Return to Transcripts main page
Interview With Nancy Grace; Justin Bieber`s Love Child?
Aired November 3, 2011 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RYAN SMITH, HOST, IN SESSION ON TRUTV (voice-over): Tonight, Nancy Grace is here.
Two big stories. Baby Lisa, now missing for 30 days. And, red hot closing arguments in the Michael Jackson death trial.
Plus, Justin Bieber baby daddy? This woman claims she had the teen singer`s love child. I`m talking to her lawyers in a Dr. Drew exclusive.
And later, a mother of four vanishes the day before Halloween. Will a flat tire and an abandoned SUV lead police to Karen Johnson? We`ll talk about it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(on camera): Good evening. I`m Ryan Smith, filling in for Dr. Drew.
Well, you could see that right there. That`s City Hall right behind me, towards the other side of that is the courthouse where Dr. Murray is facing trial in the death of Michael Jackson.
Now, tonight we move closer to a verdict in the Michael Jackson death trial. Dr. Murray`s fate will soon be in the hands of the jury. Deliberations set to begin tomorrow.
But it is also the fate of a missing baby girl Lisa Irwin still remains unclear as police investigate over one thousand leads, but still no answers to her whereabouts. Take a look.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A 10-month-old baby sleeping in her own crib just feet away from her mom goes missing without a trace.
DEBORAH BRADLEY, BABY LISA`S MOTHER: Just please bring her home.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A new time line surfaces. We discovered two separate neighbors see Baby Lisa alive the night she goes missing.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`ve seen a man carrying a baby.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: One of her stolen phones was used to make a call to the ex-girlfriend of a local handyman between 8:00 and 8:30.
BRADLEY: He said, "Where are the phones?" And they weren`t on the counter where I left them, they were gone.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The most dramatic part of the Michael Jackson trial now playing out in an L.A. courtroom. Closing arguments from both sides today.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: David Walgren closing for the prosecution. He went through every way in which Dr. Murray failed.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Justice demands a guilty verdict.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Closing arguments from the defense.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Dr. Murray did not kill Michael Jackson.
SMITH: Well, my special guest tonight is HLN`s very own Nancy Grace.
You know, she`s not only the queen of the courtroom, but she`s also reigning over the dance floor on this season`s "Dancing with the Stars." She`s the breakout star of the whole show.
Nancy, good to see you. And, Nancy, let me get your take on this. What did you think about today`s closing arguments and who do you think came out on top?
NANCY GRACE, HOST, HLN`S "NANCY GRACE": Well, I thought the closing arguments for both sides were pretty good. I think the prosecution won the closing arguments, not because of any particular prowess of the prosecution and he was great, but the defense really doesn`t have anything to work with.
I mean, what do they have? That Michael Jackson shot himself up with so much propofol that his whole body was bloated and saturated on the inside with propofol? You can`t shoot yourself up with that much propofol because when it goes into your system, it immediately knocks you out.
I have been under propofol for surgery. The last thing I remember, I saw my doctor`s face, he said, "Where do you want to be? I said home, and I woke up, it was all over. That`s how propofol works.
Jackson could not possibly have self administered, and that is the entire defense, that there never was a saline drip bag with propofol upside down in it with Conrad Murray`s left index finger on it, Ryan. Of course he administered it.
So, you know, the defense did the best that they could with what they had. They did do something very wise, though, Ryan, as you probably already pointed out. They did not put Conrad Murray on the stand because he would have been sliced up like a Thanksgiving turkey.
SMITH: So even after all of this, you don`t think that Conrad Murray should have taken the stand? Because I agree with you. Him taking the stand, I couldn`t imagine what that cross examination would look like. It would be a cross examination for the ages -
GRACE: Well, here`s the deal, Ryan. Here`s the deal. At the very beginning of every trial, every judge I was ever in front of in a criminal case would tell the jury at the get-go the defendant is under no duty to take the stand and he`d start reading, he or she start reading the fifth amendment, right to remain silent.
Listen, when somebody says I take the fifth, well, you know, they did something, OK? Why else would they take the fifth? So this jury expected Conrad Murray to take the stand, but here`s my theory on that. It`s better for the jury to suspect Conrad Murray is guilty and he remain silent than for him to take the stand and confirm their suspicions, OK, because he could never have survived cross examination.
SMITH: Oh, my goodness.
Now, Nancy, I`ve got to tell you the way this started out, it really struck me because, you know, you see these cases all the time. You and I have watched so many. We`ve been a part of so many, and you see the victim not really identified, sometimes prosecutors get caught up in their cases and they don`t focus on the victim.
Well, arguably one of the most poignant moments today, the prosecution, David Walgren, humanized Michael Jackson as a dad whose children are now fatherless. Take a look at this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID WALGREN, PROSECUTOR: Conrad Murray left Prince, Paris and Blanket without a father. For them, this case doesn`t end today or tomorrow or the next day. For Michael`s children, this case will go on forever because they do not have a father. They do not have a father because of the actions of Conrad Murray.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SMITH: Nancy, that moment really struck me because at that moment, you realize, especially in the beginning of their argument, there is a victim here. There is somebody who was harmed. There is somebody who died. And we have to hold somebody responsible. Seemed very powerful to me. I wanted to get your take on it.
GRACE: Well, Ryan, I knew that when I saw the picture of Michael Jackson`s dead body, but speaking of victims, there are three more victims.
You know, Ryan, you`re preaching to the choir right now, friend, because, you know, I got pregnant when I was 47, much older than most moms. And I actually lay awake many, many nights praying that I make it at least until my late 80s so I can be there for my twins who are now only three years old. I think about what their life would be like without me loving them.
These children don`t have a mother. We all know that story. Now they don`t have a father, Ryan. Now think about it. They may have money or maybe Jackson spent it all, I don`t know, but money cannot replace the person that loves you the most.
I don`t know about you, Ryan, but I still - I talk to my parents at least once a day. Before I make a big decision, I talk to them about it because they love me. They want what`s best for me. Who`s going to be looking out for these children say in 10, 15 years, when their grandmother has gone on to heaven, nobody. They wouldn`t have anybody thanks to Conrad Murray.
SMITH: You know, you talk about that. I think about the same thing, the idea that there is no replacement for your parents. There is no replacement for family.
And you know what`s interesting, Nancy, so many times people would ask me, well, do you think you`re going to see the children in the courtroom, do you think they want to be there? I don`t think so. I think it was a great idea that Katherine and the family kept them away so they didn`t have to go through that. But there is no replacement -
GRACE: Katherine didn`t keep them away.
SMITH: -- of what happened.
GRACE: The prosecution did that, because the prosecution could have called them if they had wanted to. And that`s a very hard decision to make because, you know, Ryan, as you well know, you have one shot at this thing. You got one swing at the ball.
Because if he`s found not guilty, double jeopardy disallows the state from retrying Conrad Murray. But they chose to take a little bit of bite out of their case by not putting the children on the stand, and they did that out of respect for Michael Jackson and Michael Jackson`s mother who did not want those children to take the stand. That`s what that was all about.
SMITH: Yes. That`s a good point.
And Nancy, let`s talk about the defense side of it, because the defense, they did a lot of things in this case, and I agree with you, they had a strong argument, they did what they could with what they had. But they really tried to touch on this point of, if it wasn`t Michael Jackson, would we be here?
So let me show you this. The defense kind of refused to go down without a fight when they were talking about all of this and talking about Michael`s involvement. Let`s take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
EDWARD CHERNOFF, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: -- thought he could help, could help Michael Jackson succeed, he could help him sleep normally. He believed that.
He was wrong. He was wrong. Because Dr. Murray had no control over the situation, because what was happening in the background, he was just a little fish in a big dirty pond.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SMITH: You know, that kind of relates to it because right there, Nancy, he`s saying, hey, he just got caught up in this whole Michael Jackson thing. Michael Jackson was the one with the problems. And Dr. Murray, he just kind of stepped into this situation, and, folks, would we even be here if Michael Jackson wasn`t the defendant in this case?
GRACE: Ryan, have you completely lost your mind? You actually asked that with a straight face.
He got caught up? Got caught up? Nobody made Conrad Murray go buy four gallons of propofol! This is only supposed to be used in the operating room. Conrad Murray had gallons and gallons, like a milk gallon of propofol, and yet he`s trying to tell the jury that he was trying to wean Michael Jackson.
There was no - here. I`ve got the autopsy report right here. An impartial doctor, the medical examiner says self administering is impossible in this case. He did not self administer.
And Ryan, you heard the jury`s charge from the judge. The judge instructs them that even if Michael Jackson self administered this drug, you can still find this doctor guilty.
Now, true, I said O.J. Simpson would go down for double murder. I said Tot Mom would go down for murder. I was wrong. But I - I`m going out on a limb here and I`m saying it is all over but sentencing.
And all this business about we wouldn`t be here if it weren`t for Michael Jackson? No, no, no. You can`t have it both ways. Everybody always screaming, oh, celebrities get all the attention. Well, now a celebrity is a victim, not a defendant. Lady Justice is blind or she should be to whoever the defendant or the victim is and I`m on the side of Lady Justice. This case must be prosecuted and this jury must return a verdict of guilty.
SMITH: Nancy, you know what, I look at this case and I look at all I`ve seen in the past month in this case, and I don`t see how you get a not guilty verdict here. I agree with you. I don`t see how you don`t hold Dr. Murray responsible on so many different levels.
GRACE: I know a way.
SMITH: But you brought it up there. But you brought it up there.
We look at this, and I remember you and I were sitting there for the Casey Anthony case, I think all of us, all the experts in town, everybody said no, no, no, she`s guilty. I look at this jury, nine of them have been on juries before, you know, defense attorneys will tell you that`s a terrible recipe for us. Many of them, families touched by addiction.
Do you see a situation here where maybe we have, like you said, an O.J. Simpson, a Casey Anthony, the jury takes us by surprise -
GRACE: Yes, I did.
SMITH: -- and decides -
GRACE: I do. I do, Ryan. That`s an excellent question. This is how I think it would go down.
I really like my doctors. Some of them I love. I trust them. And it wasn`t just trusting them when I went under the knife with my life, it was with what would become of my twins, my 3-year-old twins if I were to die, which is much more important to me.
This jury is being asked to convict a doctor. Now, Conrad Murray managed to maintain some dignity by not taking the stand. He shows up in court. He`s 6`4". He looks fine in a suit. He had a series of character witnesses, one of them even kissed him on the head. I mean, nobody is ever going to forget Mrs. Ruby Mosley, the character witness who spoke so highly of Dr. Conrad Murray.
So he has the gravitas of a doctor, people generally like doctors, and it is very, very hard to get a jury to find against a doctor. It`s just that simple.
With him not taking the stand, he managed to hold onto a little bit of dignity. So there could be one holdout on this jury that says, you know what, I just don`t think a doctor would do this.
SMITH: Nancy, so good to talk to you about this. I`ve been thinking about this all day, that you and I were going to talk about this subject.
And you know what, you never know what a jury can decide. We`re going to have to wait and see. They`re going to deliberate tomorrow.
Now, folks, who are the jurors in the Conrad Murray case? Nancy and I just talking about them. Their backgrounds are so interesting. You`ve got to check this out on HLNTV.com. It`s the number one story on HLN 10. And trust me, this is an interesting part of it because it all comes down to their backgrounds, what they take in that deliberation room.
Now, coming up, Nancy and I are going to talk about Baby Lisa, little - missing Baby Lisa Irwin, the developments in that.
And we`re also going to have an exclusive with the attorneys for the woman who claims that Justin Bieber fathered her child. We`re coming back right after this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: John, can you stop and talk to us at all?
JOHN PICERNO, BABY LISA`S FAMILY ATTORNEY: What`s that?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Can you stop and talk to us at all?
PICERNO: Probably not until next week.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SMITH: Welcome back. I`m Ryan Smith filling in for Dr. Drew.
That was a reporter from CNN affiliate KNBC attempting to get a comment from John Picerno, the newest attorney representing Baby Lisa`s parent Deborah Bradley and Jeremy Irwin.
Tomorrow marks the one month anniversary that Baby Lisa disappeared from her crib in Kansas City. And as long as this has gone on, I think there`s so much that frustrates so many people about this, the search is on, so many leads, no results so far.
I want to bring back in our special guest tonight, Nancy Grace. And, Nancy, last night in an exclusive interview you spoke to Mike Thompson. He`s one of the eyewitnesses that saw a mystery man carrying a baby the night Lisa Irwin disappeared. Let`s take a look.
GRACE: What did the man look like?
MIKE THOMPSON, EYEWITNESS: About 5`7", 5`8", kind of salt and pepper hair, yes. He`s pretty well built. He had a t-shirt on and white pants.
GRACE: Have you identified a man in a photo lineup?
THOMPSON: Yes, ma`am.
GRACE: Do you know who the man is?
THOMPSON: No, I don`t.
SMTIH: Nancy, what`s your take on Mike Thompson? Is he believable to you?
GRACE: Yes. I find him very, very believable. And also what`s interesting, Ryan, is that another witness places a man about the same height carrying a baby in the neighborhood near Baby Lisa`s home at 12:30 that night.
Now, this witness that you`re showing right now, that was around 4:00 A.M. He was riding a motorcycle, and he saw what he saw. He even commented about it to his wife. It took him a couple of weeks to put two and two together and come forward, but that is not unusual.
But there are more explanations as to why his story could be true, and the cops are still focusing on the parents of Baby Lisa. The parents are not named as suspects at this juncture, but there are many scenarios under which both could be true.
As a matter of fact, Ryan, I once had a judge who was 84 years old, and he had a jury charge that said it is your duty to make all witnesses speak the truth, impugn perjury on no one. In other words, people see things from different angles. They see different incidents, and all of them can actually be true.
I want to point out that a cadaver dog hit on the carpet in Baby Lisa`s mother`s bedroom, all right? What`s disturbing me right now is that Baby Lisa`s mother and father refuse to let their children, boys ages five and eight, speak to police.
It is not an interrogation, Ryan, it is a special therapist trained in questioning children. I used these therapists myself and I actually trained under them to learn how to question children, specifically child molestation victims and crime scene witnesses that are children, so I could unlock the knowledge the child has about the crime. And, for some reason, the parents are not letting them talk to the boys, ages five and eight.
And, let me point out that they say they heard something that night.
SMITH: Yes, yes. And - and why not have them talk? And, not only that, the continuing to lawyer up. They got Joe Tacopina, they got another lawyer now. Nancy, it doesn`t add up.
And, I think you`re right. They need to come forward, speak. There`s no harm in that.
Nancy, we`ll be right back.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: You know what, I disagree with the judges. You know, I think that our jive was really fun, and I loved it. And, when you look at all the scores on the leader board, they`re very, very close together, so I have a great hope.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SMITH: Welcome back. I`m Ryan Smith, filling in for Dr. Drew.
You see her right there. That was Nancy Grace, defending her dancing skills. She survived another week on ABC`s "Dancing with the Stars."
Now, in week seven Nancy and David Arquette had the lowest scores, but, you know what? In the end, Nancy`s fans proved to be an overwhelming force and Arquette was sent home.
Here`s another look at Nancy. She`s the dancing devil in this clip from earlier this week. Take a look.
(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)
SMITH: Nancy, you are making it happen.
Nancy is joining us right now with her dancing partner, Tristan MacManus. Great to see both of you guys.
Hey, guys, I have a big question here. Nancy, how do you pick the outfits? Do you pick that outfit yourself?
GRACE: No. As a matter of fact, we go to wardrobe, but - we come up with a plan, but I found out that Tristan goes behind my back and comes up with a whole another costume, and then on Monday I`m like, "What?"
But, I would like to point out, Ryan, that the week before we were near the top of the leader board. You know, some days are good, some days are bad.
Isn`t that true? Weren`t we at the top? Near the top.
TRISTAN MACMANUS, NANCY GRACE`S DWTS PARTNER: I try - I try to save myself an argument by go - going in early.
GRACE: Leader board. I mean were not we near the top?
MACMANUS: She wears - she wears all the costumes very well, so.
But leader board, yes. We`re doing great.
SMITH: Are you -
MACMANUS: We made it through -
SMITH: I tell you what, you guys are doing - you guys are doing so well. And, I got to tell you both, I was not a watcher of "Dancing with the Stars." You guys started showing up, now I`m checking it out every week. So, there. I`ve added myself (ph).
But, I`ll tell you what, Tristan -
GRACE: You better, Ryan. And you better check it out with your land line and your cell phone in your hand.
SMITH: Of course I do. You know I do.
Now Tristan, how do you get Nancy to follow all of your directions? You know, Nancy and I have gone back and forth so many times. Nancy, I know you -
GRACE: A very sore point that I -
SMITH: -- when you want something, you do what you want.
Why? Tell me why? Tell me why?
MACMANUS: Ryan, you know, I`m still - I`m still trying. I`m still trying.
But - but, I mean, it`s a process. It`s a process. But she - but Nancy is being great at following what I have been saying. I mean, obviously we knock heads sometimes, but, I mean, the reason we`re still here is because Nancy`s been listening to what I`ve been saying, you know?
GRACE: We only knock heads because he doesn`t listen.
MACMANUS: (INAUDIBLE). I`m still with Nancy, so, we will go right together (ph).
SMITH: Uh-oh, wait, what happened today? It sounds like something happened - it sounds like something happened today, though. Tell me about that.
MACMANUS: Another day happened, Ryan.
GRACE: The tango happened today.
MACMANUS: Another day.
GRACE: Another day. Another seven hours of dance rehearsal happened today.
Before I came to you, you know, the tango happened today. Have you ever done the tango?
SMITH: I have not.
GRACE: Have you?
SMITH: You got to teach me. At the Christmas - at the Christmas party, I want you to teach me.
GRACE: I can`t teach you. I can`t take it.
MACMANUS: There you go. Christmas party all around.
GRACE: It`s hard. Why is the tango so hard?
MACMANUS: I don`t know. They`re all hard.
SMITH: Well, you guys are great. Every week, you keep getting better and better. We`re all cheering for you.
MACMANUS: Thank you.
SMITH: Tristan, great to meet you. Nancy, keep on pushing.
MACMANUS: You too, mate.
SMITH: Nancy, I`m counting on you to win. I`m all over - and, you know, take a look at that folks.
GRACE: Oh, let me just get through Monday night, friend.
SMITH: OK. All right, folks, look at the number right there, 1-800- VOTE-465. Don`t forget to vote for Nancy.
Nancy and Tristan, always love to see you.
Now, coming up, can Justin Bieber push off a paternity suit? We`re going to have more on that, coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SMITH (voice-over): A 20-year-old woman claims Justin Bieber got her pregnant. Is the 17-year-old pop star already a father? If so, is she guilty of statutory rape? I`m talking exclusively to her lawyers for the answers.
And later, a flat, an abandoned SUV, and a mother of four vanishing the day before Halloween. Where is Karen Johnson?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SMITH (on-camera): Welcome back. I`m Ryan Smith filling in for Dr. Drew. Well, tonight, we`re talking baby talk, but it`s not all that cute and cuddly kind of talk. Serious allegations are being made. Mariah Yeater claims that Justin Bieber is the father of her three-month-old baby boy, and she`s filed a paternity suit against the singer. Now, she`s asking Bieber to take a paternity test and to provide support for the child.
Now, we reached out to Justin Bieber`s rep. His people deny all such claims, and they say they`re going to take legal action to defend the singer. Take a look at this statement. They say, "While we haven`t seen the lawsuit, it`s sad that someone would fabricate malicious, defamatory, and demonstrably false claims."
So, is Mariah Yeater a desperate mother looking for little extra cash, or is she a scorned fan who had an encounter with her idol and just wants attention, or is Justin Bieber the father of a three-month-old child? Now, Mariah Yeater`s attorneys, Matt Pare and Lance Rogers are right here with us on set exclusively tonight, right here on the DR. DREW SHOW.
And guys, let me start just talking about the suit. How do you know that what your client is saying is 100 percent credible, 100 percent true?
LANCE ROGERS, ATTORNEY FOR WOMAN MAKING BIEBER CLAIM: Right. We know and we want to scientifically confirm that.
SMITH: OK. So, you talked to her. She`s told you her full story. So far, you trust her unequivocally?
SMITH: Now, I just want to read your complaint here. I was reading this this afternoon, and it says, "Based upon the timing as well as the fact that there are no other possible men that I had sex with that could be the father of this baby," that`s sort of the basis of this claim. To me, that sounds like and I`m going to be honest with you here, she had sex with other men.
She believes it`s Justin Bieber, which makes a cynic say, wait a second, if she had sex with other men, how do we know it wasn`t one of those other men.
MATT PARE, ATTORNEY FOR MARIAH YEATER: Well, I mean, in the relevant time period, she wasn`t having sex with anyone else.
PARE: And that`s how we know that Justin Bieber is, in fact, the father of the baby. That`s really what it all boils down to, but again, harp on we need the paternity test to verify that scientifically 100 percent. And that`s what we`re asking for at this point.
It`s really a modest request. We`re not asking for an exorbitant amount of money. We just need him to step up and take the paternity test.
SMITH: Why come out publicly on this? Why not privately do it, do it out of the press? Because, guys, people are saying, wait a second, she must be a scorned fan. She`s just come up. She`s trying to get money out of Justin Bieber. He`s America`s hero. Why would she take this public if she didn`t try to embarrass him or try to trick him into giving her money?
PARE: Just to be clear, we would love to resolve this in a private, confidential, and reasonable manner. And if Justin Bieber, through his attorneys, would like to contact us and open up a dialogue, we`d be happy to engage in that. But thus far, we have not heard from them whatsoever. So, at this stage, we`re left with no other choice.
SMITH: You know, in this claim that you filed, there`s a lot of talk of how the situation happened, that she was out there at the concert. She was near the front row. He sort of singled her out. She comes up. They have an encounter. The details of the encounter are sordid, maybe a little embarrassing if you look at it.
She`s talking about he didn`t last very long, all that kind of -- again, I think the point here is that people will say, OK, if she did, in fact, have his baby, she wants that paternity test, why bring out all the details about the way he did this, and he wanted to be all over her, and just some of the words that were used are kind of like he wanted to tear my clothes off. Why all that?
ROGERS: Well, again, you know, we have a responsibility to present credible evidence under oath, and it was important for us to make sure that we had the details correct, and that those details were verified and signed by our client.
Again, we wanted to be very clear about this encounter. And, we felt it was our responsibility as attorneys to make sure we got the encounter correct. And, we can verify those.
SMITH: All right. Here`s Justin Bieber. He took the Twitter himself on this issue. He said, "I`m going to ignore the rumors. I`m going to focus on what is real, an opportunity to help by doing what I love. Judge me on the music. Love y`all."
And you know, I think what surprises people about this particular lawsuit is the Justin Bieber we know, he`s friendly, he`s good to people, and I guess, the idea here is he`s not coming forward, he`s not trying to reach out, he`s dismissing this as a rumor, but you know, I just have to say, there is going to be a thought here, guys, that she put herself into this situation, that how many fans, how many women around the world want Justin Bieber.
So, she puts herself into this situation, and then all of a sudden, she comes back and she says, oh, well, he`s responsible. He`s got something that he has to live up to. What do you say to that? Because it`s simply about how he, in your mind, impregnated her or is it about, hey, she might be a woman scorned who`s upset that he didn`t give her a number afterwards.
PARE: You know, under the California family code, both parents have a mutual obligation to support their children, all right? We`re not asking for anything, you know, excessive, but this child, if it is, in fact, Justin Bieber`s child, which we believe it to be, should be at least raised in a comfortable middle class standard, you know? So, that`s what this is really about.
SMITH: If she`s not telling the truth, she`s looking at a perjury claim, to be honest with you. That`s a couple of years in prison.
PARE: And Mariah is well aware of all the possible consequences that could result from this not being true. We have every reason to believe in her story, and that`s why we put our names on this lawsuit. We filed it in good faith, and we stand by her.
SMITH: What do you do if the paternity test checks out that Justin Bieber is not the father? And by the way, guys, they come after you. They come after Mariah, and they say, look, it wasn`t Justin Bieber. Now, guess what, we`re suing you. You`re going to be in court.
PARE: Well, we think that`s highly unlikely based upon the evidence that we have. Not all of which has been released in the media, by any means. There is credible evidence that`s going to support that he is the father to this baby.
But in response to your hypothetical question, if it comes back negative, he`s not the father, Justin Bieber moves on with his music career, and we certainly wish him the best. We have no animosity towards him whatsoever.
ROGERS: I like Justin Bieber`s music. You know, this is not an anti- Justin Bieber suit. This is -- we`re just doing our job as lawyers. We did our due diligence before filing the suit.
SMITH: But obviously, by bringing this case, it`s a huge boom to you guys. I mean, obviously. And again, I mean, you`re doing your job as lawyers, but if this actually goes forward --
ROGERS: Another lawyer just told me recently that it`s just another client. And that`s true. I stand by this. Anybody who comes into my office regardless of coming on on TV and talking about celebrities, it`s just another client. I take a look at the facts in front of me. I make a determination, an unbiased determination as an attorney.
SMITH: All right. Mark Eiglarsh, I want to bring you in on the conversation. And Mark, what do you think are the chances that Justin Bieber is hauled into court to take paternity test?
MARK EIGLARSH, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I think it`s likely. And, the battle lines are clearly drawn. He said it didn`t happen. She has enough specifics that she`ll put in an affidavit or she`ll take live testimony under oath and the battle lines are drawn. I think that, ultimately, a judge will ask for some type of sample from him.
But I disagree with Mr. Rogers. This isn`t just any other case, with all due respect. You`re on national television for a reason, and ultimately, there`s a difference between believability and accuracy. He believes the client, but apparently, he wasn`t there. So, is she being accurate? That can only be determined from a scientific test.
ROGERS: You`re absolutely right. I wasn`t there at the time of the sexual encounter.
EIGLARSH: Alleged. Alleged sexual encounter.
ROGERS: OK. That`s correct. But I think fundamentally, underlying any attorney/client relationship is trust and belief in your client.
EIGLARSH: Have you ever had a client lie to you, Mr. Rogers? Have you ever had a client lie to you? I`m in the criminal defense business. It`s just happened to me once or twice.
SMITH: You know what, Mark, hold on for a second. And that`s a good point.
SMITH: So, if she is lying you, what did you use to get her to get your sense that she was telling the absolute 100 percent truth?
ROGERS: Right. At this point, I can say that I did my due diligence. I`m a criminal defense attorney as well. I`ve been lied to all the time, and --
EIGLARSH: Did you give her a polygraph? Did you give her a polygraph? Did you have a private polygraph done, spend a couple hundred bucks, and find out whether she`s being truthful?
SMITH: I`ll ask you. Did you, did you guys think about doing that?
ROGERS: At this time, you know, as you well know, there are attorney/client privileges.
EIGLARSH: I`ll pay for it. I`ll pay for it. I`ll pay for it.
SMITH: Oh, Mark, you`re offering to pay for it? Mark, you`ll pay for the polygraph.
EIGLARSH: I`ll pay for it. I`ll do it. Will she agree tomorrow?
SMITH: All right. You know what, guys, we`re going to talk about this a little bit more. We`re going to talk about this a little bit more, maybe work something out. Mark will pay for that polygraph. We`ll all find out what the real deal is here.
Now, folks, go to hlntv.com for more of what you`ve heard tonight. You got to check this out. There are lots of must see, must share stories on there. Check it out.
Now, next, we`re going to continue this discussion with Mariah Yeater. We`re going to bring in Dylan Howard from Radar Online and talk about this as well, because here`s another question, could she be charged with statutory rape? Keep it right here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JUSTIN BIEBER, MUSICIAN: I like to stay calm and collected, but inside, I`m like, I can`t believe what`s happening. It`s been an amazing night for me. I`m just going to go party and have fun and stuff.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SMITH: Keep it right here on HLN, because at the top of the hour, Joy Behar has on Kris Jenner. Need I say more? What`s next for Kim Kardashian? You`re going to find all that out at 10 o`clock eastern right here on HLN.
Welcome back. I`m Ryan Smith filling in for Dr. Drew. Now, tonight`s big story, 20-year-old Mariah Yeater has filed the paternity suit against 17-year-old Justin Bieber. Now, she claims that their backstage twist at his concert at the Staples Center, just a few blocks away from here, produced a baby boy that was born in July.
Now, Bieber is adamant. He says he never had sex with the woman making these claims, but let`s say they did have sex. Now, here`s something I want you to consider. Can this woman be charged with statutory rape? You see, Mariah Yeater`s attorneys, Lance Rogers and Matt Pare, they`re both here with us exclusively tonight.
And, let me just go through this for a second. Under California law, the legal age of consent is 18. And listen to this, folks. Police are required to launch a rape inquiry into any claims of illicit sex. Now, when this all happened, guys, correct me if I`m wrong, she was 19, he was 17. So, he is underage, she is of the majority age. So right there, there`s a statutory rape case.
PARE: Right. Well, a couple of things with regard to the statutory rape issue. First of all, it`s really a distraction because even if she is guilty of statutory rape, that has no bearing whatsoever on the right for child support, OK? So, it`s not like a defense that he`s not going to have to pay child support.
SMITH: Yes. But by filing the claim, you`re admitting statutory rape. So, you`re putting her up for criminal liability right there.
PARE: Well, not technically, but here`s another thing that`s legally significant. Under California law, if the difference in age is less than three years between the two people, then it`s only a misdemeanor. So, you know, if that`s the case, she may be on the hook for misdemeanor, a $5,000 penalty, but --
SMITH: But she got a record. So, you`re willing to risk a misdemeanor for filing this lawsuit against Justin Bieber?
ROGERS: I will tell you this. That, so far, there has not been a police report filed.
ROGERS: If there is a police report filed and LAPD initiates an investigation, then we`ll deal with those at that time. I mean, you have a tricky question here. The child, Tristan, has a right to know who his father is. Is it required that Mariah wait until -- it wouldn`t make any difference. So, it`s a tricky legal question there.
SMITH: All right. We got to see how this plays out. And you mention, nothing has been filed yet, but still, it exposes her to this particular charge. I want to bring in Dylan Howard. He`s the senior executive editor at Radar Online.
Dylan, you`ve been following this closely. And, Dylan, talk to me. What do you think about this? What do you think about the validity of this case?
DYLAN HOWARD, SR. EDITOR, RADARONLINE.COM: Well, a court will test the veracity of the woman`s claims, and a hearing has been set down as we broke exclusively with "Star" magazine and Radar Online for December 15th. Justin Bieber, at that point, it will be decided by a judge whether or not he will be compelled to undergo a DNA test.
Ultimately, that`s the only real way in which we can test this woman`s claims. Interestingly, though, and I find it fascinating to listen to the lawyers. Ultimately, they say they have other evidence, evidence that wasn`t included in the hand-signed affidavit, quote, "credible evidence," they released in a statement today.
It`s going to be very interesting to see whether that will be brought into the next hearing and whether or not that will force a judge to compel Justin Bieber to this test.
SMITH: OK. Guys, what is this credible evidence that he`s talking about that`s not in his this complaint?
ROGERS: Right. I will say that there is additional evidence, but, in the interest of privacy for both sides --
ROGERS: We are still hopeful --
SMITH: Wait, but why would you care about privacy for Justin Bieber`s side. If you got other evidence, just tell us about it, because you know what, you`re not representing him.
ROGERS: We want to give Justin Bieber an opportunity to come to us and resolve this. It`s very simple. It`s a $5 test, and then, we have scientific confirmation. If we can get a determination and settle this matter before December 15th, we will.
SMITH: But you can`t tell us what the other evidence is?
PARE: The other reason, just to be clear, in California, a paternity case is technically confidential.
PARE: So, we`re not supposed to disclose evidence outside of court. There`s some pieces of evidence that have already been leaked one way or the other.
SMITH: Yes, but let me just interrupt you. The paternity test you said is confidential, the paternity test hasn`t happened yet. Again, I`m just trying to get to the bottom of this.
SMITH: If you have other evidence, why not reveal it, if it`s so clear?
PARE: Because we have a duty to maintain the confidentiality of a paternity case.
SMITH: All right. All right. You know what, when you can bring this evidence to us, we want to hear it, because, honestly, this is what we need to get at. And Mark Eiglarsh, I want to bring you in here. Mark, what do you think? You know, I respect Matt and Lance here, and they`re doing all they can for their client.
And I know, Mark, if you were in this situation, maybe you`d be saying a similar thing, but Mark, does it seem to you like this is a credible claim? Do you think that -- are you finding gaps in the story?
EIGLARSH: I tell you this, and I don`t know if it`s just me, but this entire thing just seems so sleazy. And I mean no disrespect to anyone. Again, everyone is doing the best they can at their level of awareness, but this just seems sleazy the way the whole thing is being handled.
Candidly, I don`t care who he is having sex with number one, but number two, the way that this is all going down, I just -- it just -- as Dr. Drew says, it makes me uncomfortable. It makes me sick. And if they really did have a polygraph, by the way, they really did do that, wouldn`t they come out with it? Wouldn`t they say she passed the polygraph? I`m just saying.
SMITH: Well, you know what, Mark, I mean, I`ll put it on you, then. I mean, if you have a polygraph, do you do a polygraph for everyone of your clients? I`m sure these guys would say, well, we just believe her. So, we`re going with that.
EIGLARSH: Criminal defense, apples to oranges. It`s not about whether the person is innocent or not. We can have another discussion. In this case, they`re coming out and they`re saying that something is a fact, and they have to show enough evidence to the court of public opinion, which they seem to care so much about, and also a court of law.
Well, if they did that, where is it? And if they haven`t done it, why?
SMITH: All right, guys. Now, when you have this other evidence, I want you to come back on the show. I want you to talk to us and tell us what that is, because I got to tell you, that sounds a little suspect, but still, you`re pushing forward for your client. Thank you for coming on the show. We appreciate it. Thank you, as well, Dylan Howard, Mark, as well.
Now, up next, a mother of four disappears near her home in Tennessee. We`re going to bring you up to date on the investigation. Keep it right here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEFF JOHNSON, KAREN SWIFT`S BROTHER: She is a well family-oriented person, loves her kids, loves her home, hard worker. And, this is unbelievable that she`s gone right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SMITH: That was Jeff Johnson, the brother of Karen Johnson Swift who disappeared after returning home from a Halloween party last Saturday night in Dyersburg, Tennessee. Now, her husband, David, was the last person to see her after she dropped their kids off with him early Sunday morning.
Now, she`s a mother of four, and Karen was in the process of leaving her husband. She filed for divorce just a few weeks ago, on October 10th. And Karen`s car was found less than a mile away from the house with a flat tire and has been sent to Nashville for forensic testing.
Now, let`s talk about this case and see if we can figure all this out. Here with me to talk about it is criminal profiler, Pat Brown. Pat, good to see you. And, Pat, what do you make of these circumstances? What does it sound like to you to try to build a profile of what happened?
PAT BROWN, CRIMINAL PROFILER: Well, Ryan, usually, when you have a case with these elements, all these specific elements, woman`s filing divorce, last person to see her is the husband, husband has no alibi, the car is found near the home, so the person can walk home quickly. And there`s a flat tire which is an excuse for why the woman had to get out of the car and something happened to her.
When you have those together, the majority of the time, the husband is actually responsible. Now, I`m not going to say it`s true this time, because sometimes something freaky could have happened and a serial killer could have come along or there could be another man in the picture. But, most of the time, it turns out to be the husband with those elements.
SMITH: You know, and Pat, here`s what I make of this. I see a situation like this because the question always becomes, oh, well, did she just leave, maybe she wanted to get away and start a new life. This is a woman with two college age kids and a daughter, two daughters, one age seven, one age nine.
For me, that`s an open and shut situation. She would never leave that situation and leave those two girls behind. What do you make of that? Could that be an option?
BROWN: Well, it always can be an option. We said that before in other cases and the families have come forward and said, oh, she`d never do that, and then, you find out she did do that. What you have to look at is her previous history. Does she exhibit a narcissistic personality disorder?
Because if she`s that kind of person who loves all that kind of attention and willing to do anything to get it, she could do that. But if she shows none of that in her past, none at all, then she is not going to be running off.
SMITH: All right. You know, there`s another situation here, and it concerns a cell phone that was in her car. It was taken and they tracked the phone number of this, and it led them to someone apparently using this phone to access the internet, and this becomes very interesting.
When you look at a situation like that and you start tracking it down, can police then determine who used that phone with that internet connection or is it just simply a guessing game just tracking down who it is?
BROWN: That`s going to be part of a guessing game. What`s interesting is going to see what that internet site was. I heard it was five o`clock in the morning. So, what we don`t know, as the husband said - - I think it was around 1:30 she left. But we don`t know if that`s true. She could have been there until 5:00 in the morning and used it and something went wrong or somebody could be using it after the fact to make it look like she was around someplace.
I haven`t figured out yet why she would drop her kids off there. Was she not staying there? Was she staying with a friend or a sister or somebody else? Or, what does that actually mean? Or was she supposed to be in the house for the night and then wake the children up at 6:00 in the morning because she was sleeping there. I don`t know. We don`t know that yet.
SMITH: All right. Pat brown, thank you for being here. You know what, you and I are going to stay on top of this. We`re going to keep an eye on this story and make sure we keep it covered.
Now, folks, keep it right here on HLN for verdict watch in the Conrad Murray trial. Dr. Drew is coming back tomorrow. And thank you so much for watching. Have a great night.