragedy?

EVENSTAD: Well, it became very consistent by the end. A lot of rehearsals. And when he went to rehearsal, there was nothing for us to get. They would, you know, drive underneath at the forum when he was rehearsing there. But we were look either for, you know, a doctor`s visit, because we could always get pictures there or a shopping trip. Shopping was the best.

PINSKY: But you weren`t looking for any weird behavior inside the gates? I mean, you expect that.

EVENSTAD: Correct.

PINSKY: He was rehearsing for how long? How long was he going in and out of these gates rehearsing?

EVENSTAD: Well, that started about -- I would say about five to six months.

PINSKY: Five to six months. They`re making so much out of the few days before he passed away, him being in good shape. And he`d been rehearsing for quite some time.

EVENSTAD: A long time. It started out at a studio in Burbank. They eventually went to the forum in Englewood, and then, eventually, to Staples Center when they -- that`s where they were filming --

PINSKY: So, this was a daily thing he would do?

EVENSTAD: Almost daily.

PINSKY: What time of day would he leave to go to rehearsal?

EVENSTAD: Generally in the afternoon, 1:00, 2:00, 3:00 p.m.

PINSKY: Was the place completely silent until then?

EVENSTAD: Well, if he was going to, you know, the doctor`s office, that would generally happen late morning.

PINSKY: Late (ph) in the morning.


PINSKY: And then, at night, you said, I`ve heard that sometimes he could be heard rehearsing in here?


PINSKY: And you said he`d go shopping at night. So, he was a night owl. He`d stay up late.

EVENSTAD: Oh, yes.

PINSKY: No matter what.

EVENSTAD: And we -- I had a conversation with one of the members of the security staff who indicated there were many times where they took him out where nobody was here, meaning very, very late at night.

PINSKY: Three in the morning.


PINSKY: OK. So, already for months, this sleep problem had been well established. They were having to adjust his rehearsal schedule around that, obviously, and he was known for being up late at night.


PINSKY: And then, Murray, just so I get put this timeline together, he`d been rehearsing five or six months. Murray had been here for a few months giving him who knows what. Were there trips to the pharmacy? Did you follow Murray to the pharmacy?

EVENSTAD: We would follow the security staff, because a lot of times, they would go and do the advance work. They were going to go to a store, movie theater. So, we wanted to have an idea of what Michael was going do later. And often times, they would go to pharmacies, pick up various things.

PINSKY: Did you guys ever try to figure out what they were picking up?

EVENSTAD: They were smart enough to not let that picture out.

PINSKY: So, Ben, you were actually here that fateful day. Where were you exactly?

EVENSTAD: So, one of my photographers was here posted early in the morning. Shortly afternoon, he saw the ambulance arrive, also with the fire truck that parked outside, the ambulance went inside. He called and alerted me that there`s an ambulance at the house. At that time, we had no idea, that could be anything.

PINSKY: Did you come over here at that point?

EVENSTAD: I came right away. I got here in about ten minutes.

PINSKY: What did you see?

EVENSTAD: I saw the fire truck outside. There was one fireman outside going to directing traffic, and then, you could see through the gate, the ambulance was inside with a number of, you know, ambulance technicians. And the gate kept opening and closing. Security was letting the help out. They kind of sent everyone away.

PINSKY: And did you try to get in?

EVENSTAD: We did not try to get in.

PINSKY: What did you think was going on? Were you aware that something was seriously wrong?

EVENSTAD: So, again, at first, we thought maybe one of the kids is sick, maybe one of the staff is sick. Through the fire truck that was outside, we could actually see the computer monitor, and it said 50-year- old male not breathing, knowing that Michael was 50 years old, we thought OK, this is probably Michael.

PINSKY: Did you see the kids?

EVENSTAD: We did not, no. When they loaded the kids into the escalade that follow the ambulance, they did not kind of in a place that was out of our view.

PINSKY: How about Dr. Murray? Did you see him come out?

EVENSTAD: His car was here. He used to have this BMW with Texas license plates. I mean, he would -- we saw him come and go all the time. And we saw the car in there, but we never saw him.

PINSKY: You saw him coming go all the time. So, was he here all day every day?

EVENSTAD: The schedule varied, but we would see him arriving, and then, you know, generally, later in the day. And then, he would also go and run errands.

PINSKY: And he`d live here basically, spend the night here?

EVENSTAD: Yes. He would be here at night.

PINSKY: And how many weeks, I guess, before the fateful day was he -- did you notice him coming around? Was it days? Days or weeks?

EVENSTAD: He had been here for I would say a couple of months.

PINSKY: Couple of months already.


PINSKY: So, this idea that he had no idea what Michael Jackson had been taking is a fallacy.

EVENSTAD: I don`t know. I can`t speak to that.

PINSKY: He`d been giving it for a couple of months.

EVENSTAD: He was with Michael Jackson in the house for a long time.

PINSKY: Because that flies in the face of some of the defense, does it not?

EVENSTAD: I don`t know to be honest with you.

PINSKY: Did you ever -- I heard some of the fans say they would see Michael Jackson leave five or six times a day. I`ve actually heard them say up to eight times a day. He go out, go to the dermatologist office.

EVENSTAD: He went to Arnold Klein`s, the building where Arnold Klein`s office is almost everyday.

PINSKY: Once a day or multiple times a day?

EVENSTAD: Usually, once a day. He`d be in there for an hour to two to three hours.

PINSKY: Any speculation about what that was?

EVENSTAD: I don`t know, but --

PINSKY: I can`t listen. I`m a physician. I can`t think of any condition that requires a daily dermatology visit over long periods of time.

EVENSTAD: Right. And it was every day, and there was also a dentist he would go to fairly often.

PINSKY: Has a dentist ever been mentioned in the trial?

EVENSTAD: His name has not come up, no.

PINSKY: Do you know who that is?

EVENSTAD: (INAUDIBLE) I actually went to him before.

PINSKY: Did he seem like somebody that could get sucked into a prescribing problem?

EVENSTAD: He`s a very well respected dentist, so I don`t know that I could characterize that.

PINSKY: How about Faheem Muhammad? Did you see him?

EVENSTAD: Yes. Faheem was his main driver for the last -- at least the last few months. Often times when Michael would go to Arnold Klein`s office, Faheem would be the driver. Michael in the backseat, and that was it. No other security.

PINSKY: How about that horrible day? Was he lurking around here?

EVENSTAD: He was already here.

PINSKY: Did you see him?

EVENSTAD: We did not see. He was driving one of the escalades --


PINSKY: How about Michael Amir Williams? Was he here on that day?

EVENSTAD: Michael Amir was not here when the ambulance went in. He arrived shortly thereafter.

PINSKY: What do you think went on in there? What don`t we know? You know what I mean? You`ve seen the testimony in court.


PINSKY: It seems incomplete, doesn`t it? Having been here, seeing how the place operates, are there insights that you have as someone that sort of sees how Conrad Murray and how Michael ran his day with his doctor? Can you fill any gaps for us?

EVENSTAD: I don`t know that I can except to say that, all the days were pretty similar. The guards came and went at the same time. You know, Murray came and went at the same time. Michael, when he was going to rehearsal, would be on, you know, fairly consistent schedule. So, my guess is, just from an outsider`s perspective, is whatever was going on in there was something that happened everyday or every night, and this one time, it went bad, and they weren`t prepared for it.

PINSKY: That day his status changed, didn`t it?

EVENSTAD: It did instantly. You know, crass to say, but the best kind of career move a musician can make often, you know, is to pass away young. And, you know, relatively young, and he was already a huge superstar, but I remember saying this as a fan before, I said when he passes away, people will realize how great he was, and I think that`s what happened.


PINSKY: All the must see, must share stories are at That was an interesting interview. He also said that Michael was always going to the hospital by an ambulance. It happened multiple times, and he thought this was just another one of those episodes where he was going to the hospital for no particular reason.

Boy, they were sure wrong. And it`s sad to think his dying was a career -- I don`t even want to think about that.

OK. The Kardashian divorce, you can, of course, get details on that at the hlntv website as well. We`re going to talk about the marriage and my take on the marriage. Ahead, hear what Kris Jenner, that`s Kim`s mom, of course, had to say about the split. Stay with us.


PINSKY: Tonight, of course, there`s the city hall. That is actually a bell tower, believe it or not. There`s a bell in that tower. The city hall, that muscular building, completed 1928. That has been iconic and representative of Los Angeles for so many years, but now that we have a veritable forest of skyscrapers down here, it doesn`t stand out quite so much as it used to.

But you`ve seen it on the TV series "Dragnet" or as "The Daily Planet," and "Superman" maybe, and many other films, but it`s right behind us here. Across street from the courthouse where the Conrad Murray trial goes on. Well, defense is now rested.

And tonight, we`re going to switch gears and talk a bit about Kim Kardashian. She wrote a letter to her fans and says that she had married for love, not money. Married for love. Seventy-two days of love? Hold on, I got to introduce you first. It was the wedding of the century, and now, it is the divorce of the century.

Couldn`t have been the separation or just -- we`re going to catch our breath and figure things out? Does it have to go right to divorce? Everyone is still buzzing about this big split. Is Kim trying to keep up with her idol, Elizabeth Taylor? Liz had seven husbands. So, Kim has merely five more to go. A lot of people -- I wasn`t aware, she had a brief marriage.

She ran away or something like when she was a young adult, teenager, with I think a record producer, and now, she has this marriage, and will the divorce help or hurt the Kardashian`s massive reality empire? That`s an interesting question. More importantly, who`s going to get that 20 carat ring, it`s worth so much, a security (ph) truck had to deliver it. And the question of the hour, what things have lasted longer?

This is what we`re going to ask. What things have lasted longer than Kim Kardashian`s marriage? We`re going to have fun with that one. I`ll explain it to you in a moment. But first to my guests and my panel, I`ve got Attorney Mark Eiglarsh, also weighing in, Kim`s former publicist, Jonathan Jaxson. He is in, I believe, you`re In Florida, in Jacksonville.

And with me in the studio, she was the first female correspondent on the "Daily Show," actress and comedian, Beth Littleford. Beth, you seemed anxious to ring in here. I`ll throw to you first. What`s your reaction on all of this?

BETH LITTLEFORD, ACTRESS, COMEDIAN: There`s a whole industry of marriage counselors out there ready to have you sit down in their office and try to work it out.


LITTLEFORD: Marriage is not disposable. You`ve been married 21 --

PINSKY: Twenty plus years. Twenty plus years.

LITTLEFORD: Yes. Together 15 plus, married 13 plus. It`s not -- you know, we have this fairy tale idea that we`re hard wired, and of course, her big special was called Kim`s Fairytale Wedding, but we know --

PINSKY: It was a fairytale. It turned out it was a fairytale.

LITTLEFORD: It was a false --


LITTLEFORD: It was a false idea.

PINSKY: Right. Fairytales are false in terms like this one was a fairytale after all. Just wasn`t the kind of fairytale it was intended to be.

LITTLEFORD: Because the matter is marriage takes work sometimes. How about a little work?

PINSKY: Again, I said this last night, and it drives me insane in this country that we have all these -- there`s an occupy Los Angeles movement outside here. I think they`d be a little PO`d about all the money spent on that marriage.


PINSKY: Money spent on crappy marriages.


PINSKY: Great weddings, crappy marriages. Guys, it`s the marriage that`s important, right? Isn`t that what`s important? It`s the relationship, creating a family. Now, Kim`s mom, actually, Mama Jer, Kris Jenner is speaking out today defending her daughter. Listen to this from John, Jay, and Rich radio show. Listen.


KRIS JENNER, KIM KARDASHIAN`S MOTHER: The one thing that is the most annoying is the rumor that, you know, she made millions off of this wedding, and she didn`t make a dime off of this wedding and actually spent millions of dollars on the wedding. So, it`s not something that she thought would ever not be happily ever after.


PINSKY: I do believe that they were foolish in how they went through, they approached this marriage. And I think the young man, -- I`m blank with his name, her husband.

LITTLEFORD: Kris Humphries.

PINSKY: Kris Humphries, I bet that guy is shattered. I bet he is really hurt, because I think he really did want to have a marriage.

LITTLEFORD: I think he is a naive young man --

PINSKY: I totally agree with you.

LITTLEFORD: -- Who was along for the ride.

PINSKY: Mark Eiglarsh, they did get paid more than a million dollars just to pose for the cover of "People" magazine, but "People" aren`t -- this what (inaudible) here, people aren`t mad about the money, they`re mad really that they didn`t give marriage a chance and they -- what they did flew in the face of what the institution should represent. Do you agree with me?

MARK EIGLARSH, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Absolutely. The first thing, though, that`s a little bit laughable that people are really that angry. You know, they have defects in character that I hope one day they`ll work on, but are we really that angry about this issue? Now, if we want to turn this into some kind of deep discussion, there is some value to what you raise.

I mean, people are believing that gays cannot get married, that somehow that would interfere with our image and the institution of marriage, yet, we`re OK with this? This sham? And by the way, I`m shocked. I thought they`d make it maybe to 76 days. You know, really, 72 --

PINSKY: Mark, yes, I thought so, too. Yes. I thought at least 73.

LITTLEFORD: No, but it`s interesting that, oh, getting married is just hurting the sanctity of marriage. No. Reality show marriage is hurting the sanctity of marriage. Let`s look at the trends, a reality show.

PINSKY: Yes. That`s -- yes, and Mark, you say yes, and that is what`s making some people, particularly, homosexuals who are trying to get some protection under this institution very angry about this. You`re right. This, indeed, is another thing that`s flying in the face of -- let`s agree it`s a valuable institution.

Jonathan Jaxson, I want to go to you, does this all surprise you? Is this consistent with the person you knew Kim to be?

JONATHAN JAXSON, KIM`S FORMER PUBLICIST: You know, it`s really not. She`s changed so much, obviously, with fame and the money and the fortune that she has. But when I met Kim in 2007 and we started working together, this was in no way her character, and it`s, you know, surprising to me that the marriage did fail because Kim is one to work at her relationship. She worked With Reggie Bush and their failings of their relationship for three years.

So, I mean, I dealt with that throughout our duration of our working relationship, so this does shock me, but again, she made it more of a business deal than a fairytale wedding. It was a fairytale wedding for the world to see, but it wasn`t so fairy tale for Kim from the beginning, and there were problems already stated before the wedding actually even happened.

PINSKY: Jonathan, is she merely worth more as a business entity single than married? Did that figure into why she did this, do you think?

JAXSON: Yes. I mean, she is definitely an empire. You know, the problem is from the very beginning, when I started working with Kim in 2007, her mom said, you know, Kim could go to New York fashion week if her sisters went along with her. That`s the stipulation there.

So, I had her mom go with me, and I mean, you know, we worked it out, and we flew her sisters in with Kim, and they came in to New York, and we had the whole fashion week bonanza there, and from there, it started from the sex tape to what she is now and the stage moments of television creativity.

PINSKY: Well, listen, there`s a hysterical game going on Twitter that we`re going to bring to light right here with my panel. You got to stay with us for me to explain exactly what this is. And for more thoughts, my thoughts on Kim`s failed marriage, go to check out our website at I`ve got a little blog there.

Coming up, everyone is asking what will Kim do with all those gifts also? Maybe, we`ll talk about what Emily post would do with them. She would, of course, return them.

But next, we`re going to bring this Twitter game to life for you. So, stay with us.


PINSKY: Tonight, Kim Kardashian insists she believes in love. Well, give it a chance then if you really believe in it. I can`t believe she can say that. I choke on it. And she did not marry to make money off her TV special. I can believe that, but she did make money and she didn`t give love a chance. That`s what everyone is mad about.

She says she will donate her gifts to the Dream Foundation. And again, I think she`s missing the point here. Ryan Seacrest doesn`t care if he gets his toaster back, the homeless shelter doesn`t need this fancy bone china. People are mad that the sanctity of marriage is being abused and really -- as a role model, right?


LITTLEFORD: Like, oh, isn`t it glamorous to get married. This is what it means to get married, spend 10 million on the wedding and divorced after two months. No, you know?

PINSKY: So, it`s some sort of spectacular party that is a disposable like Kleenex.

LITTLEFORD: Yes. That the marriage is disposable. I mean, it`s bad enough that we`re telling young women this is what you need to like on realistic ideal.


LITTLEFORD: And this is what -- and this is what it means to, you know, get engaged.

PINSKY: I think about the people out here in the Occupy Los Angeles people and all the other people occupying spaces throughout the country, this is a great example of how things are so out of whack here.

LITTLEFORD: What can we have done with that $10 million, that ring alone, how many kids could we feed? I mean, --

PINSKY: I`m going to get onto something a little more interesting here. This is --


PINSKY: Little more fun.


PINSKY: Just to wrap up tonight`s hysterical game going on on Twitter. It`s hashtag, things longer than Kim`s marriage. We`re going to play that game tonight. Things longer than Kim`s marriage. Here are some of our favorites. However long it took to find Nemo. Things longer than Kim`s marriage, my iPhone battery, half life. Things longer than Kim`s marriage, the NBA lockout.

My favorite, things longer than Kim`s marriage, Lindsey Lohan`s conviction list. I`ll throw it to my guest, Beth. Mark, you`re going to be in on this in a second, but I`ll give it to Beth first.

LITTLEFORD: Things longer than Kim`s marriage, the line at Casey Anthony`s house last night trick or treating.

PINSKY: Nice. Nice. Mark, you got one?

EIGLARSH: Yes, I got one. Octomom`s delivery.

PINSKY: Nice. Nice. That was longer than Kim`s marriage.

LITTLEFORD: Charlie sheen has had some rants that have lasted longer. Sting has had orgasms that have lasted longer. He loves the tantric sex.

PINSKY: Thank you for that. Thank you. Mark, you`ve got anything for us?

EIGLARSH: Well, Pam Anderson and Kid Rock`s marriage, that was 150 days.

PINSKY: Oh, there you go.

LITTLEFORD: Good for them.

PINSKY: I think Kim`s sex tape may have been longer than her marriage actually.

LITTLEFORD: Potentially.

PINSKY: All right. Enough of this funny business. So, we`re having a little fun on her behalf, and it`s unfortunately not funny business. Thank you, Mark, and of course, thank you, Beth. I know you feel like I do that marriage is something very, very special.


PINSKY: I`ve written an article, a commentary about it over at, Is that the actual website address? Yes, I urge you to read it. I talk about the fact that the gay and lesbian community have issues with this, because they`re supposed to be attacking the sanctity of marriage or is this what`s attacking the sanctity of marriage?

And those of us that value marriage and value families need to really give this in thought, talk to our kids, and maybe, ultimately, I don`t blame the Kardashians. I really don`t blame the -- they`re doing a job. They`re doing a good job, as a matter of fact. They`re doing well for themselves.

It`s us. We`re the problem. Don`t watch that crap. And by the way, don`t have beautiful weddings and crappy marriages. Have beautiful both. And maybe save a little bit on the weddings and invest more in the marriages and send some of that down to the Occupy Wall Street people that you would have spent on a stupid wedding. That`s not important.

Thank you for watching. We`ll see you next time.