Official August 17 Hearing
- Thread starter whisperAdmin
- Start date
A
Anonymous
Guest
Please no..
As for the bruises that he got at the hands of the police:
QUOTE (MsTenda @ Aug 17 2004, 01:16 PM)
It was Dieter who took pictures of those bruises and I know for a fact that the AG did not speak to Michael's doctors or chiropractor about his shoulders.
QUOTE (MsTenda @ Aug 17 2004, 01:16 PM)
It was Dieter who took pictures of those bruises and I know for a fact that the AG did not speak to Michael's doctors or chiropractor about his shoulders.
A
Anonymous
Guest
wow..thank's for posting all of this Whisper..I just got done. 
Some telling things going on..
Do you know if Melville will rule next week on all these things? Is he going to rule on the 955 motion arguement?
Some telling things going on..Do you know if Melville will rule next week on all these things? Is he going to rule on the 955 motion arguement?
Tiger Lilly
New member
Katz is Miller's doctor, so what if Katz started feeding information to grifter mom? What if he broke doctor/patient confidentiality?
So this is the defence's plan, right? So if Mez and co can prove Katz leaked something that was private between him and Miller under the doctor/patient confidentiality, it proves a conspiracy between the prosecution, Katz and Feldman.
But Sneddon is staying away from knowing before November. If he said he did know in December then the evidence will stay, cos he can just say he did not know before november 18th, which we know is BS. So Mez is trying to prove he did know before November 18th. Mez has something, I just know it! Sneddon's messing up already.
Also another problem for him to prove the conspiracy is that grifter mom and co had return tickets to Brazil.
So this is the defence's plan, right? So if Mez and co can prove Katz leaked something that was private between him and Miller under the doctor/patient confidentiality, it proves a conspiracy between the prosecution, Katz and Feldman.
But Sneddon is staying away from knowing before November. If he said he did know in December then the evidence will stay, cos he can just say he did not know before november 18th, which we know is BS. So Mez is trying to prove he did know before November 18th. Mez has something, I just know it!
Sneddon's messing up already.Also another problem for him to prove the conspiracy is that grifter mom and co had return tickets to Brazil.
Tiger Lilly
New member
And whats all this I'm hearing about Oxman being fined $1000 for pissing off Melville? ullhairo What did he do? I heard he wrote a check out there and then tho. :laugh
ullhairo What did he do? I heard he wrote a check out there and then tho. :laugh
A
Anonymous
Guest
is this true??Originally posted by Tiger Lilly
And whats all this I'm hearing about Oxman being fined $1000 for pissing off Melville?
Tiger Lilly
New member
Yeh, he fined Oxman for continuing to question Katz about knowing Miller. He wasn't allowed due to confidenciality (sp) but he carried on anyway. Way to go Brian! $1000 is nothing compared to you frying Katz like that!
Tiger Lilly
New member
Katz: our man who was responsible for the '93 shit, live today.
He looks happy doesn't he? :laugh :screaming :screaming :screaming <--- Oxman on Katz
He looks happy doesn't he? :laugh :screaming :screaming :screaming <--- Oxman on Katz
HeavenSent
New member
Thanks for the reports, whisper.
This victim's fund and that parking lot. :cryptic Stupid, stupid, stupid. Now how is Sneddon going to explain this? And tell me, can you get any more unethical than that, Mr. Prosecutor? I bet that little arrangement was back in the day when Mother Grifter and this case was more "manageable." and now, Sneddon probably wishes he never got himself tangled in this hot mess.
And the Katz/Miller thing...I just heard that Brian Oxman got fined. And he then got up in court to write the check, ROTFL! :laugh You go boy!!
Caught in a another lie! LOL.
This victim's fund and that parking lot. :cryptic Stupid, stupid, stupid. Now how is Sneddon going to explain this? And tell me, can you get any more unethical than that, Mr. Prosecutor? I bet that little arrangement was back in the day when Mother Grifter and this case was more "manageable." and now, Sneddon probably wishes he never got himself tangled in this hot mess.
And the Katz/Miller thing...I just heard that Brian Oxman got fined. And he then got up in court to write the check, ROTFL! :laugh You go boy!!
Tiger Lilly
New member
from mjstinkerbell
:cryptic
LadyJackson
New member
Yeah, Brian show em' you ain't NO HOE!!! :laugh That boy pulled the check book out right then and there and wrote it...THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT!!! :laugh :laugh
Tiger Lilly
New member
Sources: Threats made against Jackson
Defense drops bombshell
From Miguel Marquez and Dree deClamecy
CNN
Tuesday, August 17, 2004 Posted: 5:14 PM EDT (2114 GMT)
Did D.A. Tom Sneddon violate Jackson's lawyer-client privilege?
SANTA MARIA, California (CNN) -- Threats made against pop star Michael Jackson prompted authorities to maintain a heightened alert for the singer's court appearance, sources close to the case told CNN Tuesday.
The nature of the threats had to do with inflicting bodily harm on the singer, CNN has learned.
The Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department refused to discuss details of the alleged threats that led to Monday's alert.
Jackson attended the hearing Monday that focused on the actions of Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon in the weeks before child molestation charges were filed against Jackson.
Jackson did not return to the Santa Barbara County courthouse Tuesday.
At issue is the defense's claim that Sneddon violated attorney-client privilege between Jackson and his former attorney, Mark Geragos, when he conducted a search of the office of a private investigator.
The defense claims the prosecutor knew or should have known that the investigator, Brad Miller, was working for Geragos at the time of the search. As a result, the defense wants any information obtained in the search of Miller's office thrown out.
Sneddon maintains he did not know that Miller was directly employed by Geragos.
Investigator on why they went to office
Tuesday, Santa Barbara County Sheriff's investigator Jeff Klapakis, the lead investigator on the Jackson case since February 2003, testified that the sheriff's department did not know that Miller worked for Geragos, but was interested in finding out for whom he did work.
"It dawned on no one ... that Mr. Miller was an investigator hired by an attorney, namely Mr. Geragos?" asked Jackson defense attorney Steve Cochran.
"That is correct," Klapakis responded.
The investigator said the department sought search warrants for Miller's office because the mother of the alleged victim, identified as Jane Doe, claimed that some items belonging to her may be there.
Klapakis said the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department didn't notify police in Beverly Hills, where Miller's office was located, about the warrants, fearing there would be a leak and the private investigator would remove the items authorities were searching for.
Among the items taken from Miller's office when authorities served the search warrant were a videotape and letters. The defense wants those items to be excluded from the admissible evidence at trial.
Therapist's connection to investigator
Another tangle in the case came when Dr. Stan Katz took the stand Tuesday. Katz was the psychologist who interviewed the alleged victim and concluded that molestation had taken place.
The boy and his family had been referred to Katz by attorney Larry Feldman, who also referred another boy and his parents to the doctor in the 1993 molestation allegations against Jackson.
The singer settled those previous allegations with a nearly $20 million settlement, and no charges were ever filed.
Katz testified under questioning by Brian Oxman, a Jackson family attorney, that the first time he had heard of Miller was in a meeting with Feldman in June 2003.
"He just mentioned that an investigator named Brad Miller had made a videotape of the minor children," Katz said.
He said the next time he had heard Miller's name was in the media, in stories about a break-in at the investigator's office.
Oxman then dropped a bombshell.
"Bradley Miller is a very special patient of yours, isn't he, Dr. Katz?" Oxman asked.
Katz claimed doctor-patient privilege and said he couldn't discuss any of his patients.
He then admitted that he knew Miller because he had worked on family law cases with the investigator.
Defense attorneys also want to question Jane Doe, the alleged victim's mother, in this hearing, but the prosecution told Judge Rodney Melville on Tuesday the woman could not appear in court until the end of September due to complications from a C-section she underwent to deliver a baby July 27.
Melville said such a delay was "unsatisfactory to our timeline."
Also, Jackson attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. told the judge that he must appear in Alabama the last two weeks of September for a death penalty case.
Melville already moved the projected start of the trial from September to the end of January 2005.
Jackson, 45, has pleaded not guilty to child molestation. The singer is charged with seven counts of performing lewd or lascivious acts on a child under 14 and two counts of administering an intoxicating agent, reportedly wine.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/17/jackson.case/
Defense drops bombshell
From Miguel Marquez and Dree deClamecy
CNN
Tuesday, August 17, 2004 Posted: 5:14 PM EDT (2114 GMT)
Did D.A. Tom Sneddon violate Jackson's lawyer-client privilege?
SANTA MARIA, California (CNN) -- Threats made against pop star Michael Jackson prompted authorities to maintain a heightened alert for the singer's court appearance, sources close to the case told CNN Tuesday.
The nature of the threats had to do with inflicting bodily harm on the singer, CNN has learned.
The Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department refused to discuss details of the alleged threats that led to Monday's alert.
Jackson attended the hearing Monday that focused on the actions of Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon in the weeks before child molestation charges were filed against Jackson.
Jackson did not return to the Santa Barbara County courthouse Tuesday.
At issue is the defense's claim that Sneddon violated attorney-client privilege between Jackson and his former attorney, Mark Geragos, when he conducted a search of the office of a private investigator.
The defense claims the prosecutor knew or should have known that the investigator, Brad Miller, was working for Geragos at the time of the search. As a result, the defense wants any information obtained in the search of Miller's office thrown out.
Sneddon maintains he did not know that Miller was directly employed by Geragos.
Investigator on why they went to office
Tuesday, Santa Barbara County Sheriff's investigator Jeff Klapakis, the lead investigator on the Jackson case since February 2003, testified that the sheriff's department did not know that Miller worked for Geragos, but was interested in finding out for whom he did work.
"It dawned on no one ... that Mr. Miller was an investigator hired by an attorney, namely Mr. Geragos?" asked Jackson defense attorney Steve Cochran.
"That is correct," Klapakis responded.
The investigator said the department sought search warrants for Miller's office because the mother of the alleged victim, identified as Jane Doe, claimed that some items belonging to her may be there.
Klapakis said the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department didn't notify police in Beverly Hills, where Miller's office was located, about the warrants, fearing there would be a leak and the private investigator would remove the items authorities were searching for.
Among the items taken from Miller's office when authorities served the search warrant were a videotape and letters. The defense wants those items to be excluded from the admissible evidence at trial.
Therapist's connection to investigator
Another tangle in the case came when Dr. Stan Katz took the stand Tuesday. Katz was the psychologist who interviewed the alleged victim and concluded that molestation had taken place.
The boy and his family had been referred to Katz by attorney Larry Feldman, who also referred another boy and his parents to the doctor in the 1993 molestation allegations against Jackson.
The singer settled those previous allegations with a nearly $20 million settlement, and no charges were ever filed.
Katz testified under questioning by Brian Oxman, a Jackson family attorney, that the first time he had heard of Miller was in a meeting with Feldman in June 2003.
"He just mentioned that an investigator named Brad Miller had made a videotape of the minor children," Katz said.
He said the next time he had heard Miller's name was in the media, in stories about a break-in at the investigator's office.
Oxman then dropped a bombshell.
"Bradley Miller is a very special patient of yours, isn't he, Dr. Katz?" Oxman asked.
Katz claimed doctor-patient privilege and said he couldn't discuss any of his patients.
He then admitted that he knew Miller because he had worked on family law cases with the investigator.
Defense attorneys also want to question Jane Doe, the alleged victim's mother, in this hearing, but the prosecution told Judge Rodney Melville on Tuesday the woman could not appear in court until the end of September due to complications from a C-section she underwent to deliver a baby July 27.
Melville said such a delay was "unsatisfactory to our timeline."
Also, Jackson attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. told the judge that he must appear in Alabama the last two weeks of September for a death penalty case.
Melville already moved the projected start of the trial from September to the end of January 2005.
Jackson, 45, has pleaded not guilty to child molestation. The singer is charged with seven counts of performing lewd or lascivious acts on a child under 14 and two counts of administering an intoxicating agent, reportedly wine.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/17/jackson.case/
HeavenSent
New member
Thanks for posting, Gem.
I don't like this one bit. Can an unbiased doctor examine this B*** to make sure she is absolutely incapable of dragging her butt into court before then?!
Oh god, please no...do not take it there.
What was Miller allegedly doing with Janet's belongings? And for the lead investigator to say that it didn't dawn on him that Miller knew Geragos is :cryptic
Shouldn't law enforcement work together on this to insure that there is not compromise in their duties? Them wanting to keep it secret revealed that they had some ulterior motives, IMO, that they didn't want any other outside agency to be familiar with.
I don't like this one bit. Can an unbiased doctor examine this B*** to make sure she is absolutely incapable of dragging her butt into court before then?!
svud huir kula
New member
this is so exciting! omg
wow i would be so pissed if i was in the same room with DD. i would so bitch-slap that ho. lol. and why can nobody spell Cochran? lmao
wow that's bizarre that miller was stan katz's patient. it's great, though, because it's just another way sneddon could have known about miller! ahahaha. grill him! grill them all! buahahahaha
bad movie? no way, this is totally awesome ass-kicking!
wow i would be so pissed if i was in the same room with DD. i would so bitch-slap that ho. lol. and why can nobody spell Cochran? lmao
wow that's bizarre that miller was stan katz's patient. it's great, though, because it's just another way sneddon could have known about miller! ahahaha. grill him! grill them all! buahahahaha
bad movie? no way, this is totally awesome ass-kicking!
Tiger Lilly
New member
No worries.
Don't worry. NO ONE is gonna hurt Michael.
HeavenSent
New member
It's not that I'm worried,persay. It's just that it sounds so shady. Of all Michael's appearances and now there's supposed threats on him. They just want him to stay away. That's so wack.Originally posted by Tiger Lilly
No worries.
Don't worry. NO ONE is gonna hurt Michael.
Tiger Lilly
New member
God bless the MJJForum
Lawyer: Psychologist's patients on both sides of Jackson case
By Linda Deutsch
ASSOCIATED PRESS
2:33 p.m. August 17, 2004
SANTA MARIA — An investigator who is the subject of a crucial pretrial hearing in the Michael Jackson molestation case was himself a patient of the psychologist who first notified police of a 12-year-old boy's claims of being molested by the pop singer, a defense lawyer alleged in court Tuesday.
Stan J. Katz declined to discuss his relationship with Bradley Miller, the investigator, claiming a privilege of confidentiality, which the judge upheld for the time being.
But defense attorney Brian Oxman, who made the allegation, asked for the chance to argue that the material is not privileged and the judge gave him time to find case law on the subject.
Katz did acknowledge that he had been professionally associated with Miller before the Jackson case.
"I knew Bradley Miller because he is a professional who has worked on family law cases with me, as you have, Mr. Oxman," he told the lawyer.
"And did you tell investigators (in the Jackson case) that Bradley Miller was your patient?" Oxman asked.
The witness again asserted the privilege.
Katz had been called as a witness in a hearing to determine whether Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon and other authorities were aware that Miller worked for Jackson's former lawyer, Mark Geragos, when evidence was seized from Miller's office with a search warrant.
Sneddon has testified that he was unaware of the relationship and thus was not invading the attorney-client privilege of confidentiality when he went to Miller's office and conducted surveillance.
Oxman, the third defense attorney to question witnesses in the hearing, dropped the bombshell about the psychologist's relationship with the witness at the start of his inquiry.
"Bradley Miller is a very special patience of yours, is he not, Dr. Katz?" asked Oxman.
"If he were a patient, I could not disclose that because of the privilege," Katz replied.
Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville accepted that assertion, but Oxman continued, "Bradley Miller is a patient of Dr. Katz and has been for a number of years."
The judge then told Oxman that he should not be testifying to that fact.
The judge later in the afternoon ruled that the therapist could not be forced to say whether Miller is his patient and ordered Oxman to stop questioning him on the subject.
Oxman, however, persisted and after a number of questions in which he referred to Miller as Katz's "patient" or "client," the judge interrupted and fined him $1,000.
The defense was seeking to show that Katz's intimate knowledge of the investigator would have meant he knew of the relationship with Geragos and probably told authorities about it.
Jackson, 45, is charged with committing a lewd act upon a child, administering an intoxicating agent and conspiring to commit child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion. He has pleaded not guilty and is free on $3 million bail.
Katz earlier in the day confirmed a scenario, which has long been reported, about how he first became involved in the case and notified authorities of the then-12-year-old boy's allegations.
In May 2003, he said he was contacted by attorney Larry Feldman, who wanted him to meet with the boy and his family.
"I had seen the documentary on television, so I had seen the minor child interviewed," Katz said.
He was referring to a British TV documentary called "Living With Michael Jackson" in which the singer defended his habit of letting children sleep in his bed. The accuser also is seen in the video, which aired in February 2003.
Katz said of Feldman, "He asked me to interview the minors (referring to the boy and two siblings) to determine the veracity of the comments they made to him."
Katz testified that during a meeting with Feldman on June 3, 2003, "He just mentioned that an investigator named Bradley Miller had made some kind of videotape of the minor witness."
"When was the next time you heard the name Bradley Miller?" asked Oxman.
Katz said he heard about the investigator in the news when there was a break-in at Miller's office.
At one point, Oxman asked to see Katz's file on the case, but the judge declined to let him read it.
Katz said it contained a transcript of a conversation between him and investigators in the case in which he told them that Miller had set up a video camera and taped the boy and his family "saying how great (Jackson) was."
Katz was preceded to the stand by sheriff's Lt. Jeff Klipakis, a lead detective in the Jackson case at its inception. He said that there were only three people on the original task force and they were not permitted to tell anyone what they were doing.
"We didn't want information to get out, other than to a small circle of people, of what we were investigating," he said.
As a result, he and his staff never conferred with Beverly Hills police before a search was done of Miller's office in that city.
The videotape of the family is believed to be among the items seized from Miller's office and is critical evidence in the prosecution's case. The defense wants to suppress it.
In another development, prosecutors reported that the mother of the accuser would be unable to testify in the current hearing unless it is continued until late September. They said the woman, identified in court as "Jane Doe," gave birth to a child by Caesarean section July 27 and has had complications afterward. They said her doctor would not clear her to testify for eight weeks.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/2...aeljackson.html ://http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/...eljackson.html
-------------------------------------
Btw rumour says the threats came from Jim Thomas.... :cryptic
Lawyer: Psychologist's patients on both sides of Jackson case
By Linda Deutsch
ASSOCIATED PRESS
2:33 p.m. August 17, 2004
SANTA MARIA — An investigator who is the subject of a crucial pretrial hearing in the Michael Jackson molestation case was himself a patient of the psychologist who first notified police of a 12-year-old boy's claims of being molested by the pop singer, a defense lawyer alleged in court Tuesday.
Stan J. Katz declined to discuss his relationship with Bradley Miller, the investigator, claiming a privilege of confidentiality, which the judge upheld for the time being.
But defense attorney Brian Oxman, who made the allegation, asked for the chance to argue that the material is not privileged and the judge gave him time to find case law on the subject.
Katz did acknowledge that he had been professionally associated with Miller before the Jackson case.
"I knew Bradley Miller because he is a professional who has worked on family law cases with me, as you have, Mr. Oxman," he told the lawyer.
"And did you tell investigators (in the Jackson case) that Bradley Miller was your patient?" Oxman asked.
The witness again asserted the privilege.
Katz had been called as a witness in a hearing to determine whether Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon and other authorities were aware that Miller worked for Jackson's former lawyer, Mark Geragos, when evidence was seized from Miller's office with a search warrant.
Sneddon has testified that he was unaware of the relationship and thus was not invading the attorney-client privilege of confidentiality when he went to Miller's office and conducted surveillance.
Oxman, the third defense attorney to question witnesses in the hearing, dropped the bombshell about the psychologist's relationship with the witness at the start of his inquiry.
"Bradley Miller is a very special patience of yours, is he not, Dr. Katz?" asked Oxman.
"If he were a patient, I could not disclose that because of the privilege," Katz replied.
Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville accepted that assertion, but Oxman continued, "Bradley Miller is a patient of Dr. Katz and has been for a number of years."
The judge then told Oxman that he should not be testifying to that fact.
The judge later in the afternoon ruled that the therapist could not be forced to say whether Miller is his patient and ordered Oxman to stop questioning him on the subject.
Oxman, however, persisted and after a number of questions in which he referred to Miller as Katz's "patient" or "client," the judge interrupted and fined him $1,000.
The defense was seeking to show that Katz's intimate knowledge of the investigator would have meant he knew of the relationship with Geragos and probably told authorities about it.
Jackson, 45, is charged with committing a lewd act upon a child, administering an intoxicating agent and conspiring to commit child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion. He has pleaded not guilty and is free on $3 million bail.
Katz earlier in the day confirmed a scenario, which has long been reported, about how he first became involved in the case and notified authorities of the then-12-year-old boy's allegations.
In May 2003, he said he was contacted by attorney Larry Feldman, who wanted him to meet with the boy and his family.
"I had seen the documentary on television, so I had seen the minor child interviewed," Katz said.
He was referring to a British TV documentary called "Living With Michael Jackson" in which the singer defended his habit of letting children sleep in his bed. The accuser also is seen in the video, which aired in February 2003.
Katz said of Feldman, "He asked me to interview the minors (referring to the boy and two siblings) to determine the veracity of the comments they made to him."
Katz testified that during a meeting with Feldman on June 3, 2003, "He just mentioned that an investigator named Bradley Miller had made some kind of videotape of the minor witness."
"When was the next time you heard the name Bradley Miller?" asked Oxman.
Katz said he heard about the investigator in the news when there was a break-in at Miller's office.
At one point, Oxman asked to see Katz's file on the case, but the judge declined to let him read it.
Katz said it contained a transcript of a conversation between him and investigators in the case in which he told them that Miller had set up a video camera and taped the boy and his family "saying how great (Jackson) was."
Katz was preceded to the stand by sheriff's Lt. Jeff Klipakis, a lead detective in the Jackson case at its inception. He said that there were only three people on the original task force and they were not permitted to tell anyone what they were doing.
"We didn't want information to get out, other than to a small circle of people, of what we were investigating," he said.
As a result, he and his staff never conferred with Beverly Hills police before a search was done of Miller's office in that city.
The videotape of the family is believed to be among the items seized from Miller's office and is critical evidence in the prosecution's case. The defense wants to suppress it.
In another development, prosecutors reported that the mother of the accuser would be unable to testify in the current hearing unless it is continued until late September. They said the woman, identified in court as "Jane Doe," gave birth to a child by Caesarean section July 27 and has had complications afterward. They said her doctor would not clear her to testify for eight weeks.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/2...aeljackson.html ://http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/...eljackson.html
-------------------------------------
Btw rumour says the threats came from Jim Thomas.... :cryptic
Tiger Lilly
New member
Sorry to keep posting but is this true? If so why did Gav!n admit it to feldman before Katz when Feldman is a civil attorney? $$$$$$ motivated. :cryptic
HeavenSent
New member
Okay.
Katz + Feldman + Sneddon + Grifter Mother = Scam.
Katz + Feldman + Sneddon + Grifter Mother = Scam.