JURY DELIBERATIONS BEGIN TODAY
http://mjjsource.com/main/index.php?option...d=588&Itemid=32
Friday, June 3, 2005
On Day 66 the attorney for Mr. Michael Jackson, Mr. Thomas Mesereau, Jr., told jurors, "Ladies and gentleman, this has been a nightmare for Michael Jackson, under the law and the facts, you must return a verdict of not guilty on all counts – it's the only right verdict."
The case against Michael Jackson went to the jury Friday after the defense asked the panel to acquit Mr. Jackson, after providing testimony after testimony showing continual acts of perjury by the only two witnesses to the alleged crime, the accuser and his brother proving that Mr. Jackson is a victim of grifters trying to pull "the biggest con of their careers."
A little before 12:30 p.m. Friday, the panel of eight women and four men filed into the deliberation room, where they will sift through nearly 700 pieces of evidence, and rely on their recollections and notes from the testimony of 140 witnesses as they determine whether Mr. Jackson is guilty.
Jurors spent about two hours deliberating before going home for the weekend. They are not sequestered and will resume deliberations Monday.
Mr. Mesereau, using the testimony of renowned child molestation expert, Dr. Eslin, explained to jurors that most false claims of child molestation come from children who are 10 years old and up and where the main attraction is money. Under oath, Dr. Eslin explained that these false accusations are particularly common in children that have parents with a history of deceptive behavior.
When asked by investigators how he learned ‘right from wrong’, the accuser stated, “I just kind of figured it out for myself.”
Using court transcripts, Mr. Mesereau showed the jury the overwhelming history of deception by both of the accuser’s parents, citing many incidents including their admitted lying under oath in their JC Penney case (for which they received $152,000) and the mother’s many incidents of welfare fraud (including fiiling for emergency welfare just days after receiving the settlement from JC Penney) as well as the continual acts of perjury of the accuser and his brother. On one occasion, Mr. Mesereau pointed out, when the accuser’s brother testified to one of many things that was in direct conflict with his grand jury testimony, he accused the court reporter of getting it wrong in the transcript.
Prosecutors painted a vastly different picture during their closing argument while using photos from adult magazines and art books (that the very sweet and innocent inscriptions prove were gifts to him from fans and from him to others), to ‘dirty’ up Mr. Jackson in the jurors minds, even though they are not, in any way, illegal, as well as trying to paint Brett Barnes as a victim from the early 90’s when he has emphatically testified, under oath, that he was not.
In nearly four hours over two days, the defense attorney blasted away at the prosecution's timeline, pointed out small inconsistencies in page after page of transcribed statements from the accuser and his family, showed evidence of the family’s compulsive addiction to celebrities and revisited a history of legal actions and fraudulent welfare claims made by the accuser's mother – all in the hopes of convincing jurors that the case against Mr. Jackson was built on greed and fraud.
"It only takes one lie under oath to throw this case out of court – you can't count all the lies in court told by this family," Mr. Mesereau said. "How many does it take to show you this case is a fraud?"
Mr. Mesereau stated to jurors that the main piece of evidence lacking in this case is something called a ‘pre-text phone call.’ He went on to explain that this is a call that is almost always made when police are alerted to such an alleged crime. Interpreting this commonly used tactic to jurors, he said that this is a call made from the alleged victim to the accused where the victim asks certain questions specifically designed to illicit incriminating statements from the accused. This call is recorded and then becomes the main piece of evidence in the case. Mr. Mesereau stated that, when asked by police, this accuser refused to make such a call to Mr. Jackson. Consequently, there are no incriminating statements made by Mr. Jackson in this entire case.
Mr. Mesereau also noted to the jury that the accuser, at the age of 8, had accused his own mother of abusing him. Shortly thereafter, he retracted his accusation.
The biggest red flag, Mr. Mesereau said, was that the family went to see two lawyers and a psychiatrist before ever going to police with allegations of abuse.
One of those lawyers, civil attorney Larry Feldman, who won more than $20 million from Mr. Jackson in a 1993 settlement for another 13-year-old boy, Jordie Chandler, who also accused Mr. Jackson of molesting him. Chandler did not testify during the current trial.
"What they're trying to do to Michael Jackson is so harmful, so brutal, so potentially devastating to him," Mr. Mesereau said, referring not only to Mr. Jackson's current accusers and their attorneys, but also to the Santa Barbara County prosecutors who the defense believes still holds a vendetta against Mr. Jackson. The same prosecutors had to abandon their 1993 investigation when Chandler took the millions in exchange for silence.
The jury got the case on a day marked by an impassioned plea by defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. for Mr. Jackson's acquittal. He said Mr. Jackson is not the "monster" that prosecutors have portrayed, and he said the accuser and his family fabricated the molestation allegations to take advantage of Mr. Jackson.
"They are trying to profit from Michael Jackson. They think they have pulled it off. They are just waiting for one thing – your verdict."
He added: "If you look in your hearts do you believe Michael Jackson is evil in that way? Is it even possible? It really is not."
With regards to the alcohol charges, Mr. Mesereau stated passionately to the jury, “Michael Jackson could not even conceive of giving alcohol to a child or to this young cancer victim, he just could not even conceive of it.”
During his rebuttal, Senior Deputy District Attorney Ron Zonen sought to answer the defense lawyer's question.
"Why would Mr. Jackson do it? Because he could," Zonen offered the unsubstantiated argument. "This child was in love with him. This child would do anything he said."
Soon after, as the jury went to work, Mr. Jackson left the courthouse and walked slowly to his entourage's waiting vehicles in front of the courthouse. He drove off without comment.
Mr. Jackson felt nervous in court but was physically fine and was relieved the trial is nearly over, said his spokeswoman, Raymone K. Bain.
"He's very strong and he has a strong faith in God and the justice system. He is not falling apart. He has been a true soldier in all of this," Bain said.
Mr. Jackson, 46, has appeared gaunt in recent days, and officials at Santa Ynez Valley Cottage Hospital disclosed Friday that he had visited the emergency room overnight to receive some electrolytes to treat dehydration.
He arrived at court on time with his parents, sisters Rebbie, Janet and LaToya, and brothers Jermaine, Tito and Randy. He clutched his mother's arm as he walked in.
"Michael's innocent!" “Fight, Michael, fight!” came shouts from some in a crowd of about 75 people outside.
Judge Rodney S. Melville ordered jurors to begin their deliberations and gave them 98 pages of instructions. He told Mr. Jackson he could stay at Neverland during deliberations but attorneys would have to stay within 10 minutes of the courthouse in case the jury had questions that needed to be addressed.
At day's end the court announced that a live audio feed will be provided to news media on verdict day. No TV or radio coverage was allowed in the courtroom during the trial. Photography was also barred.
The deliberations are the final step in an ordeal that began 14 weeks ago. The panel of eight women and four men has since heard from more than 130 witnesses.
Mr. Mesereau earlier mounted a fierce attack on the accuser and his mother, brother and sister. He said that "what they are trying to do to Michael Jackson is so harmful, so brutal, so devastating ... if you have any reasonable doubt about the double-talk, the lies, it's over. You must acquit Michael Jackson."
Mr. Mesereau spoke about the American system of justice and said, "We have the best system in the world and ladies and gentlemen I'm begging you to honor the system. ... You must acquit him."
He accused prosecutors of trying to "dirty up Michael" because they lack the evidence to prove their case.
"The witnesses are preposterous, the perjury is everywhere," Mr. Mesereau declared. "None of it works. The only thing they've had is to throw dirt all over the place and hope it sticks."
"If you convict him of anything, they are going to make millions," Mr. Mesereau said of the family who accuses Mr. Jackson of molesting the teenage cancer survivor.
"They're just waiting," Mr. Mesereau continued. "Waiting for the biggest con of their careers – right here – they just need you to help them, that's all."
Mr. Mesereau played excerpts from a video in which Mr. Jackson denied sexual impropriety and said he had never "been betrayed or deceived by children." The attorney closed by telling jurors that Mr. Jackson had been lax with his money and had let the wrong people into his circle but was not the "monster" prosecutors had portrayed.
Zonen also showed the jury a video, the accuser's first interview with sheriff's investigators in which he alleges he was molested by Mr. Jackson.
"You've just witnessed the seven worst minutes of this young man's life," Zonen said.
Afterward, prosecutor Zonen, who had given his closing Thursday, offered a brief rebuttal. As he prepared to speak, Rebbie, Janet and LaToya Jackson left their front-row seats and walked out of the courtroom.
Zonen, desperate for something to bolster the accuser’s case that is actually on trial here, reminded jurors of past allegations from other boys (who profited financially) against Mr. Jackson and said such testimony was necessary "to see the total picture." Incidentally, neither of the two prior accusers or their mothers ever cared about pursuing a case against Mr. Jackson after they had received money.
But the timeline of the alleged sexual abuse has been problematic for the prosecution, as the defense pointed out during closings.
To convict Mr. Jackson, jurors must believe that, while a firestorm was brewing about whether Mr. Jackson molested the boy – and while Mr. Jackson was being investigated by social workers and the press – only then did he begin to molest the child.
Mr. Jackson's admission in the documentary that he shares his bed with boys, Mr. Mesereau contended, is nothing more than what the "childlike" entertainer calls it: an innocent, loving and nonsexual act.
"Allowing children into your bed and room is not a crime," Mr. Mesereau told jurors.
Mr. Mesereau, who called the charge "absurd," implored jurors to acquit Mr. Jackson, because there were no independent witnesses, no forensic evidence, and the accusers themselves could not be believed.
In a case that hinges on believing one side's version of events, Mr. Mesereau had plenty of opportunities to point out the seemingly inconsistent statements made by the accuser, his siblings and especially their mother.
The loquacious and emotionally erratic woman gave testimony that was at times so bizarre that even Mr. Jackson smiled. She claimed she was forced to go shopping and to beauty salons as part of a positive PR video for Mr. Jackson. At one point she said she feared Mr. Jackson was going to make her family disappear by launching them from Neverland in a hot air balloon.
Mr. Mesereau revisited testimony from a welfare worker about the mother's emergency welfare applications about a week after depositing a check for $32,000 from a civil suit.
The family received $152,000 from JCPenney in 2001 after claiming they were beat up by security guards. Mr. Mesereau again showed the woman's booking photo, depicting her unblemished face, to remind jurors that the photos of black-and-blue body bruises she later used to help secure the money did not appear to corroborate her appearance immediately after the alleged beating.
Mr. Mesereau told jurors that the mother had a knack for conniving celebrities out of cash, using her son's illness to sway favor. He pointed to the $20,000 given to the family by comedian Louise Palanker, a $2,000 check Mr. Jackson's videographer gave her after she told him "tales of woe" and the $1,500 actor Chris Tucker gave the family for the boy's medical bills, although the treatment was covered by insurance.
He asked jurors to doubt the words of the accuser when he told investigators for the first time in a July 2003 taped police interview that Mr. Jackson molested him about five times at Neverland and gave him wine and liquor almost every night.
Study the child's demeanor, Mr. Mesereau said, as he "lies about wanting to leave Neverland because he was scared." The boy testified in court that he did not want to leave because he was enjoying himself.
Scoffing at claims that his soft-spoken client was the kind of man who could plot conspiracies of abduction and false imprisonment, Mr. Mesereau said, "His generosity knows no bounds because the man has a wonderful, kind heart,"
Mr. Meserau reminded the jury that ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’, did not mean ‘probably guilty or highly likely guilty’, but that they must be absolutely sure, BEYOND any reasonable doubt.
Prosecutors asked jurors not to have any sympathy for Mr. Jackson or to think about any of the consequences that could befall him if convicted.
Mr. Mesereau informed jurors again that the accuser and his younger brother, who was not molested but says he witnessed two acts against his brother, have until the age of 18 "before the clock starts ticking on a civil suit." The mother may still sue Mr. Jackson as well.
Mr. Mesereau beseeched the jurors;
"You have the power in your hands to make them rich and they'll never have to work a day in their lives. You have that power."
“They cannot prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt and the prosecutors never should have brought the case once they learned who (this accuser’s family) was.”
“You must, under this legal system, throw this case where it belongs… out the door!”
Source: MJJsource / AP / AFP
