Cristine87
New member
What the hell is up with putting all these corrupt shady criminals on the stand?
Official April 19, 2005
- Thread starter -MyAngelMJ-
- Start date
TSColdMan Today, 02:29 PM
Sneddon to rest his case NEXT WEEK
Per my automated transcript:
---
The prosecutor informed the judge and the court he intends to rest his case next week. We were told there were about 20 witnesses or so left but I think they're going to be quick witnesses and in fact, some of the witnesses he wants to call can't come until next week so friday might end up being a dark day. That hasn't been determined yet. We're done with the two officers on the stand. They were really chain of custody types of witnesses, they said yes, I'm the one who seized the surveillance video from defense investigator bradley miller's office. So yes, it looks like the prosecution's cases are just getting ready to wrap up.
---
Sneddon to rest his case NEXT WEEK
Per my automated transcript:
---
The prosecutor informed the judge and the court he intends to rest his case next week. We were told there were about 20 witnesses or so left but I think they're going to be quick witnesses and in fact, some of the witnesses he wants to call can't come until next week so friday might end up being a dark day. That hasn't been determined yet. We're done with the two officers on the stand. They were really chain of custody types of witnesses, they said yes, I'm the one who seized the surveillance video from defense investigator bradley miller's office. So yes, it looks like the prosecution's cases are just getting ready to wrap up.
---
IrishFaery
New member
That was his whole case? How embarrassing!
sistahlamb
New member
Whew, I just got caught up with all the updates posted on this thread.
I wonder what the deal is with Janet's mother. She wasn't even with her and the family during the tiem they were allegedly being "held agianst thier will" obviously.
But she must have some "info" on everything that's been brought up in court these past few days, like the JCPenny thing.
Any updates on her???
I wonder what the deal is with Janet's mother. She wasn't even with her and the family during the tiem they were allegedly being "held agianst thier will" obviously.
But she must have some "info" on everything that's been brought up in court these past few days, like the JCPenny thing.
Any updates on her???
forevercametoday
New member
:sneddoncrybaby "Waaaaaaaaaaa!...I am so screwed!!!" :sneddoncr
Jacksonaction
New member
so the mama is on the stand; so how did it end with Janet?
Michael Jackson prosecution plans to rest next week
LINDA DEUTSCH
Associated Press
SANTA MARIA, Calif. - The prosecution in Michael Jackson's child molestation trial plans to rest next week, the district attorney told the judge Tuesday.
The announcement by District Attorney Tom Sneddon came in the eighth week since opening statements.
Sneddon said, however, that he had a problem with witness availability for Friday and Judge Rodney S. Melville agreed to give participants a three-day weekend as long as pending motions were completed by then.
The plans were revealed after the accuser's mother completed testimony that spanned five days and a brief appearance by the accuser's grandmother, who drew no cross-examination by the defense.
Under final cross-examination by the defense, the accuser's mother insisted she never solicited money from celebrities for her son when he was stricken with cancer and that a lawsuit she filed against a department store was intended to obtain an apology rather than money, although there was a settlement of more than $150,000.
The defense sought to suggest through the questioning that Jackson is the victim of a scheme to get his money.
Jackson, 46, is accused of molesting a then-13-year-old cancer patient in February or March 2003, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold his family captive to get them to rebut the TV documentary "Living With Michael Jackson," in which he said he let children sleep in his bed but that it was innocent and non-sexual.
Before leaving the stand, the woman was questioned by defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. about her family's encounters with celebrities and its involvement in the lawsuit that claimed security guards beat them in 1998 after the boy who is now Jackson's accuser walked out of a store with clothes that had not been paid for.
The woman said she was never informed that fundraisers were held for her son at a Hollywood comedy club and didn't know that donations were being made when she opened a special bank account for his benefit.
She said she had no idea why money was being put in the account and that all of it was being handled by a husband she has since divorce.
"You had no idea why anyone put money in it. You just withdrew it?" asked Mesereau.
"I did what (my husband) told me," the woman said.
"And you had no idea that Chris Tucker was going to wire money in to that account," asked the lawyer, referring to the comedian who became a benefactor of the family.
"This is correct," she answered.
The attorney asked if she was aware that comedians held a benefit for her son at the Laugh Factory in Hollywood while the boy sat in the lobby collecting money.
She said she knew nothing about it.
"And do you remember using money donated for (him) on cosmetic surgery?" asked Mesereau.
"No," said the woman. "I used a credit card."
She was asked if she knew that comedian Louise Palanker had given the family $20,000 to build a germ-free room for her son, and she said she knew nothing about it other than that she endorsed a check for $10,000 and gave it to her husband.
Palanker has testified that a second check was made out to the husband.
The mother insisted that Palanker never mentioned to her that she was writing any checks and that she knew nothing about the hiring of a contractor to construct the room.
Palanker testified that the contractor was never paid by the family for the work he did.
The mother also maintained that she never asked comedian George Lopez for money, nor did she approach Jay Leno.
"Have you spoken to Jay Leno?" asked Mesereau.
"I have never spoken to Jay Leno," she said, and insisted she knew nothing about her son possibly having called Leno.
Leno's role was mentioned in opening statements in which the defense said the "Tonight Show" host became alarmed when he was called repeatedly by the family and reported them to authorities.
The woman also gave a confused account of how she happened to be photographed with bruises all over her body in connection with the alleged beating by the store security guards.
The pictures were presented by the prosecution on Monday to corroborate the woman's testimony in response to Mesereau's vigorous effort to show that the family made a bogus claim against the store.
She acknowledged that a mug shot taken of her on the day of the incident showed no bruises on her face.
"I was wearing makeup," she said.
But other pictures showed her face scraped and bruised and her body blotched with black and blue marks.
Mesereau tried to pin her down on when the photos were taken.
She at first acknowledged that she said in her deposition in that case that bruises do not immediately show up and over time they get "blacker and blacker."
"Did your attorney have these photographs taken?" asked Mesereau.
"Yes," said the woman.
"But you didn't go to a lawyer 'til a year later," he said.
"Those pictures were taken with the criminal case," she said. "I had these photos already."
She then said that defense attorneys had the pictures taken for a criminal case when she was charged with burglary, assault and petty theft stemming from the store incident. But she also said the photos were not taken by a police agency and that her husband took her to a one-hour photo place.
"When did he take you there?" asked Mesereau.
"Immediately," said the woman.
"But didn't you testify that you didn't have those bruises immediately?" asked the lawyer.
The woman gave a convoluted response: "When the defense attorney told us was the time."
The woman acknowledged waiting a year before taking her complaints to a lawyer, and asserted that all she really wanted then was an apology.
As Mesereau questioned her, she commented to the jury, "He's mixing up things purposely."
---
Associated Press Writer Tim Molloy contributed to this story.
LINDA DEUTSCH
Associated Press
SANTA MARIA, Calif. - The prosecution in Michael Jackson's child molestation trial plans to rest next week, the district attorney told the judge Tuesday.
The announcement by District Attorney Tom Sneddon came in the eighth week since opening statements.
Sneddon said, however, that he had a problem with witness availability for Friday and Judge Rodney S. Melville agreed to give participants a three-day weekend as long as pending motions were completed by then.
The plans were revealed after the accuser's mother completed testimony that spanned five days and a brief appearance by the accuser's grandmother, who drew no cross-examination by the defense.
Under final cross-examination by the defense, the accuser's mother insisted she never solicited money from celebrities for her son when he was stricken with cancer and that a lawsuit she filed against a department store was intended to obtain an apology rather than money, although there was a settlement of more than $150,000.
The defense sought to suggest through the questioning that Jackson is the victim of a scheme to get his money.
Jackson, 46, is accused of molesting a then-13-year-old cancer patient in February or March 2003, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold his family captive to get them to rebut the TV documentary "Living With Michael Jackson," in which he said he let children sleep in his bed but that it was innocent and non-sexual.
Before leaving the stand, the woman was questioned by defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. about her family's encounters with celebrities and its involvement in the lawsuit that claimed security guards beat them in 1998 after the boy who is now Jackson's accuser walked out of a store with clothes that had not been paid for.
The woman said she was never informed that fundraisers were held for her son at a Hollywood comedy club and didn't know that donations were being made when she opened a special bank account for his benefit.
She said she had no idea why money was being put in the account and that all of it was being handled by a husband she has since divorce.
"You had no idea why anyone put money in it. You just withdrew it?" asked Mesereau.
"I did what (my husband) told me," the woman said.
"And you had no idea that Chris Tucker was going to wire money in to that account," asked the lawyer, referring to the comedian who became a benefactor of the family.
"This is correct," she answered.
The attorney asked if she was aware that comedians held a benefit for her son at the Laugh Factory in Hollywood while the boy sat in the lobby collecting money.
She said she knew nothing about it.
"And do you remember using money donated for (him) on cosmetic surgery?" asked Mesereau.
"No," said the woman. "I used a credit card."
She was asked if she knew that comedian Louise Palanker had given the family $20,000 to build a germ-free room for her son, and she said she knew nothing about it other than that she endorsed a check for $10,000 and gave it to her husband.
Palanker has testified that a second check was made out to the husband.
The mother insisted that Palanker never mentioned to her that she was writing any checks and that she knew nothing about the hiring of a contractor to construct the room.
Palanker testified that the contractor was never paid by the family for the work he did.
The mother also maintained that she never asked comedian George Lopez for money, nor did she approach Jay Leno.
"Have you spoken to Jay Leno?" asked Mesereau.
"I have never spoken to Jay Leno," she said, and insisted she knew nothing about her son possibly having called Leno.
Leno's role was mentioned in opening statements in which the defense said the "Tonight Show" host became alarmed when he was called repeatedly by the family and reported them to authorities.
The woman also gave a confused account of how she happened to be photographed with bruises all over her body in connection with the alleged beating by the store security guards.
The pictures were presented by the prosecution on Monday to corroborate the woman's testimony in response to Mesereau's vigorous effort to show that the family made a bogus claim against the store.
She acknowledged that a mug shot taken of her on the day of the incident showed no bruises on her face.
"I was wearing makeup," she said.
But other pictures showed her face scraped and bruised and her body blotched with black and blue marks.
Mesereau tried to pin her down on when the photos were taken.
She at first acknowledged that she said in her deposition in that case that bruises do not immediately show up and over time they get "blacker and blacker."
"Did your attorney have these photographs taken?" asked Mesereau.
"Yes," said the woman.
"But you didn't go to a lawyer 'til a year later," he said.
"Those pictures were taken with the criminal case," she said. "I had these photos already."
She then said that defense attorneys had the pictures taken for a criminal case when she was charged with burglary, assault and petty theft stemming from the store incident. But she also said the photos were not taken by a police agency and that her husband took her to a one-hour photo place.
"When did he take you there?" asked Mesereau.
"Immediately," said the woman.
"But didn't you testify that you didn't have those bruises immediately?" asked the lawyer.
The woman gave a convoluted response: "When the defense attorney told us was the time."
The woman acknowledged waiting a year before taking her complaints to a lawyer, and asserted that all she really wanted then was an apology.
As Mesereau questioned her, she commented to the jury, "He's mixing up things purposely."
---
Associated Press Writer Tim Molloy contributed to this story.
Dimond (ewww): Reported that one of the prosecution witnesses confirmed, under cross-examination, that there was no change in the accuser's disruptive behavior between before he went to Neverland and after he came back from Neverland. Anyway, that was just one of the things she reported. Who knows what all Mesereau really got out of that witness.
-my note: this completely destroys the pro-prosecution pundit argument that they were acting out after they were "molested" by Jackson.
-my note: this completely destroys the pro-prosecution pundit argument that they were acting out after they were "molested" by Jackson.
Tiger Lilly
New member
^^^ You'd think they had something to hide. I thought they were the "victims". *roll eyes*
Thanks for all the news guys! :rose:
Thanks for all the news guys! :rose:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Grandmom of Jackson Accuser Talks of Rock Throwing
By Dan Whitcomb and Alexandria Sage
SANTA MARIA, Calif. (Reuters) - The grandmother of the teen accusing Michael Jackson of molestation testified on Tuesday that she was bombarded by phone calls and had rocks thrown at her home after her grandson finally left the singer's Neverland Valley Ranch in 2003.
Speaking in Spanish through an interpreter, the grandmother also said she had to pretend to be sick in order to get the boy, then 13, and his brother released from Neverland.
And when the brothers finally returned "these children that came were not my grandkids ... They didn't talk to me the same way. They were different kids and even up to now (the elder boy) is not the same child," she said.
The grandmother took the stand after the mother of the boy at the center of the child sex abuse case against Jackson stepped down on Tuesday after more than four days of emotional, sometimes bizarre and often rambling testimony.
The mother, considered a key witness by both sides, never witnessed any molestation of her son by Jackson. But she is the linchpin of prosecution charges that the singer conspired to hold her family against their will in February and March 2003 at his Neverland Valley Ranch.
She is also crucial to the defense argument that Jackson, 46, was an unwitting victim of a liar and a grifter who latched onto celebrities and who had a history of making false allegations.
The grandmother's testimony focused on the days and weeks after the family returned from Neverland in March 2003 following what the mother had described as a period of intimidation at the hands of some of Jackson's aides.
"I had to lie and say I was ill so they could come, because those children, they loved me very much because I raised them," the grandmother said.
She said her Los Angeles home was barraged by phone calls day and night which she could not understand. Rocks were also thrown at her house by an unidentified man standing beside a car who drove off quickly when she came out to investigate.
The mother had testified at length about being harassed by Jackson's aides following the February 2003 broadcast of a TV documentary in which Jackson was seen holding hands with her son and defending his practice of sharing his bed with boys.
In one of the two month-old trial's more bizarre moments, she said she once feared that her family would be spirited away from Jackson's Neverland ranch in a hot air balloon.
But Jackson's lead attorney Tom Mesereau defense got the woman to admit that she never tried to call police, a lawyer, or anyone else in authority during the time she said she was held against her will at Neverland and in a Southern California hotel. The woman said she thought no-one would believe her.
Jackson is charged with molesting the woman's son at Neverland in early 2003, plying the boy with alcohol in order to abuse him and conspiring to commit false imprisonment, child abduction and extortion. The performer, who has pleaded innocent, faces more than 20 years in prison if convicted.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=8229911
By Dan Whitcomb and Alexandria Sage
SANTA MARIA, Calif. (Reuters) - The grandmother of the teen accusing Michael Jackson of molestation testified on Tuesday that she was bombarded by phone calls and had rocks thrown at her home after her grandson finally left the singer's Neverland Valley Ranch in 2003.
Speaking in Spanish through an interpreter, the grandmother also said she had to pretend to be sick in order to get the boy, then 13, and his brother released from Neverland.
And when the brothers finally returned "these children that came were not my grandkids ... They didn't talk to me the same way. They were different kids and even up to now (the elder boy) is not the same child," she said.
The grandmother took the stand after the mother of the boy at the center of the child sex abuse case against Jackson stepped down on Tuesday after more than four days of emotional, sometimes bizarre and often rambling testimony.
The mother, considered a key witness by both sides, never witnessed any molestation of her son by Jackson. But she is the linchpin of prosecution charges that the singer conspired to hold her family against their will in February and March 2003 at his Neverland Valley Ranch.
She is also crucial to the defense argument that Jackson, 46, was an unwitting victim of a liar and a grifter who latched onto celebrities and who had a history of making false allegations.
The grandmother's testimony focused on the days and weeks after the family returned from Neverland in March 2003 following what the mother had described as a period of intimidation at the hands of some of Jackson's aides.
"I had to lie and say I was ill so they could come, because those children, they loved me very much because I raised them," the grandmother said.
She said her Los Angeles home was barraged by phone calls day and night which she could not understand. Rocks were also thrown at her house by an unidentified man standing beside a car who drove off quickly when she came out to investigate.
The mother had testified at length about being harassed by Jackson's aides following the February 2003 broadcast of a TV documentary in which Jackson was seen holding hands with her son and defending his practice of sharing his bed with boys.
In one of the two month-old trial's more bizarre moments, she said she once feared that her family would be spirited away from Jackson's Neverland ranch in a hot air balloon.
But Jackson's lead attorney Tom Mesereau defense got the woman to admit that she never tried to call police, a lawyer, or anyone else in authority during the time she said she was held against her will at Neverland and in a Southern California hotel. The woman said she thought no-one would believe her.
Jackson is charged with molesting the woman's son at Neverland in early 2003, plying the boy with alcohol in order to abuse him and conspiring to commit false imprisonment, child abduction and extortion. The performer, who has pleaded innocent, faces more than 20 years in prison if convicted.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=8229911
TSColdMan
the principle (or some high figure) of one of Gavin's school testified today about how long he was out of school and what letters they sent etc... But under cross Mesereau got him to admit that Gavin was rude, got bad grades, got in trouble, and 'could handle himself with adults'.
the principle (or some high figure) of one of Gavin's school testified today about how long he was out of school and what letters they sent etc... But under cross Mesereau got him to admit that Gavin was rude, got bad grades, got in trouble, and 'could handle himself with adults'.
Rock throwing?!WTF like first Michael and his so called gang threatened them,wanted to put them on air ballons and then threw rocks?!What the hell are they really doing?They are trying to make it seem like Michael is this big threatening monster and now they are claming he had people prank call and throw damn rocks like its Grade two..this is ridiculous.
sistahlamb
New member
Why the hell would Michael Jackson's aids be harrassing her when they had no motive to?
And if she really was being harassed by Jackson's aids, why did'nt she call the police(well I'm not sure if she said she did)??? And how could she tell it was one of Jackson's aids-that she's probably never met-if it must have been in the middle of night?
I'm still wondering why the defence did'nt question her on this.
And if she really was being harassed by Jackson's aids, why did'nt she call the police(well I'm not sure if she said she did)??? And how could she tell it was one of Jackson's aids-that she's probably never met-if it must have been in the middle of night?
I'm still wondering why the defence did'nt question her on this.
Cristine87
New member
This boy has obviously always been a little bad ass, this has nothing to do with him staying at Neverland, he's just a troubled kid that comes from a ****ed up family & that has been testified to on the stand. I don't understand why the D.A. is trying to make this kid sound like he was a little innocent angel until he was victimized by Michael & then he turned in to a little hellraiser. The jury is not gonna buy that & I'm sure Janet's mother was more than willing to lie for her on the stand.