Will Jodi Arias's words be a death sentence in her murder trial?

This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," January 25, 2013. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: Will Jodi Arias's own words blow a big hole in her defense? She has changed her story about the day of the murder, and she's done it three times -- changed it three times! Prosecutors now trying to convince the jury she is, in addition to being a murderer, a serial liar, and they are using videotapes of her police interrogation to do it.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're telling me about two people coming in or however many people coming in and taking care of him and letting you go is just so far-fetched, I can't believe it. Why would they do this to him? What were they arguing about? What did they say, their details?

JODI ARIAS, MURDER DEFENDANT: They didn't say a lot. They were white Americans, from what I could tell. They had what, do you call those things, like, beanies that cover your whole face (INAUDIBLE) a mask over your eyes. One was black. I think they were both black, or even dark blue or something.

More On This...


    VAN SUSTEREN: Former LAPD detective Mark Fuhrman joins us. Good evening, Mark.


    VAN SUSTEREN: Mark, in preparing to interrogate or interview a prospective defendant in a homicide case, what do you do?

    FUHRMAN: Well, you know, certainly, you can't bluff or you can't present anything that you can't produce that evidence because then the suspect knows how much you don't know, instead of how much you do know.

    This interrogator -- Detective Flores, I believe -- he was very good at bringing the suspect along from the phone, not committing to anything, letting her commit herself, destroying her story little by little, instead of dumping on her. And then just like this video of the interrogation, it brought her to a point where she really gave up the ghost. OK, I'm there. I believe you know I'm there. I believe your evidence. And now this would have been the perfect time to say it was self-defense, not after I got an attorney and I know I'm going to get arrested.

    VAN SUSTEREN: I guess that's what most people don't realize. It's oftentimes not so much what you say during an interrogation as a suspect, but what you don't say. I mean, as you say, it would have been a good time to say the self-defense. You know, that apparently is coming later. But it's what you don't say that sometimes can be particularly damning.

    Let me ask you about the autopsy report. Your thoughts about sort of how this -- - this homicide occurred, what went first?

    FUHRMAN: Well, I listened to Dr. Baden, and we have talked about this, and, of course, you know, I have thought about this. I agree with Dr. Baden completely. I agree the gunshot came first while the victim was in the shower not paying attention, didn't even see the suspect. Gunshot, he was somewhat incapacitated. The stab wounds started. He puts up some kind of defense, maybe just from the pain, that is why we don't see really great defense wounds from him because he is much bigger and much stronger. And then obviously at the end he is not dying quick enough so you have the slice of the throat and the carotid artery, which now he succumbed to the wounds.

    VAN SUSTEREN: If I were going to kill this man, and let's say I shot him first and he didn't die, I probably would have shot him again. I probably wouldn't switch weapons, because when you switch weapons you got to put something down. And if he is not dead he is going to come at you whether it is a gunshot or a knife. I'm sort of curious is there more to the story. She told three inconsistent defenses so to me it is highly suspect, I haven't heard the evidence but highly suspect that she is the guilty party. I wonder if there was somebody else there. I just don't see the switch of weapons thing.

    FUHRMAN: Greta, it is really smart that you picked up on that, I mean, really sharp, because in her story she says when the two people came in they tried to shoot her but the gun didn't go off. I think there is the answer to the question. The second time she tried to fire the gun did not go off, and that is where she got the part of the store relationship for the two intruders that came in. She went to the other weapon because the gun didn't go off.

    VAN SUSTEREN: But she he would have to have it with her. Most people go to a murder go with one weapon. They he don't have a second weapon in their hip pocket. Maybe it's possible.

    FUHRMAN: Greta, Dr. Baden touched on this. This is a rage killing. This is I'm going to embarrass the victim. My focus on this is to show everybody and show myself just how mad I am at him. She brought both weapons and she also left with both weapons. That's fairly interesting right all into itself. She was going to do this regardless of what the gun did. She was going to humiliate. You see this in a lot of relationships where it is homosexual or not, you see it when the relationship where one person is going to kill the other person. It is embarrassment and rage.

    VAN SUSTEREN: The jury may get a little more information if she decides to take the witness stand, although I'm sure she won't fill in all of the blanks but maybe an effective cross examination by the prosecutor will. Detective Fuhrman, always nice to see you.

    FUHRMAN: Thank you.



    JODI ARIAS: Nobody is going convict me.


    ARIAS: Because I'm innocent. And you can mark my words on that one. No jury will convict me.


    VAN SUSTEREN: Will Jodi Arias take the witness stand? Knowing what they do, would our legal panelists put her on the witness stand? Troy, she is on her own witness list, but any sort of behind the scenes discussion about whether or not she will take the witness stand on her own behalf?

    HAYDEN: We're been debating that quite a bit in the courtroom. My personal feeling is as a guy sitting there watching it, how else can she say I was abused? Who else is going to testify to that besides her? If she can portray herself in front of the jury the way she portrayed herself in front of me, who knows how effective a witness she could be for herself?


    TED WILLIAMS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I would try to keep her as far from the witness stand as I could. Having said that, and when you look at the jailhouse interviews and you look at her singing "Silent Night" and all of this, I believe she feels that she can manipulate a jury into a not guilty plea.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Doesn't every defendant think that one. Michael?

    MICHAEL CARDOZA, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I have got to tell you, the only chance that she has in this trial is to take that witness stand. If she doesn't, I can guarantee you a guilty verdict. And I think the defense attorneys in this case clearly understand they will not get a not guilty verdict. They are hoping for a hung jury or a lesser included.

    And if she is even half as charismatic as she has been in the television interviews that I have seen, and she is charismatic, she may convince one or two of the jurors that she didn't do it or at least raise a reasonable doubt with them. She absolutely has to take the stand.

    VAN SUSTEREN: As a defense lawyer, even if I was the prosecutor, I would have a field day with her if she took the witness stand.

    CARDOZA: You don't have a chance otherwise you may well do it, but you may as well give up the ghost if you don't put her on.

    VAN SUSTEREN: The gun from her grandparents that apparently is missing, the fact that she doesn't have all of these defensive wounds, the fact that she told three stories, and now they're going to supply the motive that she was jealous of the other girlfriends, slashing the tires as well as sending threatening emails and more. Bernie?

    BERNIE GRIMM, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: The problem with this type of case, it is a death case.

    VAN SUSTEREN: The evidence.

    GRIMM: I've dealt with evidence before. The problem here is it is a death case. You can't call your client to say I didn't murder him and then they next day you want to testify during the penalty phase and say, by the way, I'm sorry I said that and perjured myself two days ago.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Which is another reason not to testify.

    GRIMM: Yes. When a client testifies, here's my rule -- 1,000 things have to go right, only one thing needs to go wrong.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Troy, the decision to testify is going to be hers. She gets to make it, not the lawyers. But do the lawyers, I mean are they sort of hinting that they are at least opposed to it or not?

    HAYDEN: You know, I haven't had a ton of contact with them. I think what we will have to do and see how effective a case they can put on without her. I don't know, to me is it a Hail Mary to throw her on the stand. You guys are attorneys. I'm not sure.

    WILLIAMS: They would have to put her on the stand. You are damned if you do, you are damned if you don't. You have to put her on the stand, as Michael said, and she has to explain as best she can that she was brutalized. She has got to take the stand.

    But I don't think she should take the stand, but she has to take the stand to try to explain that. She is the only one that can put the case up before the jury.

    VAN SUSTEREN: And think of the defense attorneys as she's 30 feet away as she is saying what she is going to say.

    CARDOZA: You have to remember, all of these murder cases are emotional. All you have to do is reach one or two of the jurors to hang this, and that is the only thing they can hope for. This little lady is charismatic. She is.

    VAN SUSTEREN: You hang a jury it can be retried.

    CARDOZA: No question. But then they come back and give you a better offer in the case. They may not retry it as a death case.

    VAN SUSTEREN: I agree.

    CARDOZA: And that is what you hope for.

    VAN SUSTEREN: I totally agree with you on that one. Gentlemen, thank you all.