Official May 27 2005 thread

got2makeitright

New member
They could possibly walk Gavin Arvizo through the prosecution's ridiculous timeline. A timeline which drastically changed from the original charging document filed against Jackson in Dec 2003 and the indictment.

Not a lot of pundits want to get into this fact, but originally -- according to the original charges filed against Jackson -- the accuser claimed abuse BEGAN Feb 7 2003. But according to the indictment in 2004, he claimed abuse BEGAN Feb 20 2003.

Some have speculated that prosecutors changed the dates specifically because of all the prior statements this entire family made after Feb 7 2003, which directly contradict what the accuser would later allege.

It was after Feb 7 that the accuser was still saying Jackson never molested him. He and his family denied abuse to the LA Dept of Children & Family Services. He and his family denied abuse to Bradley Miller, who came to Maj. Jay Jackson's apartment to interview the family, reportedly on Feb 16 2003.
:lol: So that why he wants it cut down to only 30mins lol I thought MJ touch gavin after LWMJ LOL :bustbubbl
 

sistahlamb

New member
Damn, I hope Gavin buckles on the stand when he's confronted with all of his lies!!!

I still hope when that happens, Meserau will finally pull the truth out of him.
 

got2makeitright

New member
You mean make him say this all a lie and that he is sorry?? I hope that too..but its never going to happen. If gavin would to say he never touch me..it would end right there.. Mez would say to the judge: I rest my case your olddrunker.
 

whisperAdmin

Administrator
Staff member
Guthrie (court tv): Prosecution is claiming they may not rest their rebuttal case until Tuesday.



my note: The prosecution is trying to prolong this trial on purpose; coming up with every excuse under the sun to play this out as long as possible. They're still trying to go after Mark Geragos.
 

sistahlamb

New member
I think it's possible.

When they get caught in all of thier lies, maybe they will buckle and just say the hell with it, it's not worth it anymore.

Kind of a niave prediction but a rabbit can dream, no???
 

SpecialJanet25

New member
Originally posted by whisper
Guthrie (court tv): Prosecution is claiming they may not rest their rebuttal case until Tuesday.



my note: The prosecution is trying to prolong this trial on purpose; coming up with every excuse under the sun to play this out as long as possible. They're still trying to go after Mark Geragos.

On my goodness. How despeate can they be?
 

got2makeitright

New member
Originally posted by whisper
Guthrie (court tv): Prosecution is claiming they may not rest their rebuttal case until Tuesday.



my note: The prosecution is trying to prolong this trial on purpose; coming up with every excuse under the sun to play this out as long as possible. They're still trying to go after Mark Geragos.


Sneddy needs more time to think what nasty things he can say on monday!! :screaming
 

got2makeitright

New member
Originally posted by MystiqueX2004
This just gives the defense more ammo for their rebuttal case and closing arguments, right?


Ya but frist the defence has to finish the rebuttal part then go to closing arguments.
 

got2makeitright

New member
Jackson Judge Mulls Questioning of Accuser By TIM MOLLOY, Associated Press Writer
6 minutes ago



SANTA MARIA, Calif. - The judge in Michael Jackson's child molestation trial heard arguments Friday on what the defense should be allowed to ask Jackson's accuser if the boy returns to the stand.

The defense asked to question the boy again because of Judge Rodney S. Melville's ruling Thursday allowing prosecutors to introduce a videotape of a July 2003 interview with authorities in which he first told them about the alleged molestation.

The judge said he was only admitting the tape so that jurors could see the boy's demeanor, not so they could determine whether he was telling the truth. Melville said that would limit the questions the defense could ask to those about the boys' spontaneity and behavior.

Defense attorney Robert Sanger said the defense wants to ask the boy about the timeline in which he made the allegations to show that his declarations to law enforcement officers were not spontaneous.

Sanger said that Stan J. Katz, the psychologist who first reported the allegations to authorities, learned of them from the boy's sister, who had heard them from the boy. Sanger said Katz then interviewed the boy and heard them himself.

But Sanger said that on the tape the boy says he has not told his brother or his sister about the alleged molestation.

The judge said he would be inclined to allow such questioning because "it's evidence that a jury could infer shows lack of spontaneity."

Sanger also said allowing the tape could significantly extend the defense's response to the prosecution rebuttal because they would need to call several witnesses including the boy, his mother, Katz and Larry Feldman, the attorney who referred the family to Katz.

Prosecutors had recently suggested they were going to finish their rebuttal case this week, but Senior Deputy District Attorney Ron Zonen told the judge they now expect to conclude next Tuesday.

Although Melville sided with the prosecution on showing the videotape, on Thursday he rejected another prosecution request: to show jurors pictures of Jackson's genitals that were taken during a previous molestation investigation.

Jackson, 46, is charged with molesting a 13-year-old boy in February or March 2003, giving him wine and conspiring to hold his family captive to get them to rebut a documentary in which the boy appeared with Jackson as the entertainer said he let children into his bed but it was non-sexual.

Prosecutors contend the videotape will show that his story has been consistent.

In arguing Thursday against its use, Sanger said it contains "prejudicial material" such as officers telling the boy: "You're really brave, we want you to do this."

On the issue of the genitalia pictures, Sanger argued that to show the photos would be "very shocking" and prejudicial to the jury.

The photographs were taken in 1993 when prosecutors were trying to gather evidence against Jackson in another molestation case.

After taking the photos, authorities had the boy involved in the case draw a picture of what he thought the genitalia looked like. Prosecutors claimed the picture contained a unique blemish.

The boy in the investigation and his family eventually received a multimillion-dollar settlement from Jackson and no criminal charges were filed.

Arguing for use of the graphic pictures, Zonen said the prosecution wanted to show jurors a child's description "of a unique feature of (Jackson's) anatomy."

Zonen said it would show that Jackson's relationships with boys were "not casual."

The judge refused to allow the pictures, saying that the prejudicial effect of the photos would far outweigh any value.

___

AP Special Correspondent Linda Deutsch contributed to this report.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a...hael_jackson_20
 

MystiqueX2004

New member
Originally posted by sistahlamb
huh????? Explain a little more???


i think what they meant was that initially, everyone thought that the prosecution would be done by this thursday, and now they are saying tues of next week. remember all the speculation that there might be a verdict as soon as next week? now it might be even longer because after the prosecution rest, the defense will come with their rebuttal and etc, etc....
 
Top