Not sure if this is a rerun, but Nancy Grace covered this last night:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0709/03/ng.01.html
Nancy.....But the reality is, he`s not talking. He`s not helping police in any way. He`s not letting the kids talk. So why not go ahead and name him a person of interest and go ahead and lawyer up and clam up?
MICHAEL CARDOZA, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I mean, when did this term "person of interest" come into vogue? When I was a district attorney, if the police were looking at you, you were simply called a suspect in the case.
Look, he`s been a suspect since day one. Let`s call him what he is. Let`s call him what he`s been all along, and that`s a suspect. So what are the police doing here? They`re certainly keeping national attention on this case by changing the terminology. It means nothing. He`s a suspect.
GRACE: Michael, finally, I get to answer a question for you after all these years. This is my theory on "person of interest" versus "suspect." As soon as the U.S. Supreme Court started ruling that once you`re officially designated a suspect, as opposed to a defendant -- used to be when you were an official defendant, you had been formally charged, your constitutional rights applied.
CARDOZA: Right.
GRACE: When you were arrested, your rights applied.
CARDOZA: Sure.
GRACE: Then when they started calling you a suspect and you haven`t been arrested, your rights applied.
CARDOZA: OK.
GRACE: So then they backed up to person of interest. I don`t know what it`s going to be next here!