and survive it. >> i know. see the most recent shots at ac360.com. that does it for 360. thanks for watching. larry king starts right now. see you tomorrow night. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com tonight, debbie rowe, deal or no deal? the attorney for michael jackson's former wife denies reports that she's agreed to take millions in exchange for this. not challenging grandmother, katherine, for custody of the two kids she had with the king of pop. what's the truth and who's telling it? plus, debbie' longtime friend is here to tell us about the debbie he knows. that's next on "larry king live." we begin tonight with two of the

best journalists covering this case. jim moret, chief correspondent for "inside edition," also an attorney by the way. carlos diaz, correspondent for ex-extra. the new york post has a screaming headline today "cash cow." rowe sells jacko kids to his mom for there are 4 million. what's it all about, jim. >> according to debbie rowe's attorney it's false and demanded an immediate retraction. this is his letter here. four key points. basically said this story is false, malicious, retract it. >> larry: what do you make of it? is the post runs wild? >> here's the thing. the -- this doesn't go to a court until monday. why would they strike a deal so early? i mean, it's great posturing by the lawyers saying, listen, no deal has been struck. even though they're still negotiating, it's a great way for her lawyer to let the jackson family know they mean business. they're not going to settle for something not as much money as

she can again. >> larry: debbie rowe's attorney sent a letter to "the new york post" demanden a retraction. miss rowe has not and will not give up her parental rights. no determination has been reached concerning custody or visitation. ms. rrksz owe has not accepted and will not accept any additional financial consideration beyond the spousal support she and michael jackson personally agreed to. the "post" stands by its story and will not give a source, right, jim? >> right. >> larry: that's a definitive statement by the lawyer, isn't it? not a hedge. >> it's not a hedge. it doesn't say they're not negotiating. that's a good thing. because, you know, these hearings, the custody hearings have been delayed twice. the sources close to the family have told us the sides are talking. and this doesn't say they're not talking. >> larry: you hear that from sources? >> we're hearing that they're talking. >> let's make one thing clear.

debbie rowe has never been a part of these kids' lives. she knows she has an uphill battle fighting for these kids because of the fact she hasn't been part of the kids. she's not battling for blanket, the youngest ones. the court would have to split up the kids to give deb by row these kids. it's an uphill battle. >> she's still the biological mother. >> larry: now, what about -- arnold klein was here last week, lot of rumors about him being the father. he didn't deny it. he said he would take dna and said he has deposited sperm in a bank. what do you make of that? where's that going? >> that's got to be in the mind of katherine jackson's attorneys. debbie rowe, if she's saying she's the biological mother she can ask for a dna test to see if

michael's the biological father. if there's a settlement, that's something in her favor, debbie rowe's favor, she can say, okay, well, if you want to take this to court, we can dna test and find out michael may not be the biological father of the kids. >> in california those kids were born when michael jackson was married to debbie rowe. as far as the law is concerned he's the dad. we don't know where the biological mom is for blanket. everyone is holding their breath -- >> larry: where does blanket appear from? >> anonymous donor. >> in an interview with martin bashir from years ago, michael jackson said the mother has agreed not to come forward and not to be part of blanket's life. that's the one -- a wildcard there. >> larry: what is debbie rowe's image, do you think, if any? >> look at the headline, larry, it said cash cow. >> larry: "the new york post" is famous for headlines. >> a lot of people are saying she's sells her kids. she said publicly i had these children for michael, he's a great father.

michael's gone. she may feel she wants to be part of their lives. i can't tell you what her motivation it. joe jackson's statements may have bothered her in the last few das says he's thinking about forming the jackson three. those are kind of disturbing -- >> she didn't help herself out, though, with the two pieces of video we have from last week is debbie rowe getting angry at the paparazzi, using a bad curse word, threatening them personally. you have paris, michael's daughter, on stage crying saying she misses her dad. those kids need to be with the jackson family. >> larry: what's the joe jackson story in this? >> the joe jackson story is michael jackson has been open about the fact he was abused by his father. he said so himself. if he's insinuating himself into their lives and the kids' lives and wants to raise them, debbie rowe may say as she said last week, i don't want him raising those kids. maybe that's what's bringing her into this. it certainly could be something disturbing her. >> michael, of course, in the

will does not -- he does not mention his father whatsoever. obviously it's michael's wishes. he says i want my kids with katherine, my mom. >> larry: if there is nothing arrange the, do you expect a spirited custody hearing? >> yes. short answer, yes. >> larry: who's the judge? >> i'm not familiar with the judge in this case. i can tell you, any judge is going to look at this following what's in the best interest of the children? >> larry: that's what he's there for. >> absolutely. you're going to talk to the children directly or through counsel. they're 11, 12 and 7. they're old enough to have an opinio p pinon. you're going to listen to them, look at debbie rowe as a mother and look at katherine as well. michael jackson specifically said in his will, that's who i want to raise them. larry, you're a parent. it's a tough thing to decide what's best for the kids. >> debbie rowe's attorneys said shea will be at the hearing on monday. >> will the children be asked? >> i don't think they'll be at the hearing.

they will be interviewed in some capacity, i'm sure. when you have an 11 and 12-year-old -- >> larry: they have judgment. >> of course they do. don't forget, they're now with katherine. they're with their niece -- their cousins, the aunts and the uncles. they're with the family they know as their family. they don't know debbie rowe as their mother. they know her as miss debbie. i suspect the older kids are old enough to go on the internet and look it up. >> larry: why are we fascinated with this? the man is gone. >> it's an interesting case. we pointed out, the fact she is the biological mother holds weight in california. these kids have nothing to do with her. she basically gave these kids to michael jackson. she gave her children away and got money for it. >> larry: what did she get, do we know? >> basically, it was a settlement over years. >> larry: jim and carlos will be back later. one of debbie rowe's friends is with us. hear what we has to say about the mother of michael jackson's children, next.

i never thought i would have a heart attack, but i did. you need to talk to your doctor about aspirin. you need to be your own advocate. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. you take care of your kids, now it's time to take care of yourself.

>> larry: joining us now from frank fort, germany, on a business and social trip is mark shappel, mark is the former business associate of michael jackson and longtime friend of debbie rowe. how did you come to know debbie, mark? >> well, i actually met debbie while i was with michael working in his camp. i had the opportunity to have contact with her several times. and i found that she really was

a very nice, wonderful, caring person. you know, when i finally got close to her and got to meet her, you know, she was completely different than what the public perceives. >> larry: different completely from the way we perceive her? >> debbie's a very caring, wonderful, warm person. i mean, she's a very humble person. people, you know, don't give her credit that she was a friend of michael's for over 30 years. she's the mother of two of his children. she was married to michael, you know, when michael passed away. she was grieving like everybody else. and, you know, reporters, paparazzi were all up in her face. and, you know, when she reacts to that, when she's looking for some privacy and just trying to go on with her life, you know, people make comments that, you know, she doesn't react well with the paparazzi. >> larry: as you --

>> her life isn't in the paparazzi. her life is -- >> larry: i know, as you mentioned, marc, she's been under a lot of pressure from the press and the paparazzi. she had an angry confrontation last week. watch. >> debbie, are you ready to fight for your kids, debbie? are you ready -- >> are you ready to fight for your children? >> do not touch me. >> nobody touched you here. >> you just did. don't. >> are you ready to fight for your children? >> are you ready to get your butt kicked? don't touch me. >> are you going to take a cash settlement for the kids? how important are the kids to you, debbie? >> are you ready to fight for your kids, debbie? do you think she's ready to fight? >> larry: i think probably, marc, a lot of people would sympathize with what happened to her there, don't you think? >> well, you know, that was the day prior to the day or two prior to the memorial for michael. i mean, her good friend of many, many years hadn't even been put

to rest yet. she's trying to have dinner with a couple of friends of hers in a private, quiet setting. people are throwing cameras up in her face, asking her, you know, very personal questions, and they're not being, you know, respectful to a grieving person. >> larry: dr. arnold klein, debbie's former employer and michael's dermatologist was a guest on this show last week and he had this to say about debbie and michael's relationship. watch. now the debbie rowe part of the story, she was your nurse, right? >> yes. >> larry: they met i guess at your office? >> yes. >> larry: was that a real love affair? >> i don't know what love is. in that sense of the imagination. i think that she loves him very much. she admired him very much. was that a love affair? you want to know. i think she really cared about his welfare, i think -- >> larry: it was not a sexual relationship? >> well, i think they did have sex. >> larry: you do? >> yes, i really do, i can't guarantee that. but i think they did have sex in their relationship.

>> larry: marc, what do you think? is that a loving, physical relationship? >> well, i mean, i'm a friend of debbie's and quite honestly it would be just totally inappropriate for me to make any comment about what their, you know, relationship was when they were a marry the couple. as far as in the bedroom. i mean, i can say, i know there was deep affection. as i said before, debbie was very close to michael, many, many years. at this point it was 30 years. there was a true, true love there for michael. >> larry: what do you think, marc, is the biggest misconception about her? you know her as well as anyone. what don't we know about her? >> debbie is a wonderful, caring person.

what most people, you know, seem to forget. debbie doesn't run out to all of the social events, you don't see her shopping on rodeo drive, not hitting the hot spots, not trying to be in the limelight. debbie is just as happy at home in her very modest, humble, horse ranch. she spends time with all of her horses and her dogs, you know, if one of her horses is sick, debbie will stay up all night long caring for them. she'll sleep on the floor in the barn with a horse if he's not well. >> larry: we'll be right back with more of marc. by the way, i want to see your comments on the bottom of your screen, go to cnn.com/larryking, click on the block, start typing. and we'll share some of your thoughts later in the show. more with debbie rowe's friend marc in 60 seconds.

at first i was afraid. i was petrified. kept thinking that each meeting meant... that i would have to fly. but then i spent so many nights... reading e-mails way too long. then i grew strong. network video came along. ♪ and so i'm back ♪ no time to waste ♪ just click the mouse and get things done ♪ ♪ see people face-to-face ♪ i should have changed things long ago ♪ ♪ this technology saved the day! ♪ [ female announcer ] more collaboration, less complication. that's the human network effect. learn more at cisco.com/newways. >> larry: we're with marc in germany, former business associate of michael jackson, longtime friend of debbie rowe. what do you make of the outpouring that's followed his death?

what do you make of this commotion? >> well, you know, i mean it's really a shame like everybody says. i mean, it's too bad it had to take his death for people to realize what an incredible performer michael was. i mean, at the end of the day he was an incredible humanitarian and he was just an absolute musical genius. nobody could ever take that away from him. and it is very sad that it took a tragedy like his death for people to come out and support michael again. >> larry: we've all seen the incredible video, i'm sure you have, of his final rehearsal. if he had lived, marc, and done those concerts in london, do you think he would've come back on top? >> yeah. i mean, i think michael would've gained a whole new audience. i mean, every time i speak with people, and they'll tell me their kids will start to hear michael music and they start to

dance. i mean, i have a very good friend, a 6-year-old nephew, is dancing to "billie jean," "beat it," and "thriller" all the time now. and he was actually in a position to regain a whole new audience, new generation. >> larry: many people, including his ex-wife, his sister, say michael didn't expect to live to a ripe old age. was that your experience? >> you know, we did have conversations like that at some point in time. i mean, i don't want to get into too much of what we said, but you know, i can tell you one of the fears michael had sometimes, you know, we were in new york city quite a bit working on one of his albums "invincible," and fans would hide places, jump out. i mean, most had great intentions. but michael's had a few scary experiences with fans and he's said to me several times, you know, i don't want to end up like john lennon.

>> larry: what do you make of la toya's accusations about foul play and murder? >> well, i mean, i can see a family member being very upset. i think the source of where the interview came from, when you look at it, it looks very exaggerated. to think there was this big conspiracy, it would need to be followed up with a simple fact of who was benefiting? i mean, you know, michael already had his deal with his atv catalog. they didn't stand to make any difference whether michael, you know, passed away or survived. and the people around him that maybe she was accusing of this, you know, if there was a will that popped up that was done two weeks prior to this happening, okay, there might be merit to think there was a conspiracy, but from what's going on now, nobody around him would stand to benefit from his death. >> larry: yeah, marc, thanks,

see you again soon. come back home. >> thank you, larry. >> larry: the guys who know a thing or two about celebrity child custody cases are here. who else? the lawyers are next.

>> larry: three guys who know the territory. mark geragos returns, the defense attorney who represented michael jackson in the child molestation case. neil hersch, child custody expert, his celebrity clients include kim bastinger and denise richards. harrisburg, pennsylvania, judge larry, the former florida circuit court judge who presided over the court battle determining the custody of anna

nicole smith's remains and her final resting place. all right, mark, what do you make of this "new york post" story that debbie is asking for or is supposed to get $4 million or back out of this custody? >> as much as i'm a great believer in free press, i've had the experience twice within the last three months and probably ten times in my career where there's been a story in the "new york post" about a client of mine that i knew was false. i have sent letters and asked for reinteractions and gave the same reaction as here. my guess is that you'd have to take it with a grain of salt. >> larry: neil? >> i agree. i don't see any basis for her to try to extract any money from -- >> larry: wouldn't she? suppose she had never showed an interest in raising them. suppose you were her attorney and she said to you, you know, can we get something out of this? i'm just -- that's a hype thetic. >> i'm surprised she hasn't already asked for custodial rights if she was intending to do so. the father of her children has passed away. what parent waits two or three or four weeks to decide whether

to take the children? if you're interested, you make your move quickly. i don't think she's interested. >> larry: judge, how would you look at this if it were in your court? >> i would do this. this amount of money, $4 million is tip money. this state's going to receive over $1 billion and going on for a long, long time. so it would be silly to even put that amount out there. >> larry: all right. how about custody? does she have a valid case if she hasn't paid attention but she's the biological mother? >> yes. there's two primary parties in this case. there's debbie rowe, who's the biological mother. under normal circumstances, she would have the first ticket into the courtroom, and then the second major party is michael jackson's mother, the caring grandmother of the children. >> larry: and what you're saying is you have to wait to hear the story? >> i -- well, at this point, the

strongest case is for the michael jackson's mother to receive the children, to be the guardian of the children. and debbie rowe's position is weaker because in the past she's shown a pattern of being given a sum of money to walk away from raising those children. but she's being unfairly slashed in the media because she tends to look like just a strong individual. and it's unfair that they're slashing her every moment. >> larry: mark? >> well, my experience, i'm certainly not going to be an expert ever or hold myself out to know anything in particular about family law. i will tell you based on observing those kids and observing their interaction with grace and with katherine and grace is the caregiver, that i can't imagine any judge who is -- as long as the situation is the same as it was years ago when we were involved in the child protective services investigation, why you'd ever

give these kids anywhere but with grace and with katherine and let them raise them. these are very well-adjusted kids, very smart and i think people are impressed by paris. i was impressed by paris five years ago in how smart and attune she was. >> larry: neal, you're in court all the time, be a judge here. >> well, i know this judge very well. >> larry: who is the judge? >> mitch becklof, very concerned with children's welfare. the best interest of the children as was discussed earlier. that's going to be his primary focus. i think, though, we have to realize two points. one, there is no custody fight yet because until debbie rowe says she wants custody, katherine is getting the children, that's it, end of story. if debbie says she wants the two eldest children, that means they're going to have to break up these children if debbie was to prevail. if so, if debbie says she wants the children, there's a custody fight. even though she's presumptively the first choice as the mother,

she had no relationship with the kids. it's no different than you or i asking for custody. she's a stranger to them. and in that circumstance, katherine's getting these kids hands down. i think it's a 99% chance debbie's going to ask for custody, i don't think she will, and i think it's almost impossible she gets them. >> larry: does his will mean anything? >> there is just a suggestion, it's not controlling. >> larry: what about the mother of jackson's youngest child? does she have a legal claim to blanket? you have questions. who can give you the financial advice you need? where will you find the stability and resources to keep you ahead of this rapidly evolving world?

these are tough questions. that's why we brought together two of the most powerful names in the industry. introducing morgan stanley smith barney. here to rethink wealth management. here to answer... your questions. morgan stanley smith barney. a new wealth management firm with over 130 years of experience.

>> larry: judge, what if blanket's mother comes forward? >> i believe no judge in america is going to split up these three children. and you'd have two of the finest lawyers in the country sitting next to you. but one of them to mention that they're going to split up the

three kids, no judge is going to do that. as you know, i wore the black robe for a long time and made life altering decisions every day, they're going to keep those children together, the statutes say it, the law says it, and that's the way it will remain. the other mother may come forward, but the best position is by michael jackson's mother and then debbie rowe has a good position. >> larry: okay. marc has -- >> mediating that case. >> larry: marc? >> i'm not sure, i should have looked that up, i could have anticipated that. i know there's a family code section that says there's no parental rights for a sperm donor. is there the same section for a surrogate? >> there's no doubt in my mind that there's a surrogacy contract in this case and the biological mother of the youngest child has derzero righ period.

there's no one who has a surrogate -- >> larry: michael was able to arrange to have a surrogate mother bring him a child and that's done all the time? >> all the time. all the time. >> larry: single men can do this? yes. >> married men can do this. >> anyone. and the idea of them having give up all rights is to avoid these problems later on when someone says, oh, gee, now i'm here. >> larry: is that the same law in florida, judge? >> it's all over the country, larry. we have a modern family now, and the modern family is we have egg down donors, sperm donors. we don't want to tear the fabric or community apart and say who's your father, have a woody allen movie and say, who's where are father? if someone says they're married and this is their child and present to the world it's their child, we're going to assume that and presume that. and we don't want to go against that. and therefore, those two children are michael jackson's children, and in california, if you have these children and you present them to the world for more than two years, there's a very strong presumption they're your children. and the one thing here that's a

fly in the ointment is i wish joe jackson, his ego was a little bit softer because he's throwing fire out there by claiming he's going to become the manager of these children. he should just be the grandfather for these children. >> larry: couldn't debbie rowe, if she makes -- all hypothetical, we don't know what we're talking about. no one knows -- >> that didn't stop us any night the last three weeks. >> larry: keep it up. that never stopped us before. why stop now? couldn't debbie rowe come forward and say, hey, wait a minute, the grandmother with the grandfather not even mentioned. there's a riff there, a whole problem there. >> that's something that's probably, i think, an issue with any court case. somebody can always come up and they can always say x, y, or z, or abc, this is the problem. and therefore, you shouldn't do it. whether that's going to fly is something else. >> katherine was very smart, applied in her own name on the paperwork it says the address of

joe is unknown or to be provided, actually. so she has separated herself from joe and the reason is obvious. if michael complained about the way his father treated him, there's no court that would want to condemn these children to that same environment that michael himself, loathed. >> larry: how about their age, though? >> the grandparents? >> larry: yeah. >> this would be important if someone else comes up to the plate and says i want to have these kids. if a competent member of the family, one of the siblings says we're younger, we're stronger, we'll be here longer, we want the children, then the age is a factor. but right now, there's no one stepping up saying i want these children other than katherine. she has a loving longtime relationship with them. unless someone other than debbie rowe pops up --? >> in katherine's case, a family that looks to be united. >> larry: judge, how is a judge trained for something like this? >> well, hopefully your life experience, your time as a lawyer, and your time on the bench help you. but you have to take control in this case.

this judge is going to have to take control of the case, separate fact from fiction, and every decision this judge makes has to be in the best interest of those three beautiful children. >> larry: i agree with that. everyone agree ws that, neal -- >> the u.s. senate wouldn't. they don't want the judges informed by life experience, they want the opposite. so even though that's the reality -- >> larry: anyone in life separate life experience? >> no, they can't. that's why the whole sotomayor thing is so silly. >> larry: that another thing. >> that's another shot. >> it's true. you've been watching that, you talk about this. the fact is that any judge when making a decision is like anybody else. their life experience -- >> larry: you desire to be fair? >> all judges have life experience. the last thing i want is a judge who went straight from law school to some civil service profession who got appointed. i want somebody either in private practice or made a payroll or had some life experience. >> larry: we have an interesting point next, gentlemen, think about it. do the children have an

attorney? do they need an attorney? next.

>> larry: neal hersh, should the children be represented? >> at this point, i don't think there's any need for that because no one's been making a contest from -- >> larry: when would they be? >> if there was a contest that got very heated and there were allegations as to who the children were bonded to and there was such conflict that the judge felt he needed an advocate for the children --

>> larry: he could appoint one? >> yes. >> larry: let's take a call, los angeles, hello. >> caller: hi, i want to know what is the proof that exists that states debbie rowe is the biological mother of the kids? >> larry: what is the proof? >> caller: correct, it's always been assume the by the media that she's the biological mother. i wanted to know, where is the proof she's the biological mother? >> larry: there must be somewhere. >> weren't they married at the time? >> larry: they were married and they have the children appear, one would assume people saw her pregnant. >> and there was also a judicial determination that she is the mother. >> larry: could be surrogate, though, right? >> well, i don't think she was, but i can't answer the question as to the exact proof of that other than there's no doubt legally she is the mom. >> larry: judge seidlin, this is not open and shut is it? >> no, this case will have more turns and twists than a roller coaster in neverland. things are going to be going on. the court's going to have to have a strong eye in all this,

take control of this case and separate this fact from fiction. and i believe that the lawyers are going to step to the plate and they're continuing to negotiate right now. and at some point, they might even go to mediation. >> larry: if michael, marc, knew all this -- if michael knew he was going to die, let's say, tomorrow, could he have prevented this? could he have done something legally? >> no, i don't think legally you could ever divest the court if there's a battle from making a decision. you can skew it, i suppose. you can set things up. >> larry: like his will says? >> you can lay things out, but you're not going to be able to will your children to somebody. >> the court always has the right to look at the best interest of the children no matter what people say. and that's their job and that's what will happen. >> larry: judge, would you listen to the children in this case? would you ask their opinions? >> absolutely. the children, i would listen to these children, i wouldn't even do it in camera where it's

outside the presence of everyone else. i would have it in front of everyone. i would have the children speak. but you don't want a position where whoever gave the last toy to the child that child then says i want to go with that individual. but i want to speak to the children, they are absolutely vital to the overall scheme of things. >> larry: would you do it, mark, in front of the -- >> no, i think almost every judge would say i'm going to do this on camera. >> larry: but he says no? >> well, i think most judges would take them in camera. i don't think -- >> a criminal lawyer. >> exactly, we like -- >> larry: in camera means -- >> in-camera means in the judge's chambers. >> there's no doubt in my mind this judge will not have the children spoken to in the public forum. and the reason is they're already -- it's a huge spectacle. could you imagine what would happen -- >> larry: you know this judge? >> very well. >> larry: if it is a custody battle, will he talk to the kids? >> i don't think he'll do it directly. he'll either do it through a mental health professional or through an attorney for the

children. >> larry: why? because they would do it better? >> yes. basically, they have more time with the child, their children at issue and they can get more information than he can. >> larry: judge, family court decisions are appealable, aren't they? >> oh, absolutely. and this is family court and probate court are courts of equity. therefore, anybody can come in if they have an equitable position. the court will listen to these children. i always like to do it right in front of the parties. so they saw and heard everything i was doing. now the court can do it in an open court and just remove the media from the courtroom. and that's what the judge might do. and i did it that way. >> larry: now, let me get a quick call in. richmond, virginia, hello. >> caller: obviously any woman would sell their children is insane. and i was just wondering, would the judge consider debbie rowe's mental status? >> larry: well, if she sold them

already -- oh, you mean previously selling them? >> right, and you can order a mental exam of any litigant, you know -- >> larry: she's getting a bad rap here. >> well, she's been vilified already based on stories we don't know are substantiated. >> on the other hand, as i said before, if she was really interested in getting these kids, she should have been at the courthouse doors the day after he passed away. >> larry: thank you all very much. stimulating stuff, although hypothetical. >> very hypothetical. >> another celebrity pundit fest. >> larry: and geragos with his throw in on the supreme court throws that in. mark geragos, neal hersh, and larry seidlin. what's your take on all this? go to cnn.com/larryking, let us know. we could be reading your comments. we'll be back in 60 seconds. i switched to a complete multivitamin with more. only one a day women's 50+ advantage... has gingko for memory and concentration... plus support for bone and breast health. just what i need. one a day women's.

tell your friends, tell your dad, tell your mom! never mind, they've been singing our songs since we first showed up with our pirate hats on! if you're not into fake sword fights pointy slippers and green wool tights take a tip from a knight who knows free credit report dot com, let's go! vo: offer applies with enrollment in triple advantage. >> larry: we know you've got something to say about our show tonight because you've been burning up the blog. here's our david with your comments about michael jackson and more. david?

>> larry, we are talking all things michael jackson on the blog tonight. it's a conversation happening at cnn.com/larryking. we're talking mainly tonight about this custody issue of michael jackson's children such as you just were with the panel. and of all of the thousands of responses that we had today on the blog, one really caught our eye. i'm going to share it with you, larry. somebody named christina. she says this, i hope the children stay with katherine jackson since that was michael jackson's expressed wish. in his will. she goes on to say katherine and debbie rowe can find a healthy, peaceful to existence for the sake of the children. that's happening cnn.com/larryking. jump into the conversation. before we go, remember this date. keep it in mind, august 29th. the place is london, august 29th, would have been michael jackson's 51st birthday, the 02 arena where michael jackson was supposed to have all of these concerts. can you believe, larry, that the concert promoter behind that concert may well do a tribute show to michael jackson on his 51st birthday? now, larry, you've seen a lot,

but would you say if i told you that the headliners may be diana ross, stevie wonder, justin timberlake and lionel richie? what would you say to that, larry? >> larry: who's going to open? >> here's another thing, we don't know who is going to open. but what would you say if i told you the jackson brothers and maybe even janet jackson would appear? >> larry: i think they might sell out. >> what would you say if i asked you for your credit card so i can go over there and cover it for the blog, larry? >> larry: you got it. you have my card, you can go. i'm paying and not cnn, right? >> this is from you, larry. it's your blog, i'll take the credit card, i'll cover it down two weeks, maybe three max, larry. maybe four max, that's it. >> larry: you're going, that's it. you're going. have a good time. >> the concert promoter may do this. he's making the rounds today, this story is making its rounds across the web today. those names, by the way, have not confirmed. that is what the concert promoter is saying would be his wish. and he has, in fact, said

according to some quotes in some articles on the web today that his hope is to have the jackson brothers and even janet jackson perform in o2 arena for this tribute concert on what would have been michael jackson's 51st birthday. nothing confirmed, just making its way across the web. we have it on cnn.com/larryking. >> larry: and i assume you want a round trip ticket. >> i'm telling you five weeks, larry, that's it, five weeks. >> larry: tough staff, i have to live with them. carlos and jim are back next with the latest on the autopsy results after this. you have questions. who can give you the financial advice you need? where will you find the stability and resources to keep you ahead of this rapidly evolving world?

these are tough questions. that's why we brought together two of the most powerful names in the industry. introducing morgan stanley smith barney. here to rethink wealth management. here to answer... your questions. morgan stanley smith barney. a new wealth management firm with over 130 years of experience. feels kind of like knives. aleve works all day on my back pain. only two aleve liquid gels can stop pain all day. that would take twice as many advil or ibuprofen. aleve allows me to get through my work day.

>> larry: anderson cooper hosts "ac 360" at the top of the hour. we understand it's barack obama

part two, right, anderson? >> that's right, my exclusive talk with president obama in cape coast castle in west africa in ghana, countless years, africans were killed or shipped into a life of bondage in america and elsewhere. it was an emotional experience for the president, sasha, and malia. the president talks about that. he takes us behind the scenes what happened when his girls met the pope in rome. and michelle obama's family's roots. we'll show you the south carolina plantation where her family believes her great, great grandfather was born into a life of slavery. also tonight, the michael jackson investigation, cnn has new video of the coroner removing documents from the office of dr. arnie klein. we'll tell you what that bodes for him and for the investigation. and jackson's security detail, the head of it is also speaking out to randi kaye. about michael jackson's addictions and how hard jackson was working at the time of his death. those stories and more on the murder of the florida couple ahead, tonight, larry on "360."

>> larry: the always interesting, anderson cooper, "ac 360" 10:00 eastern 7:00 pacific. our dynamic duo returns. jim moret and carlos diaz. what's the latest word on the autopsy? >> well, we're expecting to get the results possibly the end of the week, but most likely the middle of next week. >> larry: this is not the definitive? >> this will be the definitive. >> larry: the brain? >> the toxicology reports, everything. final conclusions as to the cause of death and the fact the coroner's office went to the doctor's office today indicates they still want more information. >> larry: brain not yet returning to the family, right? >> it's not -- it's portions of brain. you hear people talking about michael's -- michael hasn't been buried yet. michael's still not in the ground. >> larry: where's the body? >> hearing it could be at forest lawn. could be in berry gordy's crypt. it could be in a refrigerator unit while they determine where they're going to bury it. one thing to be talked about is the fact diprivan and propofol, the two -- same drug they say michael was addicted to, because

it's not written as a prescription, because it's not prescribed to people, because it's an anesthetic, it's going to be tough to track this because it's not -- you're not going to follow a paper trail. there are lot numbers they're going to have to look at. because they're lot numbers it's not a specific doctor. it's basically if they have the vials and they've recovered the vials in the house, a lot number on that vial and track it to the hospital. they can't track it to the specific doctor as to how michael got that. that's the wrench in the entire situation there. >> larry: what do you make of this dr. klein thing today? >> dr. klein -- that was a weird interview. trang for him to say to the best of my knowledge i'm not the father of those kids. the whole thing was strange. they wanted more information from him. he says he's been cooperating. the coroner today says extensive cooperation. didn't say full cooperation, extensive. >> larry: he described what he did to michael. is that allowed?

cap you say what you did to a patient? >> i don't know. >> larry: does the privilege last after death? >> i believe it's does. it's public record he had his nose done. the fact nobody is going to be surprised or sue over that. they wanted more documentation. >> larry: what do you make of this? >> there are so many facets to the story. the children, drug, tip of the iceberg. the real fight is going to come with the estate. michael left the estate to two different people. katherine filed paperwork wanting more control of the estate. they want to get the custody situation taken care of as soon as possible. you don't wpt to fight for the estate and custody battle for some time. >> larry: more with jim and carlos. has the michael jackson case impacted celebrities who gained the prescription drug system? ♪ finally lovers know no shame ♪

♪ watching in slow motion ♪ as you turn to me and say ♪ take my breath away (announcer) ge locomotives. customers love them almost as much as we love making them. ♪ my love (announcer) innovation today for america's tomorrow.

>> larry: carlos this time, are celebrities running around tonight in panic because doctors are not giving them the drugs they're used to getting? >> this is the wake-up call for celebrities they cannot -- doctors are human beings. doctors are awestruck like the rest of us. they are in awe of celebrity and what they bring, powers celebrity bring. i've seen it with doctors that are friends of mine. this is a wake-up call. saw it with anna nicole, heath ledger, seeing it with michael jackson. this is an alert to doctors that if you prescribe celebrities drugs, that they don't need, and something bad happens you could be held responsible. >> larry: do you think, jim, it's possible some addicts are going nuts now? >> yeah. look, carlos is right. fame is intoxicating. doctors want to be around celebrities.

people around hollywood are finding it harder to get what they need. let's be serious. if twrou have money you're going to get what you want. i think that's the problem that we're seeing here. >> hopefully it's going to be harder. that's what i hope comes out of this case. that they really to the letter of the law go after these doctors who may have prescribe the michael jabs these drugs. we're talking about diprivan, perpofol. they should not be in the house, anybo anybody's home. >> larry: is joe jackson a villain in this? >> i think he's being vilified. i think statements are frankly inappropriate to talk about your own record company at the b.e.t. awards and talking about the idea of putting your grandparents on stage. >> larry: if the jackson families, the jackson guys wanted to it an act now, would they be a big booking? >> if they can get janet to be the lead, somehow convince janet to do some kind of serious of shows at 02 arena in england,

that would be -- 50 shows may be too many. if they can get janet involved ten shows -- does janet need it? >> people heard jermaine saying -- he still has a great voice. >> larry: could the brothers be a big vegas act? >> i hope so. i'd book them. >> that's the thing, too. i mean, that's the one thing we haven't heard of. we haven't heard from the brothers. they have -- ever since jermaine talked to you at neverland, that i go away. you wonder what the next move is going to be. >> larry: why don't others come out? >> others? >> larry: brothers. the family is broogrieving. too soon. >> larry: parents, we forget, have lost a child which is the worst thing that can happen to a parent at any age. >> to do it in such a public forum and see it every day, must be difficult on that family. >> for a lot of different people when he passed, it was this big

commotion. michael jackson's gone. what's the next move? i think now it's set in. wow, he really is gone. and he's not coming back. we've lost a great entertainer and great person. >> larry: do you expect based on la toya's statements there's a criminal investigation invoked? >> if diprivan was in the room, found the doctor that gave it to him, you're looking at a criminal investigation. i don't think anything la toya jackson says is going to influence the investigation. the investigation has been on going and la toya's comments to uk tabloid is not going to have an effect on the investigation. >> larry: she's sum mizing, isn't she? >> we heard from the l.a. police chief. the they're looking at the possibility of a homicide vangsz. >> larry: the fda? >> that's another thing, too. >> larry: looking at doctors. >> looking at doctors. like we said, from what we understand, michael jackson had dentists involved as well. there were rumors dentists were

involved. it's a long stretches investigation that will not be solved tomorrow. >> it's not just the depth. it's also the long-term misuse and abuse of prescription drugs. >> larry: how much legs does this story have? >> there so many facets to it. when you talk about the chirp involved, custody battle, the fact we haven't gotten the toxicology report yet, the fact the estate -- that battle is looming. so many facets to the story. we'll be talking about this story for months to come. >> still talk about the -- he was our generation. there's so many -- >> larry: imagine in if we had this communication skills with elvis' death. >> exactly. you made a great point. you know, the jackson family is -- the one thing they're enjoying from this is the amount of income coming in with no money going out. >> larry: thanks, guys. calling you get probably tomorrow. jim and carlos. another