Page 7 of 11

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 3:09 pm
by whisper
Rikki Klieman (court TV): Mickey Sherman called the judge's decision absurd to allow the tape in and then to tell the jury to disregard the susbtance of it and only consider his demeanor. Another attorney on there and Sherman said the prosecution wants a do-over.

Alec Rose also said that this tape won't be a spontaneous admission. He says that if the kid hadn't made an allegation before that taped interview with police, how'd the police know to interview him? How'd they know when to start taping his interview? He said its' something fishy about that situation.

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 3:10 pm
by got2makeitright
Which means?? lol

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 3:21 pm
by dangerous
whats a "do-over"?

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 3:29 pm
by dangerous
absurd to allow the tape in and then to tell the jury to disregard the susbtance of it and only consider his demeanor.
so the jury should beleive gavin if he looks beleivable while delivering the lie? Even if its a proven lie? Thats one for the law textbooks.

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 3:31 pm
by Cristine87
Originally posted by dangerous
so the jury should beleive gavin if he looks beleivable while delivering the lie? Even if its a proven lie?
Basically, does he look scripted or coached?

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 3:33 pm
by dangerous
Yes but if the video is the old set of charges Gavin will have to admit to have lied about the charges before, ie all those timeline regards. So once Gavin admits to have mispoke about the previous charges, the jurors should DISREGARD those lies and just use the video to see if he is beleivable, EVEN IF IT WAS JUST SHOWN HE LIED? no sense!!

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 3:36 pm
by whisper
Originally posted by dangerous
whats a "do-over"?
It means he thinks the prosecution is trying to sneak and re-try their case during their rebuttal phase.

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 3:37 pm
by Cristine87
Originally posted by dangerous
Yes but if the video is the old set of charges Gavin will have to admit to have lied about the charges before, ie all those timeline regards. So once Gavin admits to have mispoke about the previous charges, the jurors should DISREGARD those lies and just use the video to see if he is beleivable, EVEN IF IT WAS JUST SHOWN HE LIED? no sense!!
It looks that way! I agree, it's stupid. If he lied, it's important that that be pointed out to the jury. For the judge to say that it can't be is ludacrious!

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 3:52 pm
by got2makeitright
So the judge can say is ok if he lie about the old charges but look at how he ask on the tape!! sSHH.

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 3:59 pm
by whisper
test

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 4:01 pm
by whisper


Murray Richman and Alec Rose

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 4:05 pm
by whisper


Rikki Klieman and Murray Richman

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 4:15 pm
by got2makeitright
its not working!!

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 4:28 pm
by sunny2005
news flash MSNBC

Michael Jackson's defense suddenly rests without presenting rebuttal case
the prosecution is sunk!

Official May 27 2005 thread

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 4:30 pm
by got2makeitright
CNN Breaking News - the defense rest no rebuttal case closing argument Tuesday

Is that good or bad?? What about gavin coming back and all those people that were called back!! I need to know.