got2makeitright
New member
I hope the judge does not allowed it in! You?
Official May 12 2005 thread
- Thread starter whisperAdmin
- Start date
Well, except for one thing: how powerful would it actually be to have MJ actually speak in front of a jury? True, Sneddon would try to eat him alive, but Mez would not let him. Raymone Bain said that MJ will be very articulate if he were to testify. Besides, it would show everybody that MJ is not afraid!!!
Besides, as far as I know, the outtakes did not show Gavin nor his mom. Or Debbie Rowe. Having Mike actually testify would give him a chance to say what they were like. The tapes showed everybody what MJ is truly like and what an a**hole Bashir is -- but it didn't give him a chance to say what he thought about the accusations. It did portray him as a sensitive, misunderstood human being, but it does not directly address the accusations because there were none at that time!
Anyway, you bet that if MJ is to testify, Mez will prepare him for the worst so he knows exactly what to do in case Sneddon or Zonen try to f*** with him.
Wait, if someone say "Michael Jackson molested me", it is something. It might not be enough for an indictment, but I think that, technically, what they claim is considered to be evidence. It might not be enough evidence, but in legalese, I think it's still evidence, isnt' it?
Now we know why Jim Hammer and laura ingle are so delusional about this "case". They're all hugged up with Diane Dimond.
Assholes of a feather, flock together.....I guess. :lol:
Assholes of a feather, flock together.....I guess. :lol:
Cristine87
New member
It might be but there's nobody else to corraborate that story so how credible is it supposed to be?
HeavenSent
New member
Thank for that, whisper.
opcorn Looking forward to hearing from Geragos.Frenchy,
The DA can only re-open its case regarding the evidence that the defense objected to due to lack of foundation and verification. This was a very minor point. They can only re-open to discuss this information. It was things like receipts, checks, etc. No big deal. Their rebuttal can only address issues that the defense brings up. That's why you see this motion that the DA filed last week. They want to bring in evidence that the judge has already disallowed as rebuttal to any witnesses that speak solely to MJ's character. This is why MJ/Mez are allowing star witnesses but only those that have real relevance to the case. I'll bet anything that all of MJ's witnesses including D. Ross, S. Wonder, L Taylor, and Q. Jones have some relavence to the current and/or the 1108 info. So, that motion should go nowhere.
Desparation is setting in....
:sneddoncrybaby
HeavenSent
New member
Originally posted by whisper
Now we know why Jim Hammer and laura ingle are so delusional about this "case". They're all hugged up with Diane Dimond.
Assholes of a feather, flock together.....I guess. :lol:
Omg gross. :lol: That pic explains it ALL. She looks mighty comfortable having him all up on her chest like that.
:yuk
Cristine87
New member
Thanks for clearing that up, Alfredo! I'm curious, do you work in law?
Cristine87
New member
Skank!Originally posted by whisper
A
Anonymous
Guest
Attorney: Filmmaker 'misrepresented' intentions to Jackson
Thursday, May 12, 2005 Posted: 1844 GMT (0244 HKT)
SANTA MARIA, California (CNN) -- Michael Jackson signed "terrible contracts" with British journalist Martin Bashir prior to the filming of an unflattering television documentary, Jackson's former attorney said Thursday.
Additionally, Bashir never followed through on a promise to let the pop star "screen and edit" the final product, testified David LeGrand.
Taking the stand for the defense in Jackson's child molestation trial, LeGrand said he "found it hard to believe" Jackson had signed two, one-paragraph documents giving Bashir and Grenada Television the rights to the footage shot at Neverland Ranch, including an interview with Jackson.
LeGrand said such contracts are usually specific and detailed. The agreements Jackson made with Bashir were neither, he said. Jackson also did not receive any money from the production, which LeGrand said earned "millions" of dollars.
The footage, shot in the summer and fall of 2002, formed the basis for the documentary "Living With Michael Jackson," which aired in Britain on February 3, 2003. Three days later, ABC aired a slightly different version of it in the United States.
LeGrand said that in January 2003, before the program aired, he was asked by Jackson to assemble a team of lawyers in Britain and the United States because he was concerned that no one in his camp had been allowed to review the final work.
LeGrand said Grenada TV insisted that it had the rights to the material, but the production company agreed to several concessions:
No outtakes from the footage would be used to create a second program.
The documentary would not be sold as a videotape or DVD.
Faces of Jackson's children would be obscured.
The documentary, which sparked a worldwide media sensation when it aired, showed Jackson holding hands with the then-13-year-old boy who now says the entertainer molested him. In the documentary Jackson also defended his practice of allowing children to sleep overnight in his bed.
A grand jury indicted Jackson last year on charges of molesting the boy, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold him and his family captive in 2003. Jackson pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Jury see videotaped conversations
LeGrand told jurors that he believed Bashir "had misrepresented to Mr. Jackson what they were going to accomplish in this production."
On Wednesday and Thursday, the defense -- trying to support its contention that Bashir deceived Jackson -- played for jurors nearly three hours of video of Bashir's conversations with Jackson. The footage was shot by the pop star's personal videographer, Hamid Moslehi, who had his cameras trained on the British journalist when he was at Neverland.
The footage showed Bashir heaping praise and flattery on Jackson, calling him a "musical genius" and a "stupendous" performer with an "extraordinary voice" who had an "incredible" interaction with children.
When Jackson at one point complained that media coverage of him is often "twisted," Bashir assured him, "We aren't going to do that here." He also told Jackson that the entertainer was "looking so sexy" during the taping.
"Women are going to be taking their pants off and throwing them at the screen," Bashir said.
LeGrand said Jackson filed a lawsuit against Bashir and Grenada over the program; that suit is still pending, but LeGrand is no longer involved. He said he was "terminated" by Jackson on March 28, 2003, less than two months after the program aired.
LeGrand did not tell jurors why he was fired.
Also Thursday, Carlos Velasco -- the son of a Jackson employee who attended high school with a boy who testified earlier in the trial that Jackson molested him -- said the boy never spoke about being molested at the time.
Velasco also said he saw Jackson and the boy together on several occasions and never saw or heard anything inappropriate.
However, under prosecution questioning, Velasco admitted that he did not know whether molestation had actually occurred.
CNN's Dree De Clamecy contributed to this report.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/LAW/05/12/jack...rial/index.html
Thursday, May 12, 2005 Posted: 1844 GMT (0244 HKT)
SANTA MARIA, California (CNN) -- Michael Jackson signed "terrible contracts" with British journalist Martin Bashir prior to the filming of an unflattering television documentary, Jackson's former attorney said Thursday.
Additionally, Bashir never followed through on a promise to let the pop star "screen and edit" the final product, testified David LeGrand.
Taking the stand for the defense in Jackson's child molestation trial, LeGrand said he "found it hard to believe" Jackson had signed two, one-paragraph documents giving Bashir and Grenada Television the rights to the footage shot at Neverland Ranch, including an interview with Jackson.
LeGrand said such contracts are usually specific and detailed. The agreements Jackson made with Bashir were neither, he said. Jackson also did not receive any money from the production, which LeGrand said earned "millions" of dollars.
The footage, shot in the summer and fall of 2002, formed the basis for the documentary "Living With Michael Jackson," which aired in Britain on February 3, 2003. Three days later, ABC aired a slightly different version of it in the United States.
LeGrand said that in January 2003, before the program aired, he was asked by Jackson to assemble a team of lawyers in Britain and the United States because he was concerned that no one in his camp had been allowed to review the final work.
LeGrand said Grenada TV insisted that it had the rights to the material, but the production company agreed to several concessions:
No outtakes from the footage would be used to create a second program.
The documentary would not be sold as a videotape or DVD.
Faces of Jackson's children would be obscured.
The documentary, which sparked a worldwide media sensation when it aired, showed Jackson holding hands with the then-13-year-old boy who now says the entertainer molested him. In the documentary Jackson also defended his practice of allowing children to sleep overnight in his bed.
A grand jury indicted Jackson last year on charges of molesting the boy, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold him and his family captive in 2003. Jackson pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Jury see videotaped conversations
LeGrand told jurors that he believed Bashir "had misrepresented to Mr. Jackson what they were going to accomplish in this production."
On Wednesday and Thursday, the defense -- trying to support its contention that Bashir deceived Jackson -- played for jurors nearly three hours of video of Bashir's conversations with Jackson. The footage was shot by the pop star's personal videographer, Hamid Moslehi, who had his cameras trained on the British journalist when he was at Neverland.
The footage showed Bashir heaping praise and flattery on Jackson, calling him a "musical genius" and a "stupendous" performer with an "extraordinary voice" who had an "incredible" interaction with children.
When Jackson at one point complained that media coverage of him is often "twisted," Bashir assured him, "We aren't going to do that here." He also told Jackson that the entertainer was "looking so sexy" during the taping.
"Women are going to be taking their pants off and throwing them at the screen," Bashir said.
LeGrand said Jackson filed a lawsuit against Bashir and Grenada over the program; that suit is still pending, but LeGrand is no longer involved. He said he was "terminated" by Jackson on March 28, 2003, less than two months after the program aired.
LeGrand did not tell jurors why he was fired.
Also Thursday, Carlos Velasco -- the son of a Jackson employee who attended high school with a boy who testified earlier in the trial that Jackson molested him -- said the boy never spoke about being molested at the time.
Velasco also said he saw Jackson and the boy together on several occasions and never saw or heard anything inappropriate.
However, under prosecution questioning, Velasco admitted that he did not know whether molestation had actually occurred.
CNN's Dree De Clamecy contributed to this report.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/LAW/05/12/jack...rial/index.html
HeavenSent
New member
hreally :thehellHeavenSent
New member
Nasty, sleazy, shady muthaf*@#%^
A few comments:
1. Can't MJ sue Bashir and Granada despite the contract? Isn't a promise an oral agreement and therefore considered a contract?
2. Could he have signed the contract without consulting with his attorneys or his "people"?
3. Who's the "boy who testified earlier in the trial that Jackson molested him"? Jason? Gavin?
4. Do you guys realize how much the defense has accomplished in ONE WEEK?? I mean, compare to the persecution that did not prove anything AT ALL after 10 weeks!!!
WOW, I think Thomas Mesereau deserves a huuuuuge thumbs up. :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup
A
Anonymous
Guest
Seriously, Bashir even looked full of shit while he was saying it. I don't know why MJ couldn't see through his crap.
I honestly think that Michael was 'out of it' then. If you've noticed, since then it's like he's done a total turn around. But that's just me.
I honestly think that Michael was 'out of it' then. If you've noticed, since then it's like he's done a total turn around. But that's just me.