MSNBC should have a legal show

I am very disapointed that MSNBC devotes 4 hours a day to broadcasting crockumentaries and I really think they need to add a legal show to their lineup. They used to have two, Dan Abrams and Rita Cosby... but now they have zero. Dan's new show used to do a tiny bit of legal reporting at the end but they've since dropped that in favor of more election coverage.

I honestly believe people are gonna get so sick of this election because the media is driving it into the ground that they will not want to vote.

I'd like to see at least one legal show fill up one of those empty timeslots. They look like a very un-credible news organization if they don't cover all the genres of journalism.

I think Catherine Crier would be a good host. She used to work at Court TV before they fired her. She's filled in for Dan Abrams and Joe Scarborough before on MSNBC.

I also think Susan Filan, Wendy Murphy, or Diane Dimond would make excellent hosts.

I also think CNN needs one. They could put it on at 11, considering they just re-air Cooper's show.

Defending Nancy Grace: More

I think your making a way bigger thing of this than it is. Nancy is a legal analyst. She has the right to analyze a case any way she wants to. The majority of her fans are people with good hearts who want the best for victims and want dangerous killers off the streets. I think the majority believe in freedom of speech... and that is what Nancy is exercising every night.

About you attacking her over the recollection Nancy has about her fiance's murder it just shows that you are not realizing what a traumatic experience that was in Nancy's life. She doesn't even remember going to the courthouse. Its a blur to her because we block out painful memories, thats just human nature. So, if her facts are a little off its not because shes trying to pull a fast one on you. Its just simply, she doesn't remember because the experience was so absolutely traumatic.

Shes not wrong in her predictions. Like when she predicts guilty and the jury says innocent... the jury is wrong!

Nancy was analyzing the Elizabeth Smart case as a legal analyst. She had every right to point out and call attention to a person she thought was suspect. And there were many reasons why he was suspect in many people's eyes.

About Duke, Nancy's not allowed to take a day off from her show? Wow! Tough regimen you've got going on there. And about Duke... I hate that the media has completely freed those players from any responsibilty whatsoever. When in reality, if they hadn't gone to that party and hadn't hired a stripper... something they should of never been doing... none of this would of happened. Yet the media just slaps the label of "innocent," "falsely accused," and "rush to judgement" on them and off they go. Whereas, if they would do their jobs... maybe these 3 boys could learn something about how to not get into this kind of mess agian. And maybe the media could educate other kids that you don't go around doing the kinds of things these kids were doing because look at the mess it can lead you into. Those Duke boys have nobody to blame but themselves.

Monkey see no evil... money hear no evil

I think the bigger show of disrespect of human tragedy is the fact that the autorities are dragging their feat! You do not need a body to prosecute. They swore, they took an oath to protect the public. Everyday Drew reamins free, the public is unsafe. He could strike agian at any moment. We already know hes looking for dates.

But enough about the behavior of Drew because thats not the story... the story is that Stacy is missing and LE has failed to find her. Much worse, they've failed to charge Drew when they have evidence of double homicide!

Defending Nancy Grace!

Nancy is a legal analyst. She doesn’t claim to be a jounalist. She doesn’t have to be fair to all sides. She can say whatever she wants about whatever case she wants. She can say someone is guilty even if the jury says no. She has the right to her opinion and in America, we have the right to express those opinions.

With that said, anybody has the right to disagree with her as well.

I have had it up to here with the media elites who say that journalists can’t give their opinion. We live in the new millenium… this isn’t the 1800’s anymore. Everybody has an opinion and I wanna hear it. I don’t care that we may disagree. The reality is, I want to know what you are thinking.

I have a real problem with people who say that journalists cannot tell their viewers what they really believe about a story. Our whole jury system is based upon what you believe in your moral heart and reasonable head. Journalists have every right to tell people what they believe. And I don’t believe that makes them biased… its makes them better journalists. You can express what you believe one minute and give both sides the next. It has absolutely no bearing on your ability to report the facts.

Thats what I BELIEVE!

Lisa Stebic

Lisa Stebic: No charges, no prosecution, no conviction... yet

Susan, thankyou for bringing some very much needed attention to this case. I am very upset the media hasn't been covering this case like they should be. And unfortunately, I think this is just another fine example of authorities dragging their feat, being lazy, and letting the evidence come to them instead of getting out there in the thick of it, in the mud and getting the evidence themselves. A lot of time has passed and they have done nothing.

I do not care if they have no body. Proseuctors win convictions everyday in courtrooms all across this country without a body. Will it be an uphill battle? You bet! Will it be really tough on the prosecutors? Absolutely. But they are public servants who swore to protect the public and we cannot afford to have Lisa's killer on the streets one moment longer. We cannot afford allowing him to strike agian. We owe it to his next victim to get him off the streets now.

The Celebrity Factor

You know... you have a good point and I wanted to believe that. But just think about how lady justice was tricked in the Robert Blake case. I was sure the jury could care less about Beretta and wouldn't know Robert Blake from the moon. But I had to eat crow on that because the jury proved to be starstruck.

Just because these celebrities are not "on the scene" like an OJ or Michael Jackson does not mean that they are still not celebrities. It does not mean that the judges don't still give them celebrity treatment in their rulings. And its starstriking to the jury because of who they are, the people they bring into the courtroom, and the people they associate themselves with.

Just think of all the great singers Court TV had on during the trial that testifed to Phil Spector's character (and why Court TV is bringing that in during a criminal trial makes no sense to me)... but don't tell me that the juries don't go home and watch the television coverage of the cases and read the newspapers.

Even if they had not known Phil Spector before, they quickly learned... theres a celebrity in the courtroom!

From what my sources told me, 11 of the 12 prevailed in the jury room to hand down the right verdict. At one point it was 11 to 1 to convict, at another point it was 10 to 1 to convict, according to my sources.

But from my analysis of the case, it was really this one hold out who was really strong and just refused to look at the evidence. He was starstruck. He just could not vote Guilty.

So, the reality is that juries are starstruck. We've seen it time and time agian... even in places where we think it won't be a problem like Robert Blake.

Bobby Cutts spared death in Jessie Davis double homicide

Dumb jury syndrome strikes agian! Yesterday, Bobby Cutts was sentenced to 57 years in prison for the double homicide of his wife Jessie Davis and her unborn child Chloe. Cutts was spared the death penalty by the jury of 12. Sources tell me the jury foreman quickly decided agianst the death penalty because Cutts had no prior history of violence and believes he did not intentionally kill Davis. Well thats just simply not true because he did have a misdometer from 10 years ago. But even so, Ted Bundy and Scott Peterson had no prior criminal history either and they are still convicted killers. Jessie Davis and her unborn child get the death penalty... but Cutts doesn't?

Some legal analysts have said they understand the jury's decision because Cutts lead law enforcement to the body. So what? That doesn't change the fact that Cutts committed double homicide. It doesn't change the pain, fear, and terror Jessie was going through as she was being killed. It doesn't ease the families burden at all. So thats just a rediculous argument. This is simply the opinion of 12 people... I disagree with it.

Very shocking is that one source told me that the jury foreman was agianst the death penalty but would consider it if he had to. Don't juries have to death penalty juries before getting on death cases?

Larry's Notebook: Here are some of my notes from watching the testimony at the procceding yesterday:

"I never wanted to believe you could hurt her, but in my soul I knew you had... There are mornings I have to cover her picture up. I can't get out of bed." - Jessie Davis' mother

"Do you know what this feels like?... You don't. Because you have not lost someone. You got rid of someone who was an inconvenience. I hate you." - Jessie Davis' sister

"Don't even look at me... He violently murdered her, five foot four, nine months pregnant, that baby could have delivered," - Jessie Davis' father

Rest in peace Jessie and baby Chloe.

Parents starve baby to death

Parents Tracy Hermann and James Sargent are charged in Peoria with starving their 5 month year old baby, Benjamin Sargent to death:

This is brutal 1st degree homicide. I'm very pleased to hear that Lyons may seak the death penalty, I would absolutely encourage and push him to do that. You not only need to do it to provide justice to the infant but to send a message to the public that this kind of crime will not be tolerated. I hate bail! They should not be released pending trial... they should be in jail. Its really interesting for me to hear defense attorneys say that these people should be found not guilty because of their "troubled past" and "history of mental illness." They absolutely refuse to let their clients take any responsibilty. It goes back to what I was saying about defense attornies, I just don't understand how they do what they do. If their fight in the courtroom allowed these parents back on the street to do it agian... I just couldn't live with myself.

The authorities need to be working around the clock to remove the 3 year old from the home.

Drew Peterson to New York for another heart to heart with Matt Lauer

Drew is eating right into our hands! Keep talking honey! I can't imagine what his defense attorney is thinking. Even I can tell you that you tell your client to be quite. Just like in Scott Peterson, all his interviews can be used agianst him in court. Inconsistant statements can be pointed out by the prosecution. The reality is, even the dating game on the radio will come into court. That will disgust a jury.

With that said, I'm very upset at the law enforcement charged with the prosecution of this case. They are dragging their feat. They have already ruled the 3rd wifes death a homicide... do they have any suspects? Why not charge somebody? They have a body in that case. In Stacy's case... I don't care if they don't have a body because convictions are won in American courthouses everyday without bodies.

The reality is, if they stop dragging their feat and do their jobs... they have a very strong case for double homicide.

Authorities dragging their feat in Brianna Dennison case

Law enforcement sources are telling me that the Nevada Division of Parole and Probation is helping the Reno Police Department investigate the Brianna Dennison case. Sources have told me that many possible persons of interest are on deck. Some of these people have given DNA samples and law enforcement is working on interviewing them. Sources tell me that they have an interest in interviewing all known sex offenders in the area to see if they had anything to do with the murder, know who did it, or can provide police a clue or valuable information.

One high level source told me that law enforcement needs to work around the clock to catch Brianna's killer most urgently because their seems to be a pattern of this person striking once a month. Then I have to personally ask, why is law enforcement dragging their feat? Brianna was found dead on the 15th of this month... its been 14 days... 2 weeks, and you still haven't done anything. You don't even have a suspect. The reality is, the public is going to crack this case, you need to be running to television begging the public for help. I am also disappointed in the media for not giving this case the attention it needs. Their is a killer on the loose who strikes once a month... what could be more important than preventing the next Brianna Dennison from happening?

Tipline: 745-3521

Halt the Auction!

Sources are telling me that Michael Jackson is desperately trying to keep his Neverland ranch with a new loan. My source told me that the ranch will not be put up for auction and the financing is being worked out as we speak. Another source tells me that just a few weeks ago Michael Jackson payed off back taxes on the ranch. Therefore, it doesn't make sense that he would do that just to let the ranch go a few weeks later. Developing...

Michael Jackson's Neverland for Sale

I can confirm that Michael Jackson's Neverland Ranch is to be sold during an auction on March 19th. Unless Jackson pays $24,525,606.61 by that date a public auction with occur in Santa Barbara at the county courthouse. The winner of the auction will not just win Neverland, but all property within and around the property. My sources tell me that Michael Jackson has not been at Neverland since June 30, 2005. I am very curious at who in the world would ever want to buy such a rediculous and crazy property that in my mind, is the scene of multiple crimes.

The Blame the Victim Defense

I can smell a big victim bashing smear campaign in court to distract the jury from the evidence. The defense attorney will dig up any thing they can, anything in her past to drag her memory through the mud like OJ did with Ron and Nicole and Robert Blake did with Bonny Lee Bakley. IMO, judges should not allow that. Its not relevant. If your client is so innocent, you shouldn't have to resort to smearing the victims to prove it.

The Abuse Factor

The reality is that both forms of abuse are awful. Emotional abuse is virtually un-prosecutable which is unfortunate. Abuse of all types should be condemmed. These people need to be put in jail and then once in jail get help for their problem. A lot of people tell me that we shouldn't help them but the reality is, they will be back on the street agian... so even though it seems disgusting to help them, we need to do it so they don't strike agian. Some people tell me that would cost an arm and a leg for tax payers. When the reality is, it would be a drop in the bucket. If we can spend trillions to keep America safe overseas, we can spend a little more to keep America safe here at home.