new revelations straight from the doctor who was with michael jackson when he died. dr. conrad murray insists he never gave the king of pop anything that should have killed him. and his attorney is ripping apart the timeline, calling it police theory. this shocker. cops might have caught dr. murray in a blatant lie. and a gruesome, bloody public service announcement on the dangers of texting while driving. it feels real. it is scary. scared straight is the theme here. you see teen girls texting, and then a head-on collusion. you hear a neck snapping, a little girl in the backseat screaming for mommy and daddy. graphic, raw emotion. i think it's going to work.

call in, we love hearing from you. here's the number. 1-877-tell-hln. e-mail us, cnn.com/primenews. or you can text us at hlntv. just start your message with the word prime. it's your chance to be heard. welcome. this is "prime news," i'm mike galanos. breaking news out of colorado. we're watching a los angeles courtroom for pop singer chris brown, and just moments, he's going to hear his sentence for assaulting his then-girlfriend rihanna. beat her up back in february. brown avoided jail time by taking a plea deal on a felony assault charge. the judge is expected to give him five years probation and about 1400 hours of labor oriented community service. brown is expected to undergo counseling for domestic violence. we'll bring you live when that sentencing begins in los angeles. want to stay with us for that. meantime, stunning statements right now from dr. conrad murray, michael jackson's

personal doctor. he's speaking out against those newly released court documents. they suggest he gave jackson a lethal doze of propofol. murray says he never gave jackson anything that should have killed him. and now his attorney is slamming the theory, and new details where murray may have brought the drugs and if he lied to police about that, as well. take your calls, 1-877-tell-hln, the number. joining us to talk about it, dr. mort kelini, he runs rehabs in los angeles. and with us, andrew blankstein, reporter, "los angeles times" and robin sacks. andrew, let's start with you. lay it out for us, comments from dr. murray and his attorney as they try to rebut these court documents. >> one of the key things they're focusing on is a statement -- and again, people are mixing up with a coroner's report, with

these documents which were actually out of a search warrant from last month that the lapd served on his office in houston, texas. and what they said, essentially, is that murray, dr. murray found jackson not breathing around 11:00. and that's one of the things that the lawyer, his lawyer, is rebutting. >> okay. let me read the statement from, this is ed chernoff, murray's attorney. much that was in the search warrant aftfidavit is factual, but unfortunately much is police theory. the timeline reported by law enforcement was not obtained through interviews with dr. murray, as was implied by the affidavit. so, let me go back to you on that, andrew. so -- we were -- the understanding we had yesterday was, through a three-hour interview that a police detective had with murray, that's how we came one the timeline.

the attorney is saying that's not the case. >> that's right. and the other element is the suggestion in the search warrant affidavit was that dr. murray had been making phone calls for about 47 minutes, but it doesn't really put it in context in what the lawyer is trying to say. and it doesn't portray accura accurately what happened in that time between when jackson was given propofol and when the 911 call was made about an hour and a half later. >> okay, let's bring in robin sacks. as we talk about that timeline, you are looking at propofol given at 10:40. a 911 call is not made until 12:20. that's an hour and 40 minutes. in the middle of that, we're led to believe he was on the phone for 47 minutes. you got to call 911 as soon as the guy's not breathing, i would think. your thoughts here. >> absolutely. that's a huge issue of consciousness of guilt, if the exact moments of time maybe a minute or two one way or another, that may be subject to

dispute, but that's what jury trials are made out of. one person's view is another person's defense. in that search warrant, that search warrant, while it may be police theory, it's still something that was signed under penalty of perjury and signed by a judge, and for our purposes, true until we hear otherwise. >> didn't he make a huge mistake by just giving this open interview? if you were representing him, wouldn't you advised against? >> absolutely, absolutely. i don't think -- i think that chernoff is, you know, kicking himself for not being involved in this case earlier. dr. murray is probably kicking himself for not having hired him earlier. that would be defense attorney advice number one. don't talk. don't say anything. your own statements can be your own worst enemy. statements now combined with i did nothing wrong sounds like a problem. >> exactly. let's bring in the doctor. dr. murray says, he administered

cocktail that we're led to believe was in his system? i know everybody is focusing on what medication was given, and what was not given, but the way i characterize what has happened to michael jackson, really, this is a man who became hooked on prescription medication, a long time ago, four, five years ago, they tried to do an interview, trying to get him involved with recovery, and looking at what part he plays. once you become an addict, you really don't have a sound judgment as what's best for you, so, i'm not surprised that he attempted to get anything he could from his bedside physician, to continue the process, numbing himself out. this is what we call self-medication, with some of these medications that obviously he had no untension of dealing

with. so, i look at the emotional issues involved with michael jackson. unfortunately, his physician has been involved in administering medication that has been lethal, and taken him out. but we need to look at what happened with michael jackson, way before this incident, and i characterize this perhaps somewhat controversially as assisted suicide, because michael did not heed his family's advice to get into treatment, to allow him to do an interventi intervention, so, he could become more educated, and get into recovery and sobriety, and avoid all these consequences. i truly believe that the emotional pain that he was under really made this inevitable. >> all right. we will pick it up after the break. much more on this coming up. we'll take your calls. quite a theory from the doctor, calling it assisted suicide. 1-877-tell-hln is the number. we're monitoring a los angeles

courtroom for the latest on chris brown. stick around for that, as well.

welcome back to "prime news" on hln. want to let you know, chris brown is in a los angeles courtroom waiting for sentencing. we'll keep you updated on that. continue our conversation on the death investigating concerning michael jackson. taking your calls, e-mails. let's go to the phones. crystal in -- hold on a second. we're going to go to los angeles, chris brown being sentenced for beating up his then-girlfriend rihanna. >> thank you. what housekeeping item.

i believe last time you were here, you showed me a copy of the program that mr. brown was going to be doing for domestic violence counseling in virginia? and if you can just if you want, you can just give me the name of that program. >> sure, commonwealth catholic charities. >> thank you. can i get a copy of that? we'll give you back your original. >> and did i leave a copy of the city letter from -- >> the chief of police? yes, i have that. >> okay, okay. i think i have everything with that. >> got it. all right, we're here for sentencing. last time we postponed it because i did want to see an

indication of what the state of virginia would be requiring of mr. brown, because i wanted a firm plan. as you know, i'd indicated to both of you that i wanted to see actual physical labor, as opposed to some type of community service. so, before i sentence, just for the record, i want to indicate that i have read and considered the probation report that was completed in connection with mr. brown. i also, the last time we were together, reviewed a letter from commonwealth catholic charities, indicating that they would be able to accommodate mr. brown in a 52-week domestic violence cown receiving program and it does comport to what's required in the state of california in addition today, i was provided with a letter that's actually addressed to me, from the chief of police of the city of richmond in virginia, a brian

norwood, who confirms in his letter to me that he understands that the community labor includes performing manual labor tasks such as graffiti removal, trash pickup, washing cars, cleaning and maintaining grounds, et cetera, and that he, actually, will supervise your work directly, so, i have a high level of confidence in the fact that that supervision will be conducted and that you will be performing the week that we will be sentencing you to today. so, with that, is there any legal cause why sentencing cannot proceed? >> no, no legal cause. >> all right, thank you very much. mr. brown, in position of sentence is suspended. you are going to be placed on formal felony probation for a period of 60 months on the following terms and conditions. did he do one day?

>> yes. >> served one day in the los angeles county jail, and i will credit you with one day. you are to obey all laws, rules and orders of the court, and all rules and regulations of probation. you get a report to probation within 72 hours of today's date. and your attorney will know the location of that. at this point in time, i'm going to keep probation to be supervised by the state of california, with mr. brown performing his domestic violence cown selling and his community labor in the state of virginia. so, i will expect reports from the domestic violence counseling program, and also expect reports directly from the chief of police of the city of richmond in virginia. and while we are doing that, mr. brown, is that i understand from your attorney that you have no legal residence in the state of

california, that while you are -- you travel here extensively and are here extensively, your family, primarily is in the state of virginia, so, to give you that nexus, we'll allow you to do that, but you have to report here in accordance to whatever terms on the state of california probation department sets for you. do you understand that? >> yes. >> thank you very much. all right, you are also to maintain residence as approved by the probation officer and keep them advised of your home address and telephone numbers at all time. your property to search and seizure any time of day or night, with or without a warrant or reasonable suspicion. do not own, use, possess, buy or sell or any dangerous or deadly weapons including but not limited to firearms, knives or other concealable weapons. i will be issuing a protective order at the conclusion of

sentencing in this case, copy of it is going to be given to you, and one of the terms and candidates of your probation is that you obey the protective order issued in this case, or in any other case. provide dna samples and print impressions as required by penal code section 296. in rule in, and complete. a 52-week domestic violence counseling program. it has been represented to me that the program, sponsored by the commonwealth catholic charities, will -- satisfies the california requirement, and they indicate in the letter, dated june 10th, 2009.

>> your honor, the people have preliminary reviewed the information given to us from the defense attorney on that issue. however, penal code section 1203-097, specifically requires the department of probation has to approve a batter's program. i'm not aware of any official approval at this point. i think it's my understanding that the commonwealth of virginia will satisfies california, but we don't have an official -- >> well, let's just make the following term and condition a term of probation. mr. brown has to complete a one-year domestic violence program which comports fully with the requirements set forth in california penal code. that means that if the probation department at some point in time, after reviewing this program, that has been recommended, determines that that program isn't sufficient, in whatever way, there won't be a debate, you'll have to

transfer to a program that does satisfy the probation department, just so that we're all on the same terms. >> i understand. miss murray and i -- i've done a multipage comparison. they've don't californians before. i don't anticipate that's a program. >> and mr. brown, under california law, you are required to come to see me every three months until the domestic violence counseling program has been completed, and as i indicated to you and your attorney, the district attorney in the past, i will want that to be a personal appearance by you so i can monitor not only your progress in the domestic violence counseling class, but also to monitor how you are progressing on your community labor requirement. you understand that? >> yes. >> all right. >> and in fact, date, can we set that for november 19th? >> yes. i will -- >> is that good? >> not like a furlough day or anything? >> i picked a thursday so it wouldn't be a furlough.

>> these are the lightest days. >> i no longer select wednesdays. is 2:00 okay? >> that's fine. we'll check the calendar. and formally now, you have to perform 180 days of community labor, not community service. we've gone over that, and that include includes physical labor that you have to do. there are certain fines and fees that are required under california law. there is a restitution fine that i impose. that fine may be anywhere between $200 to $10,000, and i'm going to impose a fine of $2,500, pursuant to penal code 1202.4b. i'm imposing a $2,500 probation revocation restitution fine. with that fine is stayed, and that means you don't have to pay it until and unless probation is

violated. also to pay a $30 court security fee. cost of probation services, as determined by the probation officer, and a $30 criminal conviction fine, imposed per sunt to government code section 70373, and a $400 domestic violence counseling fine, which goes into the domestic violence fund. and you've got the 52-week domestic violence counseling program. i'm going to set a progress report, and a report from probation for 11/19/09. i'm also -- >> 2:00 we're going to do this? >> i don't think it should be longer than ten minutes. >> also, i'm going to issue a

protective order, mr. brown. this is, again, a condition of your probation, in this case, pure sunt to 1203.097. a copy of it is going to be given to you, and i'm going to read it into the record. the court orders that the defendant, chris brown, must not harass, threaten, assault, sexually or otherwise follow, stalk -- >> just listening to that last part, the protective order. chris brown getting the sentence we expected. five years of probation, 52-week domestic violence program, and six months community labor, not community service, we're talking about picking up trash, washing cars and the like. also, have to pay a $2,500 fine. we'll have much more on this. chris brown, in court, getting the sentence we expected for assaulting rihanna. stay with us.

welcome back to "prime news" on hln. the blogger who created the website skanks in new york city, going on camera to defend her lawsuit against google. says going didn't do enough to protect her secret identity. remember, she is the one who went on a rant and ripped a model, well, the model sued goggle. i want to know her identity, call her out. there should be consequences if you're going to rip people online. we're going to take your calls on that. and we want your calls on this one, as well. strong warning for you now the video is very graphic, bloody, but it's meant to be. public service announcement on the dangers of texting while driving. again, the warning here.

young kids shouldn't watch this, but for you adults, watch, learn. may the message soak in. let's watch it. >> james, my mate jules fancies you. >> please don't. >> pass -- >> it's not funny now. >> get his number.

>> it is chilling. is this enough to stop you from texting while you're behind the wheel? is it too much? we'll take your calls. 1-877-tell-hln. that's the number. we have the filmmaker, peter watkins hughes with us. he wrote, produced and directed it. also with us, robert sinclair of aaa of new york. and joining us, advertising executive mark dimassimo. we want to really hear from you on this. hear a pin drop in this studio right now, as everybody watched that. so, it is shocking. let's get some opinions on it. robert, start with you. you think it's effective? >> well, absolutely. and i think it's effective because we have abdicated in large part the responsibility of training youngsters for a young age, and so we need messages like this now, for the population, as they get into their teens. unfortunately, we haven't

communicated the seriousness to youngsters that driving is serious, and we need messages like this to let them know. >> it is hard to watch, but i know when my teen gets ready to start driving, he's definitely going to watch it. let's get mark in on this. mark, your thoughts on this? >> absolutely. look, it's an emotional, intense experience, and i have to feel that, you know, the police department's behind this. the first responders wanted to express this, what they experience in reality. so, what you have here is a reality, and the only thing shocking about it is the idea that people have that this is running in tv, in primetime. i doubt that that is -- i doubt that that's true. i doubt that it ran without a warning. i think it's terrific for education and the internet. it's just important for kids to know. >> yep. let's get peter watkins hughes in on this, the filmmaker. pete, you are you with us? >> i am, indeed. >> great job. i mean, in putting this together. it is shocking, but man, it gets the message across. did you know once you took on this assignment, you were going

to go with the scared straight type of theme here? >> absolutely. when we were researching the film at the very beginning, we spent quite a bit of time talking to kids, right across the country in the uk, and the number one message these guys were giving us was, give us reality. if we're old enough to drive, we're old enough to handle the terrible reality of what happens when thing goes wrong when you're driving. our sort of need or whatever, to shock, we've actually led by the young people. young people were telling us, we're old enough to drive. we're old enough to take the reality so, it's the young people's voice we're trying to capture here. >> what's been the response in great britain? especially with young people. >> we're been testing the film, we've been running it against, you know, up with kids, et cetera, and the response has been extraordinary. one thing that is really interesting, talking about, you know, the shocking nature of the

film, we were showing the earlier cuts, slightly less brutal cuts, less bloody cuts, and every time we showed it, until this final cut, all the guys, i mean, these are, for the schools from all over the uk, saying, we need to see the reality. we need a little more. >> there you go. >> so it's needed for young people. but the reality is, i had the misfortune when i was researching this, i had the misfortune of looking at real accident scene photos, and the reality is much more disturbing, and the reality is that actually given the nature of the physics of that accident, the chances are, that the faces and bits of bodies would be missing. so, we are kind of holding back, but we found that line. >> young and old. adults need to know that, too. peter, it's a split second, 60, 65 miles an hour, blooming at the blackberry, that's all i can take, the difference between life and death.

>> absolutely. >> let me get robert back in from aaa. robert, will this change a teen's behavior? >> it's hard to say. i think it has to be part of a multi-pronged approach. this message, along with the message that we give to your young people. there's nothing more dangerous that the average human being can do than ride in or operate a motor vehicle in the course of their day-to-day existence. the number one cause of death for a teenager is driving a car. but it's been well communicated how serious they are, but we seem to take driving very cavalierly. so, the public service announcement will help, but it has to be part of a message that we're sending as parents, as adults, to young people, and probably to lots of adults, as well, that driving is very, very serious, it's very, very dangerous. it requires all your attention behind the wheel, and the idea that you could text while drive is a ridiculous one. >> yeah, exactly. i think people try to do everything but driving on their way to work. we know the study, virginia tech

had a study if you text while you're drive, you are 23 times more likely to get into an accident. enough said. something has to be done. again, we applaud peter watkins hughes for this. we're going to continue this conversation. want to hear from you. do you think it's effective? call in. the number, 1-877-tell-hln.

welcome back to "prime news" on hln. continuing our conversation about a graphic public service announcement but it gets the message across. stop texting while driving. we see a gruesome accident. but that's what can happen when we take our eyes off the road. a lot of you want to chime in. a couple of facebook comments. chance writing this on facebook. also, michelle on facebook writing --

let's hope that people stop texting right now, especially while they're driving. we showed a little bit of it. again, i have to warn you, we're going to show you more, and this is really heart wrenching. this is after the accident, in the public service announcement and his mother, father, not moving. let's watch. >> mommy! daddy! wake up. mommy, daddy, wake up. >> i can't get any response whatsoever. >> i want mommy and daddy to wake up. >> it is heart wrenching. i want to get our ad exec back in. mark, we talk a lot about teens and we want teenagers to get the message. let's hope adults get it, too. you think they will? >> i couldn't agree more. yes, i think adults will certainly get the message. and i think, you know, the truth about people is that for a lot of people, especially young

people, dangerous isn't enough. because they don't believe it will be them. and i think what this gets at, over a million views on youtube, spreading on the social web, partal of the conversation is that it becomes socially unacceptable. socially unacceptable to text while driving. that's where the real change begins in both. >> and i don't think we're there right now. >> no, we certainly aren't. >> >> yeah, people think it's kind of cool to do three things while they drive, and it's not. that's why this is so good. let's get a call in. lisa in kentucky. your thoughts on this? >> caller: oh, god, i bluam absolutely 100% behind it. my niece was hit and killed by a 16-year-old in february, and we believe she was text messaging. and i believe the tape should be shown by everyone before they get a driver's license. it is a privilege to drive, and you need to know what you're responsible for and you are responsible for that vehicle. >> yeah, lisa, we're sorry for your loss, but thank you, again,

for helping cement the message that this is so dangerous. let's bring back peter watkins hughes, filmmaker who directed, wrote and produced this. was there a story like that that you heard that helped drive you to make this, and make this so powerfully? >> absolutely, absolutely. in south wales, where i'm from, similar circumstances. the initial thing. when i was researching, it was speaking to firmen, police officers, all the emergency services, and they were telling me these tales, and that scene there with the boy crying for mommy and daddy, that's something that countless emergency personnel told me, and it's just stayed with me, haunted me. i have a confession, there was a little boy, actually, making my own son henry, and i just heard it now, and it fills me ups my wife, we did a premiere recently, and my wife had to leave the room, because she just

can't handle it, because it's one of those, as a parent, and this is why i think the film just doesn't communicate. it commune kaments to the parents who can hopefully inform their kids or hopefully sort of put pressure on them. the fact, that as a parent, you know, worst nightmare, rather than losing yourself is the idea of your child being left on his own. the child being there, and the film is actually a half an hour drama. the crash is a sequence in the half hour drama. later in that drama, we meet the child's grandmother, and it's a heart wrenching thing where the father of the girl who causes the crash sees this little sweet old lady in the corridor. the coffee machine isn't working. they strike up a conversation and then they realize that actually it was his daughter who killed this old woman's son. and it is one of those things where the breath just leaves the room. and you say what we try to do with the film is, yes, it is aimed at young people and we do

believe passionately that you can re-educate young people. texting is such a new behavior. if we can make smoking unfashionable, you know, after 100 years. >> peter, i hate to cut you off here, but this is a powerful, powerful announcement that by all need to watch and take heed. by grabbing the emotion, the second layer of that story, that this would hit a parent if we win the heart, we'll change actions. peter, nice job, mark, robert, appreciate your time. >> thank you. >> coming up, we're following this story for you. a woman that created a website, skanks in new york city, is defending her lawsuit against google. she rips a model on the website. the model sues google, wants to know who did it. the woman doing the ripping is claiming she's the victim? give me a break.

seeing your name on a blog called skanks in nyc, not good for a reputation, especially for a model. because of a court order, google outed the anonymous blogger that called that model vicious names. here is the model. she's the blond on the left the blogger, the brunette on the right. she wrote nasty words about cohen, but she says she's the real victim. and she's suing google for $15 million. how is that? here's jason carroll from cnn. >> reporter: it's the kind of photo spread no model would want. a feature on the blog called skanks in new york city. former vogue covergirl ended up on the blog, telling campbell brown she was determined to find out who was behind putting her there. >> i wanted it gone and i didn't want it to be there for the rest of my life. and i knew the only way to --

for it to be gone was to call my lawyer. >> reporter: she's not the only one calling a lawyer. so is the woman behind the blog, rosemary port. a 29-year-old fashion student and casual akwan tense of cohen. port's attorney saying she's the real victim. >> i feel my client was wronged and it sets precedent that anyone with money and power couldn't get the eidentity of anyone that decides to be anonymous blogger. >> reporter: port's name released after a judge sided with cohen, who sued google to reveal information about the anonymous blogger. the blog appeared on google's website. the court rejected port's claims that blogs like hers serve as a modern day forum for conveying personal opinions and shouldn't be regarded as fact. >> the court said, look, there was specific evidence that this one person may have libeled another person. in that circumstance, we're going to disclose that game.

>> google says it come flips with court orders, saying, we have a legal team whose job is to scrutinize these requests and make sure they meet not only the letter but the spirit of the law. port plans on suing google for $15 million cohen's attorney says he can't believe port's nerve. >> her being a victim here? i have trouble understanding that. in its entirety. >> web watchers like wired magazine's nicolas thompson say this is a lesson for all anonymous bloggers. >> some of the effect will be good. people will recognize, waked, the law does apply to the blogosphere. people won't publish things they should publish. >> want to know what you think. we'll take your calls, 1-877-tell-hln. joining me former los angeles county district attorney, robin sacks and the model at the center of this storm, liskula

cohen. what was your reaction when the person calling you names is now claiming to be victim here? >> i mean, it's really none of my business. you know what i mean? she's going to do whatever she's going to do and it doesn't have anything to do with me. if she really feels like she's a victim, i mean, i'm sure i'm not the only person that can sort of see how ridiculous that it is. >> exactly. i'm with you on that front. real quick, robin, 30 seconds. does rosemary port have a real case against google? >> absolutely not. i mean, just because of the internet doesn't mean it's free-for-all for everything. i mean, look at pedophiles. pedophiles would say child pornography is also an monitored all the time. so no, no, no. >> more coming up after a break. stay with us.

new revelations straight from the doctor who was with michael jackson the day he died. dr. conrad murray insists he never gave the king of pop anything that should have killed him. and his attorney ripping apart the timeline calling it police theory. then this shocker. cops might have caught dr. murray in a blatant lie. and there's a gruesome bloody psa on the dangers of texting while driving. i mean it, feels so real, it is frightening. you see a girl texting and then a head-on collision. we have a neck being snapped, a little girl in the back, a child crying. screaming, mommy, daddy, wake up. it's graphic, it's emotional but it gets the message across.

we need to stop texting and driving. love to hear from you, call in 1-877-tell-hln is the number. e-mail us cnn.com/primenews, text us at hlntv and start your message with the word prime. it's your chance to be heard. >> this is hour number two of "prime news." i'm mike galanos. we have stunning statements right now from dr. conrad murray, michael jackson's doctor speaking out against those newly released documents that suggest he gave jackson a lethal dose of propofol. dr. murray says he never gave jackson anything that should have killed him and now his lawyer is slamming the coroner's report on what went wrong in those last hours. plus new details where murray may have bought the drugs and whether he lied to police about that, as well. we'll take your calls, experts, joining us again dr. william morrone, toxicologist, also back with us,

robin saks, former los angeles deputy district attorney and alicia jacobs from las vegas. all right. well, let's start with you, dr. maroney. as we talked about. >> thank you so much. >> we talked about this yesterday. now we're getting a small snippette from dr. murray and his attorney. we'll zone in what dr. murray said first, he gave nothing that should have killed michael jackson. is that true? >> if it was given parsed out into pieces and not added together, he has a leg to stand on. the combination of drugs with the respiratory depression side effects was a lethal cocktail and you're not going to find anybody to disagree with that. >> as far as medically because it sounds like by saying that that's a legal answer trying to cover himself, that's what it sounds like. but on a medical front, does he have any excuse at all for the way that this time line lays out that he administered these drugs

to michael jackson, again topping it off with propofol the most powerful of all at 10:40 in the morning. >> the midazolam that he gave is something also used outside of hospitals or surgical centers. even in his cocktail, he's using things that are usually monitored in surgery. the valium, lorazepam and midazolam all add up to a equivalent of 40 to 50 milligrams of valium all to themselves. and that's never given by physicians. plus propofol. >> all right. let's get a call in. marie is with us in florida. your comments or questions here? >> caller: hi it, i just want to say that fans are beyond distraught and sick to our stomach that a homicide may have actually occurred and we are demanding that justice is served. doctors are supposed to take care of people unable to take

care of themselves. if michael was an addict this includes him. so i just want to say if this case goes to court, it's going to be a hard time if not impossible to find a jury that doesn't have their heart string tied to michael jackson or at least some experience in connection with someone who has struggled with addiction. >> let's bring in our attorney robin saks. robin, let's hit the first point that marie brought up, talking about a doctor caring for michael jackson because personally, i don't see any excuse other doctors gave him meds for years. what happened in the last hours before his death right there is damning enough against dr. murray it would seem. >> that's exactly what i think. you look at the propofol and any medication that wouldn't be administered out of the house and whether someone's an addict or not, the fact that that amount, whether it be in a cocktail or propofol by itself caused the death, that's enough to be able to prove the prosecution's case, and frankly,

i think it's even worse when you add in the addiction and the drug used and the drug history and hope that you have someone to come to the rescue and say hey, you need help. >> exactly, help. not more of the same. out from dr. murray's writing this. egregiously the timeline was not obtained through interviews with dr. murray as was implied by the affidavit. lisa jacobs, is it your understanding as well that they're getting this time line because of a three-hour interview with dr. murray? >> exactly. many people are surprised actually at how candid he was. he gave a lot of information that it looks like will be very damaging to this man. some of it shocking especially what how long it took him to make that call to 911. i cannot get that out of my

head. i have a feeling a jury would feel the same way. >> robin, at 10:40 is when according to this time line is when he administered propofol. we don't get a 911 call for an hour and 40 minutes. he found michael jackson not breathing at 11:00 in the morning. >> that is problematic for dr. murray. even if as chernoff suggested, these are incorrect statements that are contained within the search warrant, i'm still wondering how you deal with the fact that the phone records speak for themselves and not one of the three cell phone calls that were made during that 47-minute period of time was a call to 911. >> exactly. now, dr. murray, his attorney, they're disputing this time line, the 11:00 a.m. we'll delve into much more. take your calls and comments and questions, the number 1-877-tell-hln as we're all hoping and wanting justice for the king of pop.

welcome back to "prime news" on hln. continuing our conversation, death investigation concerning michael jackson. a lot of you e-mailing us. here's an e-mail from barbara in oklahoma writing i cannot imagine a medical professional jeopardizing the life of an individual for the sake of monetary gain. it isn't about what michael begged for, it is about the doctor acting unethically. and again, we go back to that timeline where dr. murray, according to the time line, tried to wean michael jackson off the propofol, did not want to give him propofol on the morning michael jackson died. gave him other medications but

gave him midazolam. he final gives him propofol because michael had begged for it. jeff in florida, go ahead. >> caller: my name's jeff. i'm an and anesthesiologist in florida. this is, i mean, anyone that thinks that this is not malpractice and accounts to murder is ridiculous. dr. murray gave michael jackson multiple benzodiazepines through the day. he said he didn't know that michael jackson was an addict. addict. gives him 250 milligrams and then goes to the bathroom? that's the amount that i would give normally. >> let me stop you there. it was 25 milligrams you.

make good points. bring back dr. william morrone. doctor, it's hit on the basic point. a cardiologist administering these medications especially propofol. it shouldn't happen, should it. >> that's exactly right. and that's why we obtain board status and board certification because then you practice within the specialty board. if you're not an anesthesiologist, have you no business giving these drugs. >> yeah. robin saks, our attorney, what's the defense to that? is there one? >> the defense in this case is going to be looking for reasonable doubt wherever you can find it and finding a juror that's going to be sympathetic to a doctor because the evidence as it stands and as we're hearing from both viewers and experts, it's pretty darn damning stuff not to mention all of the consciousness of guilt factor. not only do we know what dr. murray knew was wrong but he knew what he was doing was wrong.

>> alicia jacobs, i know you had an encounter with the jackson family, young paris jackson. can you tell us that story? what happened. >> on sunday, i was over at the palms hotel which is a place where the jacksons had spent a lot of time. michael brought the kids there a year ago. he was recording. the kids came back there with their grandmother to get away before they start school. i was sitting in the salon having my lights done and in comes paris with her aunt and jackie jackson and a tutor. she had her very first haircut ever at 11 1/2 years old. as soon as they cut her hair, security made the hairstylist go to the floor, pick up every single strand of hair and but the it in a plastic baggie and they put it on the premises. imagine what the hair would be worth, just the dna alone. what a lovely little girl. charming. got main cure. was as pleasant as can be. it brought back the idea that michael in spite of everything, did he an amazing job raising these kids. we have seen that more than anything since his passing.

>> did you speak to her at all? >> i did very briefly. she chose this obnoxious green nail polish because she mentioned it matched the color of the limousines at the palms and said they were at the pool that day and it was raining in las vegas and that she started dancing in the rain which instantly made me think of her father. she said she was having a wonderful time in vegas spending it with family. >> you bring us back to kind of home base here at the end of the day. three children without a father. we're going to talk about justice and how this happened and who could be responsible, but it's nice to be brought back to that, young paris getting a haircut. maroney, robin, thanks so much. coming up, a man accused of killing a model? some serious red flags you've got to think when you're talking about ryan jenkins finds his way on a reality show. didn't someone see something in meeting this guy? did they sense any violent

tendencies? we'll talk to the person who cast this guy for the show on vh-1. that's coming up.

welcome back to "prime news." coming up, a public service announcement. it is bloody, it is jarring, plays out like a horror movie designed to warn teens, really all of us, to stop texting while driving because when we text and drive, this can happen. watch right here. well, i fooled you. we've got a crash coming up and then the horror and aftermath after that. so we want to hear from you on that what you think. is it too much? it gets the message across. also this story, shocking new insights today on the reality show millionaire contestant accused of killing his ex-. we may never know why jasmine fiore was murdered. ryan jenkins committed suicide. it seems were there red flags out there and who might have seen these?

this guy had a criminal record, domestic violence, his own father said hollywood corrupted him but a casting director calls him a nice guy. how did he make it on to a reality show? we'll take your calls, 1-877-tell-hln. back with us dr. dale archer, psychiatrist, and stewart bra l brazel, the casting director who selected jenkins to appear on the vh-1 reality show megan wants a millionaire. where did you meet ryan jenkins and what was he like when you first met him. >> i met jenkins in las vegas. this was a first city, the first stop in kind of a united states casting tour. we hit four different cities, my personal casting team. and you know, ryan was the first person i met in las vegas. he came over, approached me and my colleague, was very tongue in cheek, very energetic, very confident. a cocky guy was saying what are

you guys doing? hey baby baby and that's why i thought this guy would be perfect for the show that i'm casting. >> when you met him, did he know this was an audition? so he knew who you were and you were casting for the show so he was laying it on thick, is that what you're saying. >> no, he was actually just in laegs vegas on a vacation with friends and had no idea at all that we were there forecasting whatsoever. after we spoke for a couple minutes and i got a feel for his energy and i thought this guy's perfect, he's exactly what we're looking for. he's charismatic, convictional, attractive and i mentioned hi, i introduced myself said i'm in town casting a reality show. is this something that you've considered doing? would you like to be interviewed for the show. >> he was flirting with you, as well, wasn't he? >> he was a flirtatious guy. you can see on the show i realized three episodes, you can see on the show he's very much a ladies man. no doubt about that. >> okay. so you think he's going to be

good reality tv, right? >> 100%. >> so after that, what was the background check on this guy? i think a lot of people, that's the base question. how did he end up on a reality show. >> exactly. so my involvement with the show and i am not speaking as a representative for the show but on my own terms, my involvement is very much the creative process. i recruit tal pent lent. i meet them, interview them on camera. it's ten to 15 minutes. once i'm done, i pass those tapes on. so i don't have anything to do with the vetting process. now, because i have personally been on a show myself, they most definitely did a background check on me so i assume the natural vetting process was in order for the show, as well. >> from another contestant, we gathered there was a 500-question psychological exam given to him and we're assuming mr. jenkins, as well. let's bring in dr. dale archer as you listen to that account and this guy is charming, flirting with stuart there, how

does that charming ladies man, the man plateder lead to what we end up with, a murder and suicide when it's all said and done? i think it's very common to have an abuser who basically looks completely normal every other aspect of their life. so i don't think there was necessarily any red flag that the people on the show were going to say, oh, my, this guy's going to be bad news. when you can find out what's going on is when they are with a significant woman in their life and oftentimes it's the only time you're going to see this type of behavior and typically that takes awhile to build up. we talk about the continuum of abuse, we talked about chris brown previously. and what happens is, this eventually can get taken to the level where they start thinking, i'm going to lose this woman forever, and if i can't have her, nobody else will either. >> there you go. okay. so let's go back to stuart when you talk about the show megan wants a millionaire," what was he like with megan? i take it he never showed any violent tendencies at all?

>> ryan was a perfect gentleman on the show. as i said only three episodes aired. i was not there during the shooting. i met ryan during the casting process of the show. but he, anyone can see that he was obviously charming her. they had a very successful dinner date. she seemed to be enthralled. he was a charming guy. could anyone have predicted the actions he would have taken after the show wrapped? no one saw this coming. this is a complete tragedy. my only hope is that something positive can come out of this complete devastating experience that we can better the reality casting process. and look more possible counsel, better prepare these people before they go on the show, during the show, after the show. you go from being in the sleeping quarters with all the other contestants, you're competing with them and we friending them, it's a crazy process. >> we'll take your calls, 1-877-tell-hln.

welcome back to "prime news" on hln. the blogger who created the website skanks in new york city going on camera to defend her lawsuit against google. says google didn't do enough to present her secret identity and wants $15 million. remember she is the one who went on a rant and ripped a model. well the model sued google, i want to know her identity. call her out. there should be consequences if you're going to rip people online. going to take your calls on that at 1-877-tell-hln. we want your calls on this one, as well. strong warning for you now. the video you're about to see is very graphic, bloody but it's meant to be. the public service announcement on the dangers of texting while driving, again the warning here. young kids shouldn't watch this

but for your adults watch, learn. mate message soak in. let's watch it. >> fancy you. get his number. [ screaming ] ♪ [ horn honking ]

n no! >> it is chilling. is this enough to stop you from texting while you're behind the wheel? is it too much. we'll take your calls, 1-877-tell-hln is the phone number. we have the filmmaker, peter watkins-hughes with us, he wrote, produced and direct that had announcement. also with us, robert sinclair with aaa of new york. also joining us advertising executive mark dimassimo, ceo and founder of dimassimo goldstein. you could hear a pin drop in this studio as everybody watched that. so it is shock. let's get some opinions on it. robert, do you think it's effective. >> absolutely. i think it's effective because we have abby indicated in large part responsibility of training youngsters for a young age. so we need messages like this now for the population as they get into their teens. unfortunately, we haven't communicated the seriousness to youngsters that driving is very

dangerous and as such, we need messages like this to let them know. >> i agree with it. it is hard to watch but i know when my teen gets ready to start driving, he's definitely going to watch it. let's get mark dimassimo in on this. your thoughts on this. >> absolutely. look, it's an emotional intense experience. and i have to feel that you know, the police departments behind this, the first responders wanted to express this what they experience in reality. so what you have here is a reality. and the only thing shocking about it is the idea that people have that this is running on tv in "primetime." i doubt that that is true. i doubt it ran without a warning. i think it's trik for education. it's terrific for the internet. it's just important for kids to know. >> let's get peter watkins-hughes in on this, the filmmaker. are you with us. >> i am indeed. >> great job in putting this poth. it is shocking but it gets the message across. did you know you're going to go with the scared straight type of

theme here, you're going to make it graphic. >> absolutely. when we were researching the film at the very begin, we spent quite a bit of time talking to kids right across the country in the uk. the number one message these guys were giving us was give us reality. if we're old enough to drive, we're old enough to handle the terrible reality of what happens when things go wrong when you're driving. so from the outset, i was sort of need or whatever to stock was led by the young people. young people were telling us we're old enough to drive and take reality. so it's -- it's the young people's voice we're trying to capture here. >> what has been the response in great britain, especially among young people? >> it's been extraordinary. we've been testing the film. the editing process and even throughout its writing, we've been running it up with kids, et cetera and the response has been extraordinary. one thing that really is interesting talking about the shocking nature of the film, we were showing the guy's earlier

cut, slightly less brutal cut, slightly less bloody cut and every time we showed it until this final cut, all the guys, these are school systems from all over the uk were saying we need to see the reality. we need a little more. so like i say, it's engineered for young people but the reality is when i was sort of researching this, i looked at real accident scene photos and the reality is much more disturbing. and the reality is that actually given the nature of the physics of that accident, the chances are the faces and that the bodies would have been missing. we are pulling no punches. with the guidance of young people, i think we found just about that line. >> adults need to know it, too. it's a split second. people going 60, 65 miles an hour looking at the blackberry texting away, that's all it could take the difference

between life and death. robert from aaa, robert, will this change a teen's behavior. >> it's hard to say. i think it has to be part of a multipronged approach. this message along with the message we give to our young people, there's nothing more dangerous than the average human being can do than ride in or operate a motor vehicle in the course of that i day to day existence. the number one cause of death for a teenager is a car crash, more than guns, aids, suicide combined. those other path jens it's been well communicate how serious they are but we seem to take driving very cavalierly in this country. the announcement will help but has to be part of a message we're sending to young people and probably lots of adults as well that will driving is very, very serious and very, very dangerous and requires all of your attention when you're behind the wheel. the idea that you coo text while driving is a ridiculous one. >> exactly. i think people trying to do everything but driving on their way to work. we know the study, virginia tech had a study, if you text while

your drive, you're 23 more times likely to get into an accident. enough said. something has to be done. we applaud peter watkins-hughes for this. want to hear from you. do you think it's too much. >> call in, the number 1-877-tell-hln.

welcome back to "prime news" on hln. continuing our conversation about a very graphic public service announcement, but it gets the message across. stop texting while driving. we see a really gruesome accident but that's what can happen when we take our eyes off the road. a lot of you want to chime in. a couple of facebook comments. chance writing this on facebook. teenagers think nothing bad will ever happen to them. hopefully this will be their wake-up call. you're right on that one, chance. also, michelle on facebook writing --

let's hope that people stop texting right now, especially while they're driving. we showed a little bit of it. again, i have to warn you, we're going to show you a little bit more. and this is really heart wrenching. this is after the accident, in the public service announcement and a child is sitting in the backseat and his mother, father, not moving. let's watch. >> mommy! daddy! wake up. mommy, daddy, wake up. >> i can't get any response whatsoever. >> i want mommy and daddy to wake up. >> it is heart wrenching. i want to get our ad exec back in. mark dimassimo, mark, we talk a lot about teens and we certainly want teenagers to get the message. let's hope adults get it, too. you think they will? >> i couldn't agree more. yes, i think adults will certainly get the message. and i think, you know, the truth about people is that for a lot of people, especially young people, dangerous isn't enough. because they don't believe it

will be them. and i think what this gets at, over a million views on youtube, spreading on the social web, part of the conversation is that it becomes socially unacceptable. socially unacceptable to text while driving. that's where the real change begins in both. >> and i don't think we're there right now. >> no, we certainly aren't. >> we're not. yeah, people think it's kind of cool to do three things while they drive, and it's not. that's why a public service announcement like this is so good. let's get a call in. lisa is with us in kentucky. your thoughts on this? >> caller: oh, god, i am absolutely 100% behind it. my niece was hit and killed by a 16-year-old in tampa in february and we believe she was text messaging. and i believe the tape should be shown to every person before they get a driver's license. i don't think it is just teens but it is a privilege to drive and you need to know what you're responsible for and you are responsible for that vehicle. >> yeah, lisa, we're sorry for

your loss, but thank you, again, for helping cement the message that this is so dangerous. let's bring back peter watkins hughes, filmmaker who directed, wrote and produced this. peter war, there a story like that that you heard that helped drive you to make this and make this so powerfully? >> absolutely, absolutely. in south wales, where i'm from, of researching the film, i was speaking to police officers and firemen and all the emergency services and they were telling me these tales and that scene there was a boy crying for mommy and daddy, that's something that countless emergency personnel told me, and it's just stayed with me, haunted me. in fact, i have a sort of confession to make. the little boy actually is my own son henry. and i just heard it now and it fills me up. my wife, we did a premier recently and my wife had to

leave the room, because she just can't handle it, because it's one of those, as a parent, and this is why i think the film just doesn't communicate to a 17-year-old. it communicates to the parents who can hopefully inform their kids or hopefully sort of put pressure on them. the fact, that as a parent, you know, worst nightmare, rather than losing yourself is the idea of your child being left on his own. the child being there, and the film itself is actually a half an hour drama. the crash is a sequence in the half hour drama. later in that drama, we meet the child's grandmother, and it's a heart-wrenching thing where the father of the girl who caused the crash bumps into this little dear sweet old lady in the corridor. the coffee machine isn't working. they strike up a conversation and then they realize that actually it was his daughter who killed this old woman's son. and it is one of those things where the breath just leaves the room. and you say what we try to do with the film is, yes, it is aimed at young people and we do believe passionately that you can re-educate young people. texting is such a new behavior.

we've only been doing it ten years. if as a society we can make smoking unfashionable after 100 years -- >> peter, i hate to cut you off. i'd love to continue the rest of the show with you. i think you did such a great job. this is a powerful, powerful announcement that by all need to watch and take heed. by grabbing the emotion, the second layer of that story, that this would hit a parent if we win the heart, we'll change actions. peter, nice job, mark, robert, we appreciate your time, as well. coming up, we'll continue to follow this story for you. a woman that created a website, skanks in new york city, is defending her lawsuit against google. she creates the website, goes and rips this model. the model sues google, wants to know who did it. the woman doing the ripping is claiming she's the victim? give me a break.

well, seeing your name on a blog called skanks in nyc, not good for your reputation especially for a model. because of a court order, google has outed the anonymous blogger who called that model vicious names. here's the model, liskula cohen, she's the blonde on the left. the blogger rosemary port, the bruinette on the right. she says she is the real victim. and she is suing google for 15 million. how is that? here's jason keller, from our sister network cnn. >> it's the kind of photo spread no model would want, a feature on the blog called skanks in new york city. the former vogue cover girl, liskula cohen ended up on the blog telling cnn's campbell brown she was determined to find out who was behind putting her there. >> i wanted it gone and didn't want it to be there for the rest

of my life and i knew the only way for it to be gone was to call my lawyer. >> reporter: she's not the only one calling a lawyer. so is the woman behind the blog, rosemary port, a 29-year-old fashion student and casual aquaintance of cohen. port's attorney saying she's the real victim. >> i not only feel my client was wronged but i feel now it sets precedent that anyone with money and power couldn't get the identity of anyone that decides to be an anonymous blogger. >> port's name released after a judge sided with cohen who sued google to reveal information about the anonymous blogger. the blog had appeared on google's website. the court rejected port's claim blogs like hers serve as a modern-day forum for conveying personal opinion and shouldn't be regarded as fact. >> the court said look, there was specific evidence that this one person may have libeled another person. in that circumstance, we're going to disclose that name. >> dwoogal says it complies with

court orders saying we have a legal team whose job it is to scrutinize these requests and make sure they meet not only the letter but the spirit of the law. name private and plans on suing google for $15 million. cohen's attorney says he can't believe port's nerve. >> her being a victim here, i -- i have trouble understanding that. >> reporter: web watchers like nicholas thomson say this is a lesson for all aanonymous bloggers. >> people will recognize the law does apply to the blogsphere. it will be good for society. >> all right. we want to know what you think. joining me to talk about it, we welcome back robin sax. also with, tamara holder. and joining us as well, the model at the center of this storm. welcome back to the show.

what was your reaction when the person calling you names is now claiming to be victim here? >> well, i mean, it's really none of my business, you know what i mean? she's going to do whatever she's going to do. it doesn't have anything to do with me. if she feels like she's a victim, well -- i mean, i'm sure i'm not the only person that can sort of see how ridiculous that is. >> exactly. that's -- i'm with you on that front. real quick, robin, we've got about 30 seconds, does rosemary port have a real case against google? >> oh, absolutely not. just because it's the internet doesn't mean it's a free-for-all for everything. look at pedophiles. pedophiles would say child pornography is aneshpressi esxp a statement. so no, no, no. >> got you. more coming up on this after the break.