michael's new show >> seems like a match made in heaven. >> this is "piers morgan tonight." american student amanda knox walked free from an italian prison after serving four years for a horrific crime she didn't commit. her roommate was brute ale murdered in an apartment they shared in perugia. tonight amanda and her boyfriend rafael sollecito are free. she's preparing to fly home to the united states to rebuild her shattered life. for the latest, let's go to matthew chance in perugia. you've been out there the whole time. you were in court today. dramatic scenes. were you expecting that? you've been following this very closely for years. >> reporter: yeah, well, i wasn't quite expecting the level of emotion that i witnessed in the court today. it really was tense. you had both the knox family and the kercher family sitting in the same course. the kerchers very much wanted for amanda knox to stay in prison. they wanted the conviction to be upheld. obviously, the knoxes wanted the opposite. when it went the knoxes' way, there were whoops and chants. and powerful tension. amanda was just so overcome with emotion. she could barely walk she was crying so much when she walked past me. but there were tears as well from the kerchers because they were obviously upset. they've gone through such a lot in the past few years since meredith was killed. they truly believed the first conviction was the right way for the police to go and they're devastated that it's gone this way. >> the kerchers, unless i'm wrong, haven't really said anything since this verdict came in in public, whereas the knox family, as you would expect, have been pretty jubilant. what's going through the kerchers' mind. their daughter was brutally murdered, and right now they don't know who did it. they obviously suspected and believed it was amanda knox and her boyfriend. but now the justice system and many people would argue fairly has said there wasn't the evidence. >> reporter: well, that's right. in fact, the kerchers have been very, you know, kind of under the radar as it were for the past several months, for the past several years since meredith was killed. they did give a press conference today, spoke to the media saying they believe the original sentence was the right one. they believed that amanda knox and raffaele sollecito were guilty in the killing of their daughter, their sister. and they wanted that sentence to be upheld. but obviously the jury didn't see it the same way. from this hearing from this trial and what we were left with was an acquittal. this wasn't the evidence putting amanned do knox and raffaele sollecito at the murder scene. >> matthew chance, thank you very much. abc legal analyst dan abrams has had a close eye on this case for the last four years. what did you make of this stunning verdict today? >> i thought it was the right call. i think that once the dna evidence was discredited, the link to murder simply wasn't there. i expected that there would be some sort of compromise verdict as we saw here with the three-year sentence, but basically saying it's time served. >> and the complication came from this issue of defamation where amanda knox had accused patrick lumumba, an early suspect in the case, of doing the killing. he was awarded damages. explain how this all works legally. >> he was completely cleared. he turns out he had an alibi. and she had pointed the finger at him. so in italy, you sort of move forward with the civil and the criminal cases together. so his lawyer was present throughout the process. but this really brings up a bigger issue. and that is that the reason amanda knox got into a lot of this trouble is because she made inaccurate, untruthful statements to the authorities about significant points in the investigation like this. now, she would say she was coerced. she would say she was effectively forced to make them. if that's true, then this has been a complete travesty of justice. but if that's not necessarily true, even if there isn't a link to murder here, that means that there were statements that explain why the authorities went down this road in first place. >> see what is very interesting to me, having been in america the last few months where the media were definitely slanted, i felt, towards her being acquitted and that she was an innocent young american woman, here in britain, where i am at the moment, a very much different view. because, of course, meredith kercher was a british girl and her family have given impassioned interviews. the media here have latched on to a lot of these -- as they say -- lies by amanda knox and that she's not a trustworthy witness. it's quite a messy situation. >> that's right. but just because she wasn't a trustworthy witness, so to speak, doesn't mean she was involved in the murder. that's why i think this was the right decision. because the key to the murder case was the two pieces of dna. one of amanda knox, one linking her boyfriend. those became the essence in many ways of the prosecution's case in conjunction with what they said were her lies. without those pieces of evidence, i simply don't see how they would have been able to uphold this murder conviction. remember, this judge, who ordered them to retest the dna evidence, is one of the same judges who determined her fate. so imagine this. imagine the judge says, you know what? we need some new testing on the dna evidence. the dna evidence then comes back and it's totally discredited. then the judge says, thank you very much. i appreciate that it was discredited. i'm still going to uphold the murder conviction. it would have been very, very hard to do. >> where are we now with the legal process? it is over? apparently they can appeal but only on the legal technicality. could you explain what that means. >> that's right. meaning up to this point, the appeal in the appeals court was a retrial of all the facts. both sides got to present new evidence, new facts. they had a second shot at the apple. remember, prosecutors were asking for a stiffer sentence here. in the highest court in italy, it's very similar to our courts in the sense here this the united states in the sense that you can only really challenge legal error. you don't get to retry all the facts again. but interestingly, the prosecution can still appeal again. they can say, we think that there were legal errors made. for example, not letting -- not allowing for another test of the dna evidence. but even if they want, meaning even if the prosecution won in italy's highest court, i simply can't see the italian authorities demanding extradition and the u.s. complying. i think amanda knox will be safe and sound at home. >> dan abrams, thank you very much. >> good to be with you, piers. >> how will amanda knox and her family move on? i'm joined by the author of "the fatal gift of beauty request ", thomas wright, the founder of the friends of amanda knox. and the prosecutor for acquittal. you wrote a book of amanda knox, a fascinating young woman in many ways. are you aware of the pressure put on her when she tries to return to normal life? >> well, i don't know that there's been a lot of celebrification going on as much as demonization. that has to do with the tabloid press, especially in the uk, where they pay for interviews and pay sourceses to talk to them. and one of the interviews that they did with patrick lumumba was one of the most damaging interviews done, really painted her as a character who was going to be replaced in her job by meredith kercher. he put a motive into the case. when i interviewed him because american journalists don't pay for interview, when i interviewed him for my book, he retracted every bit of it. i don't know that she's been celebrityfied as demonized. >> thomas wright, you're a knox family friend. it's been a trial by media as much as trial in a courtroom for amanda knox. very tough for her and her family. how have they all been baerg up? >> it's been incredibly difficult, piers. one of the things i'd like to do is correct the record. amanda knox is not a liar. this is an outstanding young woman. those of us who have known her for years know that. number one, we don't know what took place in the police station because it wasn't recorded as required by italian law by the prosecutor. it's very curious that that prosecutor didn't record it considering that he'd already been convicted and has been convicted of illegal wiretap of public officials and sentenced to 16 months. he's on appeal now. in terms of the defamation, it's also very curious that he would go out and arrest pat lumumba and keep him incarcerated for two weeks if he had an ironclad alibi. in terms of the coercion, i would say it's suggestive of coerce that over 12 police officers kept her in a room and 12 police officers signed the arrest warrant at the end of that period. we'll learn an awful lot about her experience when she gets home and she gets settled in and she begins her transition. we knew her as an outstanding individual, an athlete, a scholar, someone who was popular, well thought of and a very, very kind and gentle person. >> and you're a former prosecutor yourself. clearly, as i say, passions running high. you'd understand why friends and family of amanda knox feel so angry tonight. but at the same time, you know, an apparently innocent man patrick lumumba was accused directly and was arrested and held, so on, with this crime, which he was later found to have a castiron alibi for. so where do you think amanda's blame lies here? do you believe she was guilty of lying? >> no, i don't. and tom wright has worked tirelessly on behalf of amanda and with the friends of amanda knox, piers. that interrogation went overnight in italian. she didn't speak any italian. it was rudimentary. they gave a description of somebody, the police did, to her, that matched patrick in certain respects. i won't go into here other than to say certain parts, hairs, things like that. it wasn't that she said he did it and falsely accused someone else and the fact of the matter defamation in italy, they've accused ogi magazine which is "people" magazine in italy and amanda, they tried to indict one of our newspapers the west seattle herald for defamation and they don't even have an international section. that's great news for amanda and her family. this is a long time in coming. she's innocent of this horrible murder. she was demon i'ded like neen is a ped. foxy knoxy, the she-devil. that's how they started the case, that's how they ended the case. but ultimately the evidence carried the day and this conviction has been correctly overturned. >> finally, let me ask thomas wright again. do you believe the family feel so angry about the defamation conviction that they may seek to have that overturned? >> i can't speak for the family. i know there's a great deal of relief. this poor young lady went through a lot of suffering in the last four years. the family was brought to the brink of bankruptcy. they're going to have a lot to heal. i would say there's a great deal of relief and a great deal of joy and she'll be welcomed back into her community because she was well thought of when she left and she's well thought of upon returning. >> thomas wright, nina buehrle and anne bremner, thanks very much. >> thanks. >> after the break, what will be the emotional impact of amanda knox? we'll ask dr. drew pinsky. [ [ female announcer ] in the grip of arthritis, back, or back joint pain? aspercreme breaks the grip, with maximum-strength medicine and no embarrassing odor. break the grip of pain with aspercreme. be punished, to have my life, my future taken away from me for things that i haven't committed. because i am innocent. >> that was amanda knox today in court pleading her innocence. she's been freed after serving four years in priz fortune a brutal crime she didn't commit. the emotional scars may take longer to heal. joining me is dr. drew pinsky host of "dr. drew's life changes" on the cw. what was your overall take? >> there was nothing that i could glean from this young lady's history that suggested anything like the way she was portrayed in the italian press or by the prosecutors in this case. not only that, this whole nonsense of there having been this bizarre threesome with people taunting each other with knives. people don't behave like that, not out of the blue. even then, when somebody's cut excessively in that kind of acting-out behavior, it was somebody who was into that cutting and it goes too far or somebody into this violence, has a long history of acting out in intimate encounters, and it goe too far. there was absolutely nothing about this case that fit reality, frankly. although there were lots of peculiarities of amanda knox's behavior as she was brought into custody, the human reality was nothing about this case made sense to me. >> what could you deduce about amanda knox herself? obviously very young when this happened? >> yes. >> just hit her 20s. i heard from a family friend right now very eloquent saying she was a very nice, quiet, normal girl, he doesn't believe she's even capable of lying, and yet she has been convicted of defamation. that may be another one of the vagaries of the italian justice system. we may never know the answers to all these things. but from your assessment what kind of woman is amanda knox? >> two things i want to comment. one was this idea that she was promiscuous. because she was sexually active with a boyfriend and the roommate was upset about that and they were fighting about that? if there was a motivation for murder, there would be dead bodies all over college campuses across this country. that's absurd, number one. but the answer is this young lady was naive, exceedingly naive. a cautionary tale for all the young americans that go overseas with the naive notion that they can carry on like they do over here and they're not dealing with a different culture with a different set of standards and a legal system that you can get trapped in and bizarre behaviors that were reported on after she was brought in for questioning, this is a fantasy, this isn't something real, the depth of her naivete was profound and that's been shattered. that's what we'll hear from her when she gets back to seattle. >> dr. drew, thank you for your analysis. when we come back, i'll talk to one of michael jackson's friends about the singer's death, the estate he left behind and the new cirque du soleil show he inspired. our 4 new rich & hearty soups really have people talking... [ guy ] ring, ring. progresso... i love your new loaded potato with bacon. that's what we like to hear. ring, ring. progresso... ...switch our phone service? ...no, i think we're pretty happy with our phones. [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. [ gnome ] awwwwwwww. i just feel bloody awful. she told tiffany, stephanie, jenny and becky that she was coming to a place like this! but somebody didn't book with travelocity, with 24/7 customer support to help move them to the pool daddy promised! look at me, i'm swimming! ♪ [ gnome ] somebody, get her a pony! [ female announcer ] the travelocity guarantee. if your booking's not right, we'll help make it right, right away. from the price to the room to the trip you'll never roam alone. co-executor of michael jackson's estate. the estate has grossed more than every other celebrity estate combined. howard weitzman join me now. you very rarely give television interviews. what is your primary motivation in going public now? >> well, piers, michael is no longer with us, obviously. and we felt that we have a message to get out to talk about the cirque show and various other questions that we thought would be good to address at this time. >> you knew michael for well on 30 years. an extraordinary long relationship with him. how would you describe the nature of your relationship over that time? it was a bit roller coaster, wasn't it? you sort of dipped in and out of his business life. >> well, we started in january of 1980. and i'll never forget the first meeting. michael had his sunglasses on. and in the middle of the interview, he leaned over and he said, branca, do i know you? i said, i don't think so, michael. i think this is the first time we met. he said, you are sure? i said, michael, i think i would remember. so we went for a decade, then on and off for pretty close to three decades. i was his principle business adviser through much of that period, we developed a friendship as well. >> i interviewed him once. fascinating experience. i discussed this on the show a few times but you're the most interesting guy to talk to about that. when i talked to him about charity work, children, he had a soft high pitched voice. when i talked to him about business, it seemed to drop a couple of octaves and he became much more serious and, dare i say it, adult in the way he spoke. did you find that? >> absolutely. michael was multifaceted. he was misunderstood in some ways, but we think that the movie "this is it" gave fans a pretty good glimpse at the real michael. he was a perfectionist and at the same time he was a humanitarian who respected the work of his fellow artists. >> like a good businessman, would you say? >> yeah, michael had great instincts, particularly with regard to marketing and promotion. he was always connected with his fans. and he's had a loyal fan base to this day. >> you had this extraordinary experience with him on "thriller" when most videos at the time were going for about $50,000 to make them. and michael had this ever more fanciful plan, which meant the cost of making the "thriller" video was going to be a million dollars. he came to you and said, right, branca, make this work. and the brilliant idea of going off and pitching the making of the "thriller" video as a tv show in its own right and a video. and you sold that for 1.2 million. you ended up making michael a profit. he must have thought you were a genius, didn't he? >> well, michael was the genius. but the "thriller" video is so good, it's been considered the greatest video of all time. >> the other smart business move that yakson made -- i know you were heavily involved in this -- was his decision to get his hands on the beatle catalog. tell me about that process. >> well, michael was good friends with paul mccartney. and after "thriller," michael had a lot of money, a lot of cash. so michael asked me to call paul mccartney and yoko ono, his good friends. he did not want to bid against them. and i spoke with yoko. and i said, yoko, are you bidding on this catalog? she said, no. we'd be thrilled if michael could get it rather than some big corporation. i spoke to paul mccartney's lawyer who said they were not bidding. so we went out. it took us a year to close that deal. it wasn't easy. there was a lot of competition. but michael was passionate. he wanted to invest in things that he was passionate about. so we did buy the beatles catalog. we later brought some elvis presley publishing. that's now the cornerstone for his net worth. >> is that still part of michael's estate? >> absolutely, yes. >> in terms of the sheer number crunching here, can you tell me now what he paid for it and what it might now be worth? >> well, we bought the catalog in 1995. we spent $47.5 million, which is well known. we sold off a background music library. so his net investment was about $41 million. and while i can't give out confidential details, it's been reported that sony is worth up to $2 billion and michael owns half. >> he took 40-odd million to a billion dollars? >> yes. and i would say in addition to sony atv, michael has his own publishing company which owns all of his own songs as well as many other songs we bought over the years. when you add the two companies together, it's even more valuable. >> all this stuff about michael being h