Official August 17 Hearing
- Thread starter whisperAdmin
- Start date
This is what Dimond said from an excerpt of Crier Live:
DIMOND:…After the break, the judge came back and he said “You know, I’ve thought about this, Mr. Oxman, and you just cannot make him talk about who’s his patient. It’s just not gonna be allowed.” Well Brian Oxman ploughed ahead, full steam really.
And he got to the point where he said, “Ok, outside of the office, you ran into Bradley Miller one day out on the street. And didn’t he tell you he was devastated by the search of his office?” Dr. Katz said, “No. But he did say, ‘Did you hear what happened to me? They raided my office.’ “ And Mr. Oxman said, “Well didn’t he say to you, ‘You’re not the psychologist on this case, are you Dr, Katz? I mean, were you in conflict of interest from one patient to another?’ “ So see he wandered back into that realm again and the judge sanctioned him immediately $1000 and he got up and he left the bench.
-=---------------------------------------------
So it looks like Katz did confirm he talked to Miller. And Miller asked Katz, out on the street, “Did you hear what happened to me? They raided my office”
So this would certainly confirm, by Katz’s own testimony, (according to Dimond’s reporting which is not terribly reliable 100% of the time), that he did talk to Miller. And why would Miller ask Katz if he heard about the raid on his office if there hadn’t been a previously established relationship–whatever it may be–between the two men?
While he may not have outright lied on the stand–and hid behind doctor/patient–her certainly confirmed knowing Miller by his own testimony…..again, according to Dimond. (Why would she lie in the defense’s favor? :lol
DIMOND:…After the break, the judge came back and he said “You know, I’ve thought about this, Mr. Oxman, and you just cannot make him talk about who’s his patient. It’s just not gonna be allowed.” Well Brian Oxman ploughed ahead, full steam really.
And he got to the point where he said, “Ok, outside of the office, you ran into Bradley Miller one day out on the street. And didn’t he tell you he was devastated by the search of his office?” Dr. Katz said, “No. But he did say, ‘Did you hear what happened to me? They raided my office.’ “ And Mr. Oxman said, “Well didn’t he say to you, ‘You’re not the psychologist on this case, are you Dr, Katz? I mean, were you in conflict of interest from one patient to another?’ “ So see he wandered back into that realm again and the judge sanctioned him immediately $1000 and he got up and he left the bench.
-=---------------------------------------------
So it looks like Katz did confirm he talked to Miller. And Miller asked Katz, out on the street, “Did you hear what happened to me? They raided my office”
So this would certainly confirm, by Katz’s own testimony, (according to Dimond’s reporting which is not terribly reliable 100% of the time), that he did talk to Miller. And why would Miller ask Katz if he heard about the raid on his office if there hadn’t been a previously established relationship–whatever it may be–between the two men?
While he may not have outright lied on the stand–and hid behind doctor/patient–her certainly confirmed knowing Miller by his own testimony…..again, according to Dimond. (Why would she lie in the defense’s favor? :lol
Faithful MJ Lover
New member
:crackingu LMFAO!! :crackingu
Dimond said that Jay Jackson will be testifying Thursday
SpecialJanet25
New member
Oh really! I wonder what he going to say. I guess will found on Thursday, if this correct.
Questions: I don't understand the part about the furniture being stolen, could you elaborate if you don't mind?
Did it really come out in court on Tuesday that Janet Arvizo (I refuse to use her new last name) has already filled out PAPERWORK for her to recieve money from the State's victim fund? Was this the deal Sneddon made in exchange for her cooperation??? LAWD.
What's this about Jay Jackson being a secret informant for Sneddon? And since he is ex-mil, I think we need to obtain the background on this guy. My guess is INTELL... That would explain a lot.
Originally posted by Tiger Lilly
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
The question here is: who would trust this doctor???? I mean REALLY! He looks like a sleazy used car salesman. I certainly wouldn't trust the likes of him for psychiatric counseling. Good grief. :2thinking
There's no court tomorrow (Aug 18) The hearings will resume on Thursday Aug 19
mello1 said:
Basically, the story goes, mama was upset after the LWMJ documentary aired, and initially planned to file a lawsuit against the company that aired the special. She hired civil lawyer Bill Dickerman to represent her in that case. Plans for this lawsuit fell through, and she made other plans to sue Michael for unlawful posession of her furniture and passports. ITs as this point that Dickerman begins his letter writing marathon to Geragos claiming all this and that the family was "harrassed" by members of the Jackson camp.
These possessions landed in Millers office, so if the SBPD beleived the mother, which they obviously did, and beleived that her furniture was stolen, they would have (normally) contacted the Bev.Hills PD, the PD allocated for where Millers office is.
The detective on the stand said that they didnt notify the Bev. Hills PD because they didnt want anyone to know about there SECRET investigation of Miller, Geragos and Jackson. So already we know of an ongoing secret investigation BEFORE child molestation allegations even surfaced.
So the question was why is there a secret investigation regarding child molestation long before allegations even came out?
lol, i hope i explained that right, and didnt confuse u further
[/QUOTE]
Tiger Lilly
New member
What a surprise, Melville ruled in the prosecution's favour saying no "evidence" from Neverland is allowed to thrown out. ullhairo
ullhairoThat's not what he said. He said that there was "probable cause" (meaning an accusation) to get a search warrant for Michael's house. He's still going to allow the defense to challenge, individually, certain information taken, police going outside the scope of the search warrants, etc. He's saying that he's not going to throw out the entire NV search in a blanketed way, but he will let the defense challenge step-by-step what happened there.Originally posted by Tiger Lilly
What a surprise, Melville ruled in the prosecution's favour saying no "evidence" from Neverland is allowed to thrown out.
Tiger Lilly
New member
I see, I suppose that's something. When will Mike's team be able to challenge this?
Posted: Aug 18 2004, 07:53 AM
the ruling was on the neverland raid. melvile ruled that mez cant surpress everything that was taken from the ranch in one go. he has to argue each thing seperatly. so mez has pick each thing he wants to surpress and have a seperate argument for each thing. melvile said it had to be in by tomorrow according to reports which is abit short notice, maybe thats why theres no hearing today??
jay jackson according to reports will be there tomorrow. first time we have heard about him been there. presume its still to do with the miller raid. we dont know much about this. hopefully dickerman will be there tomorrow thats the one im waiting for
the ruling was on the neverland raid. melvile ruled that mez cant surpress everything that was taken from the ranch in one go. he has to argue each thing seperatly. so mez has pick each thing he wants to surpress and have a seperate argument for each thing. melvile said it had to be in by tomorrow according to reports which is abit short notice, maybe thats why theres no hearing today??
jay jackson according to reports will be there tomorrow. first time we have heard about him been there. presume its still to do with the miller raid. we dont know much about this. hopefully dickerman will be there tomorrow thats the one im waiting for
HeavenSent
New member
I can deal w/Melville's ruling on the raid. Raids based on probable cause isn't illegal. I'm glad Mes will be able to argue to suppress indiv. evidence....But this has to be argued tomorrow, though?!
A
Anonymous
Guest
Oh my God. I was gone for one frigging day and I come back and there's 4 pages of information.
I have to congratulate and thank you ALL for talking about all this and explaining things that you don't understand to each other, because I was completely lost on a few things but I read every single post here and it's all as clear as day!
I love you guys
I have to congratulate and thank you ALL for talking about all this and explaining things that you don't understand to each other, because I was completely lost on a few things but I read every single post here and it's all as clear as day!
I love you guys
Tiger Lilly
New member
Yeh ok I can deal with that cos I don't expect him to surpress everything in one go. But 1 day? A bit short notice, isn't it?
And Jess, I'm glad you've been able to catch up. :thumbsup
And Jess, I'm glad you've been able to catch up. :thumbsup
A
Anonymous
Guest
Gems I totally love your signature! Great caption, sexy Michael!!!
Tiger Lilly
New member
Awww thanks Jess, that means alot coming from you.Originally posted by HoldMeThrillMe
Gems I totally love your signature! Great caption, sexy Michael!!!
You're blends are AMAZIN'!!! I thought you'd like the Mariah lyrics. :greenlaug And yes, Mike's one sexy mofo. :licklips:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Awww my blends aren't that great. You've got soooo good at it I haven't blended in so long ... lol. Mike is more than one sexy mofo!!!! he's like 100 sexy mofos wrapped in to one!
I haven't blended in so long ... lol. Mike is more than one sexy mofo!!!! he's like 100 sexy mofos wrapped in to one!