Michael Jackson\'s accuser must testify publicly, judge decides (Jan 29 2005)

Found any positive articles or new about him? You can read and reply to the latest MJ news items. This forum is for actual news articles about MJ with source information.

Moderator: Global Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
whisper
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 9130
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 1:00 pm
Contact:

Michael Jackson\'s accuser must testify publicly, judge decides (Jan 29 2005)

Post by whisper » Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:37 am

Michael Jackson's accuser must testify publicly, judge decides

1/29/05

By DAWN HOBBS

Prosecution allowed to show British documentary

NEWS-PRESS STAFF WRITER

The boy who has accused Michael Jackson of molestation and his brother, who allegedly witnessed at least two of the incidents, must testify in open court, a judge ruled Friday.

Despite prosecution arguments that public testimony would irreparably harm the children, Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville ruled for the defense, who insisted that Mr. Jackson has a right to face his accuser in an open hearing.

At a pretrial hearing in Santa Maria, Judge Melville also said he would not allow a sketch artist in the courtroom while the boys testify and that he would reconsider his ruling if there is any disruption during the testimony.

The judge's decision was significant because it allows the public to see and hear one of the most crucial parts of the trial. The judge also ruled on a grab bag of other motions that will set the ground rules for the trial and for what evidence will be allowed.

He said the prosecution would be allowed to show a British television documentary about Mr. Jackson to the jurors and ruled that the filmmaker could be called as a prosecution witness.

Jury selection is scheduled to begin Monday and is expected to last up to a month.

Mr. Jackson, who has pleaded not guilty to child molestation and conspiracy charges and is free on bail, must attend the trial from this point on. However, his relatives, who have attended pretrial hearings, will not be allowed in the courtroom during the first part of jury selection because the seats are needed for potential jurors.

In the TV documentary, Mr. Jackson is seen holding hands with the boy who would later become his accuser. The entertainer also tells interviewer Martin Bashir on camera that he shares his bed with children.

Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon argued the documentary was catastrophic to Mr. Jackson's career, finances and future and is what catapulted the entertainer and his business associates to "isolate, control and extort" another video from the boy's family in which positive things are said about the pop star.

Lead defense lawyer Thomas Mesereau shot back that the documentary was "an outrageous an inflammatory piece of material" which was "highly edited, highly dramatized . . . and sensational" and designed to lure television audiences.

Mr. Mesereau argued that the defense should be allowed to show footage that was taken by Mr. Jackson's videographer, Hamid Moslehi, so jurors can see that the Bashir video did not include Mr. Jackson's complete answers and that his statements were taken out of context. He also suggested that the jurors be shown Mr. Jackson's rebuttal video that aired two weeks later.

Judge Melville said he would view the Moslehi footage and the rebuttal video and make a decision later.


The judge also ruled that the prosecution may call Mr. Bashir to testify.

In heated exchanges that showed the high stakes, attorneys even fought about the use of specific words during the trial.

Prosecutors requested that defense lawyers not refer to them as the "government," because the word could have negative connotations in the North County, where county government is out of favor with some residents.

Defense lawyers requested that prosecutors not call themselves "the people," because jurors could interpret that to mean that they, too, are part of "the people."

The defense also requested that the prosecution not call the accuser or his brother "victims," and that material seized from Mr. Jackson's Neverland Valley Ranch be referred to as "adult" rather than "pornographic."

Prosecutors are entitled to refer to themselves as "the people," Judge Melville said, "but they are certainly not entitled to refer to the jury as if they are 'the people,' too. . . . That doesn't prevent the defense from referring to you as 'the government,' 'the prosecution,' or 'the people.' "

As for the accuser and his brother, the judge said prosecutors may not call them "victims" until closing arguments. The books, magazines and videos seized from Neverland will be called "adult material" during the trial, he ruled.

The judge also denied the prosecution's blanket request that the defense not attack the credibility of their witnesses, particularly the accuser's mother. He said he would hear evidence and objections when the issues arise.

Judge Melville also made a plea for civility during the trial. "During the last week or two this case has heated up a little. . . . I can feel it among my staff and at the courthouse. . . . I want to take a moment to remind both sides the world is watching justice in the United States. Not Santa Maria. Not Santa Barbara County. The world is watching.

"And I expect you will carry the burden on both sides to show the world what a fine justice system we have. . . . I will not put up with personal attacks. I've said we have the best of the best here."

Source: http://news.newspress.com/topsports/012905jackson.htm

classicaldj
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:53 pm

Michael Jackson\'s accuser must testify publicly, judge decides (Jan 29 2005)

Post by classicaldj » Sat Jan 29, 2005 10:39 am

I think positive things happened.

The kid has to show his face to the world when he testifies and the 1993 stuff will not be admitted.

There is no way in hell they can prove that Michael and the kid touched that magazine at the same time.

Besides that in one of these gazillion threads it says that the kids were caught in Michael wine cellar when he wasn't even at Neverland so just assume they did other stuff when he wasn't there like......looking at adult legal porn.

It was a good day.

...
“Music is a tapestry of sound,

It comes to me like a leaf that falls from a tree,

Let the song create itself, that’s my lawâ€

DirtyDiana87
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 2666
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 1:00 pm
Contact:

Michael Jackson\'s accuser must testify publicly, judge decides (Jan 29 2005)

Post by DirtyDiana87 » Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:37 am

It's about time the judge ruled for the defense. Thank you Whisper!

Heather~
Image





Thank you so much Pam for my beautiful avatar & Blend!! I love them so much!!



Image



Thank you Sarah for the beautiful blend!!! I LOVE it!!!

Danielle Oliver
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:32 pm

Michael Jackson\'s accuser must testify publicly, judge decides (Jan 29 2005)

Post by Danielle Oliver » Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:55 am

whisper,

What´s the difference between the american and english version of "Living with Michael Jackson"? I never watched "Living with Michael Jackson". I knew that´s gargage.

classicaldj
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:53 pm

Michael Jackson\'s accuser must testify publicly, judge decides (Jan 29 2005)

Post by classicaldj » Sat Jan 29, 2005 5:23 pm

This is from the Bullet Special #21

"The judge ruled against the prosecution in allowing the ABC News version of the Bashir "documentay" in. He ruled that the jury can see the European version of the Martin Bashir documentary. Those who have seen both have said the American version was even more sensationalistic than the European version. The American version was also edited down from the European version and commentary from reporters were tacked onto the end to make it all the more dramatic."

On another forum, there is a message that says the judge told Michael that none of his family will be allowed in the court for the trial.

I find this extremely hard to believe.

Have you heard this?

No link was given. It just said source AP but I went to their web page and could find no article which stated that.
“Music is a tapestry of sound,

It comes to me like a leaf that falls from a tree,

Let the song create itself, that’s my lawâ€

SpecialJanet25
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 6:30 pm
Contact:

Michael Jackson\'s accuser must testify publicly, judge decides (Jan 29 2005)

Post by SpecialJanet25 » Sat Jan 29, 2005 5:49 pm

Originally posted by classicaldj1
This is from the Bullet Special #21

"The judge ruled against the prosecution in allowing the ABC News version of the Bashir "documentay" in. He ruled that the jury can see the European version of the Martin Bashir documentary. Those who have seen both have said the American version was even more sensationalistic than the European version. The American version was also edited down from the European version and commentary from reporters were tacked onto the end to make it all the more dramatic."

On another forum, there is a message that says the judge told Michael that none of his family will be allowed in the court for the trial.

I find this extremely hard to believe.

Have you heard this?

No link was given. It just said source AP but I went to their web page and could find no article which stated that.
I think its during jury selection, not the during the trial. I say we wait until this is clear up.
Image



Image

mjlovergurl
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 8:02 pm
Contact:

Michael Jackson\'s accuser must testify publicly, judge decides (Jan 29 2005)

Post by mjlovergurl » Sat Jan 29, 2005 5:52 pm

im glad that he finally ruled for the defence. its about frigging time. i dont think that the documentary is gonna help anyways i mean what good it is a tv interview gonna do besides show that the kid was happy and survived cancer WITH Michael 's help in paying medical bills and letting him spend time and neverland as if it was his last day alive. all that stupid crap about the porn has gotta stop. Michael must be so emabaressed when the world found out he has adult porn. I feel so bad for Michael like it was anypone business and whos to say that the kid didnt sneak in to mj's room, find the porn and look it and michael cought him and took it away. thats very possible since he was a 14 year old teenage boy. i hope things get better for michael.





Phil
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:29 am

Michael Jackson\'s accuser must testify publicly, judge decides (Jan 29 2005)

Post by Phil » Sun Jan 30, 2005 1:03 am

This a major blow to the prosecution's plans. Now that the child must testify in open court not only will his credibility be on the line but more important is that it will be open to public scrutiny. I want to see this kid admit that the allegations are false under cross-examination.

classicaldj
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:53 pm

Michael Jackson\'s accuser must testify publicly, judge decides (Jan 29 2005)

Post by classicaldj » Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:52 am

We only have one question for the accuser:

What did mommy promise you to get you to lie about Michael?

..
“Music is a tapestry of sound,

It comes to me like a leaf that falls from a tree,

Let the song create itself, that’s my lawâ€

t1obaggage
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 4:32 pm

Michael Jackson\'s accuser must testify publicly, judge decides (Jan 29 2005)

Post by t1obaggage » Sun Jan 30, 2005 11:03 pm

What is Sneddon's big idea trying to get the defense to not be able to challenge the credibility of the accusers? That's fair game, and the defense can do whatever they want to defend the client (as long as it's not illegal). The lengths Sneddon is going to here.....sheesh.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests