Official April 13 2005 Thread

A

Aaliyah

New member
52625006.jpg


52625007.jpg
 
A

alfredo

New member
Ok. A minor setback, if at all. The prosecutor already admitted that she's a fraud. Also, remember, the defense has other ways of getting that information in. They could call someone from the welfare office and present that information. She just could not incriminate herself.

The judge is working for Sneddon on this case. But its not going to save him! :lol: :sneddoncrybaby
 
S

sistahlamb

New member
Ok. A minor setback, if at all. The prosecutor already admitted that she's a fraud. Also, remember, the defense has other ways of getting that information in. They could call someone from the welfare office and present that information. She just could not incriminate herself.
Click to expand...

Yes that is true and the defence just might do that very soon.
But as of right now the defence has more dirt on her than even she knows.
here's that link to a summery that I mentioned earlier from MJ-Case.net that examines her grand jury testimony.
 
H

HotMJ!

New member
:thumbsup

Great article, and timely!

...quotes attorney Ann Bremner





http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=48165

Money makes the world go round at Jackson trial
16:00 AEST Wed Apr 13 2005



SANTA MARIA, California (AFP) - From its main actors to its bit players to its overarching themes, a central motif runs through Michael Jackson's child molestation trial – and it isn't sex.

"Money in this case is huge. It's money, money, and more money," lawyer Anne Bremner, who has been following the trial, said Tuesday. "It seems like everyone has their hand out."

Jackson is on trial for allegedly fondling a 13-year-old boy two years ago, plying him with alcohol and holding him and his family against their will, a charge which the prosecution links to his failing fortunes.

The pop icon's handlers were so worried, the argument goes, they panicked after a television documentary showed him holding his future accuser's hand and admitting that children often share his bed.

As his longtime publicist said in court this week: "Perception is 90 percent of what the public thinks."

So Jackson aides moved to sequester the family to force them to make a rebuttal video, aiming to prevent further erosion of the pop star's empire.

The defense meanwhile maintains that the allegations by the accuser's family are driven by the mother's rapacious greed.

She has a history of using her children to bilk celebrities, lead defense lawyer Thomas Mesereau argued in opening arguments six weeks ago. Past targets include Hollywood superstar Jim Carrey, boxer Mike Tyson and US comedian Adam Sandler, he said.

When those alleged ruses failed, she turned her rapacious sights on Jackson.

"The mother, with her children as tools, was trying to find a celebrity to latch onto," Mesereau said. "Unfortunately for Michael Jackson, he fell for it."

The prosecution has taken its time calling the mother to the witness stand and is now, late in its case, apparently weighing whether to bring her out at all.

Jurors might believe she coached her kids to lie in this case, if the defense dredges up too many questionable details from her past, Bremner argued.

"If she's on the stand and is eviscerated by Mesereau ... what happens to the case? Because she is the one who drives the children," she said.

Prosecutors rolled out her new husband Tuesday, a seemingly "straight and narrow" military man, in a bid to improve her image prior to her highly anticipated testimony, Bremner said.

But his squeaky clean image was sullied when he admitted speaking several times with a British tabloid that was offering US$15,000 ($19,340) for the family's story.

And then there's the domestic help at Jackson's Neverland Ranch, a gated fantasy world he spends millions to maintain each year.

Adrian McManus, Jackson's former personal maid, denied she plotted with other employees on how to reap riches from her insider access, but later admitted in court she collected US$32,000 ($41,258) from tabloids and other media.

She could not deny that she had a contract with a gossip magazine to rat on Jackson's relationship with his former wife Lisa Marie Presley, or that she was quoted in an article in Star magazine titled "Kinky Sex Secrets of Michael and Lisa Marie's Bedroom: Five of his Closest Servants Tell All."

Another maid admitted in court to being paid US$20,000 ($25,787) dollars for an interview with the Hard Copy television program.

Jackson, in addition to doling out millions to two alleged abuse victims, has been sued by ex-employees for overtime pay and wrongful dismissal.

And everyone, from his former long-time publicist to the man who supervised his maids, has a book in the works.

Dwayne Swingler blabbed to News of the World after working as Jackson's house manager for just five weeks and jotted down some notes tentatively titled "Entering Neverland: Secrets behind the Gate," according to Jackson's defense.

"I was interested in maybe writing down some information to cash in like everybody else was doing," Swingler said.

"Everybody wants money from Michael Jackson. Everyone wants money from the press or tabloids," said Bremner. "No one is immune from the money angle of this case."

Click to expand...
 
F

floacist

New member
Poor guy, I dont blame him for having a reaction like that cause that gross bitch has made his life a nightmare..my reaction would have been to take off my shoe and throw it but hey thats just me.
 
A

alfredo

New member
Mez is incredible. Roger Friedman reported this for Fox News....

"Also during cross-examination, it became clear that the stepfather did not know much about the accuser's mother's finances, FOXNews.com columnist Roger Friedman reported from the courthouse in Santa Maria.

The accuser's mother had been using check-cashing companies to cash her welfare checks and subsequently was paying a fee, so her husband told her to deposit them in his checking account."

But he didn't know she had checking accounts all over L.A., in which she kept monies like her settlement from a lawsuit against JCPenney (search).
 
A

alfredo

New member
Originally posted by alfredo
Mez is incredible. Roger Friedman reported this for Fox News....

"Also during cross-examination, it became clear that the stepfather did not know much about the accuser's mother's finances, FOXNews.com columnist Roger Friedman reported from the courthouse in Santa Maria.

The accuser's mother had been using check-cashing companies to cash her welfare checks and subsequently was paying a fee, so her husband told her to deposit them in his checking account."

But he didn't know she had checking accounts all over L.A., in which she kept monies like her settlement from a lawsuit against JCPenney (search).
Click to expand...

Here's the link. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,153308,00.html


Ozzie and Harriet this couple is not!! :lol:
 
M

mjwifey3

New member
This whole case isn't fair. It hasn't been fair since it started. If Michael were white or hadn't sold the greatest selling album of all time, or even if he didn't own the Beatles, and Elvis's royalties it might have been fair. But maybe not because when it comes to Michael Jackson people think they have some kind of right to be biased and greedy :nonono: I feel so bad that she affected him so bad because that lying whore of a b***h doesn't deserve Mike's to feel anything for her at all, she is not worthy of emotion. I'm not worried though because the jury has already heard from Snedumb that she commited welfare fraud, and if she pleads the 5th the jurys gonna think that she has something to hide which she does, so overall, she's probably gonna turn out to be a bad witness for the prosecution, just like of of their witnesses! :sneddoncr poor sneddon... NOT :D This whole case is a ridculous waste of time and don't even know why we bother trying to make sense out of it! :makesense:
 
S

Saphster

New member
I know this is very off topic, but whisper... I really love your avatar. Did you make it yourself? Looks very nice. Love the pic. :-D
 
S

Saphster

New member
I'm a little lost. What "reaction" are you guys talking about? Did you all see it on tv? If so, are there any video clips I can see this reaction on? Please? I'd appreciate it. :-D
 
M

MystiqueX2004

New member
I'm a bit confused...I thought that it was unconstitutional for the mother to try to choose what exactly she is pleading the fifth to? Why can't she just not testify? This is really confusing and what about the former bodyguard who robbed a bank or something? He invoked his fifth amendment and is not testifying, so how come its not the same in the mother's case???? The judge allows stuff from Michael's past but allowe her to only testify to what she chooses? Even though she has committed the act? One question...If her son was really molested, then she should not be worried about incriminating herself right? Seeing as the prosecution is so willing to overlook it..Why should she be so concerned about her testimony if her son were really molested? First thing on her mind should be bringing this molester to justice, not worrying about her own well-being, right? :idontknow
 
W

whisperAdmin

Administrator
Staff member
SpAnKeY SmArTaSs post Today, 01:44 PM


Another break, Trent Copeland reporting:

witness was all over the place, very difficult witness, cant be controlled under direct exam, no way she gone make it under cross.
At the end of the day Trent is not certain prosecution will want this witness up.
Asserting her 5th amendment right regarding fraud.
To plead the 5th at this critical stage undervalues her testimony. Says jury wont believe her.
She's been practiced and rehearsed and still aint doing well on the stand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top