Judge Hell-Bent on Jan 31 Date, Pros. Breaking Court orders– MJEOL Bullet #232 UPDATE Stinging new court docs released show prosecutors still up to their old tricks while the judge looks the other way While Court TV tries to publicly hang Michael Jackson with lies and speculation before he even steps foot inside a courtroom for a possible trial—doing a hatchet job with reporting the “facts” in the “case” today (Dec 22 2004)–it’s important to note that there have been some incredibly damning court documents (docs) and other evidence that has made its way to the public about the accusing family. The disgusting ‘guilty until proven guilty’ attitude held by Court TV anchors can’t change the fact that this “case” is full of incredulous allegations which make no sense given the prosecution’s own set of so-called events; not to mention holes in their story the size of the Pacific Ocean. During the December 20 2004 hearing, the public learned that some 70 names on the prosecution’s defective witness list are identical to names on the defense’s witness list. This slashes the speculation from hack-reporters who want to claim that everyone subpoenaed by prosecutors are going to testify against Jackson. In a decision that some “case” observers are openly calling “odd”, “surprising”, and “ridiculous”, the current judge in the Michael Jackson “case” has refused to delay the trial date from January 31 2005. Melville recently signed search warrants on Nov 24 2004, which prosecutors didn’t execute until Dec 3 2004; over a year after raiding Neverland on November 18 2003. Despite those last minute searches—tantamount to invasion of privacy, say the defense—the judge has refused altogether to delay the trial in any way. Most legal analysts had previously said that the defense’s request to delay the trial would be granted because of the prosecution’s last minute scrambling. This can be viewed two ways: Either prosecutors got what they wanted or the judge has essentially called their bluff in face of their declarations of being “ready” to go forward. But the questions being raised now are whether or not this judge is hell-bent on taking this case to trial regardless of the current circumstances around it. Some observers have made the point that if prosecutors were really ready, then why are they continuing to search and execute search warrants? And why did they gather a swab of Jackson’s DNA at the very last minute. As reported by Celebrity Justice Dec 6 2004, there may be a 2 faction split between those prosecution team members who want to move forward with a trial on Jan. 31 and those who want more time. Speaking of turmoil, it also already came out that Larry Feldman is mysteriously absent from current proceedings. The family has a new attorney. It is also important, once again, to understand what the accusing family’s and prosecution’s story is. Prosecutors are claiming that Jackson conspired to kidnap, then kidnapped a family of 4—after already knowing them for years—and holding them at the wide-open Neverland Ranch. Then, they claim Jackson molested the accuser. Then they claim he conspired some more. And this was supposedly all done right in the middle of at least 2 independent investigations into these very allegations. Not to mention the media’s white-hot spotlight being focused on this kid and this family, the family being caught on tape numerous times talking about what a wonderful person Jackson is, and signing sworn affidavits in connection with these independent investigations sparked by so-called “concerned citizens”. __Obstruction?__ In recently released court docs, the defense continues to hammer away at the credibility of the accusing family and their tall tales of conspiracy, alcohol and molestation. Again prosecutors may have violated the court’s order and might be attempting to skirt the law by trying to act as the accusing family’s private attorneys. But, then again, some say the prosecution doesn’t seem to have all that much respect for other Court orders (namely the gag order and Motions to Compel), so why should they care about this one? This isn’t the first time prosecutors have done this. In a three part MJEOL Bullet #227, a previous declaration from Brian Oxman was discussed. And the prosecution’s affinity for breaking the Court’s order was discussed again. The prosecution is objecting to the defense’s right to subpoena documents and materials relevant to the accusing family’s credibility, and relevant to allegations that the mother has leveled against Jackson herself. Some of these records are medical records. The defense makes the point that there isn’t a “physician-patient privilege” in a criminal case; especially when some of the records being sought have already become public knowledge from a previous case. From the Declaration of Brian Oxman in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Objection to Subpoenas, the defense writes:

Plaintiff’s objections are without foundation because:

(1) There is no physician-patient privilege in criminal proceedings, and the complaining mother’s ________ records from ___________ are relevant because she has placed her mental and physical conditions in issue by claiming injuries as a result of Mr. Jackson’s conduct.

(pg 6 of .pdf | p1 of Declaration)

Injuries to her as a result of Jackson’s alleged actions? Yes, it seems that the accuser’s mother gotten into the act by claiming she was somehow injured surrounding these allegations. Therefore, her medical records are in bounds whether prosecutors like it or not. Despite recent nonsensical articles from the likes of local reporter Steve Corbett and tabloid reporter Diane Dimond, the media did not appear too concerned with covering yesterday’s hearing. Some reports, however, recount the big, bad Tom Sneddon huffing and puffing about being ready for trial, despite the fact that he’s still executing search warrants…some 100+…..looking for “evidence” that doesn’t exist. __A trial within a trial__ What the prosecution wants to do, now, is bring in the 1993 allegation. Despite no matching description of Jackson’s body, no evidence other than the allegation, no grand jury indictment, no charges filed, no arrest, and no cooperation from the 93 accuser, prosecutors want to use speculation from the likes of Ray Chandler and Larry Feldman to shore up their “case”. But is the 1993 accuser even standing by those allegations from 1993? For some reason, there’s been a change in tone in tabloid reporter Diane Dimond’s speculation about whether or not the ’93 accuser will testify against Jackson. She used to be 99.9% sure he would testify. Now she’s claiming he doesn’t want to. What happened to that 99.9%? For the record, if subpoenaed by either side, he can’t get out of testifying. At first, during the course of this case followed closely by some “case” observers who have shared their opinions with MJEOL, the prosecution backed away from using the 1993 investigation. One point, prosecutors stood up in court and called the 1993 investigation “irrelevant” after the defense filed a Motion to Compel to force prosecutors to hand-over documents from that investigation. We also came to find out that prosecutors had heavily relied on speculation from the 1993 investigation to further this current “case”; to get an indictment and to get dozens of search warrants in this “case”. Most observers have echoed a sentiment that was expressed by NY Daily News reporter Michelle Caruso’s comments. She said if prosecutors have their way, this is going to be a “trial within a trial.” However much they claim this as a benefit, some “case” observers familiar with the 1993 investigation say it may be devastating not for Jackson, but to the prosecution’s current “case”. __Start with the loons in the mirror__ The prosecution will attempt, however unsuccessfully, to paint Jackson as a perverted and crazed loon…even if they have to act like corrupt and crazed loons in the process. That includes breaking court orders and flouting the law by breaking attorney-client privilege, invading the defense camp (at least twice), breaking the gag order and trying to act like private attorneys for the accusing family. They also seem to want to go back in time and change history. The defense says certain information was subpoenaed by Jackson’s defense on March 17 2004. The documents arrived in court and were taken by prosecutors who then voluntarily handed it over to the defense. Now, apparently, they’ve changed their minds. Sorry no back-sies! Jeez. From the motion:

As discussed below, the records arrived in court and the prosecutor took custody of them. The plaintiff then voluntarily turned over the records to the defense. The prosecutors claim that it now has standing to complain about follow up subpoenas to get full and complete records such as billing records from hospitals is without merit. (pg 9 of .pdf | pg 4 of Declaration

Yeah, this isn’t the only thing prosecutors have done that is without merit. But the prosecution has the gall to claim that the defense is invading the privacy of the accusing family. And the prosecution’s argument for invasion of privacy is ridiculous because the records they claim to want to protect have already been publicly disclosed. These records because public in a previous attempt by the family to get money from department store J.C. Penneys. “All of the complaining family’s…records were produced in connection with the case of _____________ v J.C. Penney Inc., Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. KC 027876,” the defense writes. These particular records were reviewed by someone whose name was redacted. And the case law to back up the argument is cited in Klang v Shell Oil Co, Jasimine Networks Inc. v Marvell Semiconductor, Inc., and Roe v. Superior Court. Since the prosecution already has a copy of certain medical records, why are they trying to keep the defense from getting this information? As a matter of fact, the defense reveals that prosecutors are lying when they claim these medical records were confidential because prosecutors got their hands on them as a result of the J.C. Penneys case too:

13. All of the complaining witness family produced their _________ records in the J.C. Penney case. The prosecution knew this because it got a copy of those records. Plaintiff’s claim that the records are confidential or that no waiver has been established is disingenuous. (pg 10 of .pdf | pg 5 of Declaration)

As far back as April and May 2004, these prosecutors already promised to make a copy of said records and provide Jackson’s attorneys with a copy. Now apparently they have changed their minds. Wonder why? Did they make a mistake? Like they mistakenly invaded the defense camp by raiding Mark Geragos’s private investigator’s office? Yeah right. Back in March 2004, Jackson’s former attorneys subpoenaed certain records that neither of the prosecutors objected to. Now all of the sudden, they have a problem. Further, back then, prosecutors “freely and voluntarily turned all of the records over to Mr. Sanger” (pg 11 | pg 6 of Declaration). __A history of defrauding people and entities?__ It came to light in previous court docs that the accuser’s mother may have defrauded others as well, including Fritz Coleman, Chris Tucker, and George Lopez. From a Santa Barbara News-Press article dated Dec 2 2004 (Jackson lawyers prepare to attack accuser’s mom):

The attack is expected to include questioning whether the mother appropriately used money that celebrities—including comedians Chris Tucker, George Lopez, and Fritz Colement—raided at the Laugh Factory in the fall of 2000 for her son’s cancer treatments. (see Jackson lawyers prepare to attack accuser’s mom – Fritz Coleman (Dec 2 2004))

The Laugh Factory should sound very familiar. Jamie Masada is the owner. Yes, that Masada who claimed to have introduced the accuser to Jackson (false); the same Masada that made the rounds whining about the accuser needing blood and a kidney (false); the same Masada who claimed the mother and her children were sleeping on the floor with the accuser’s face swollen up (false, too). Could he too be part of any shady dealings with money raised by this family? Time will tell. But Masada, by the way, reportedly opened a New York venue of The Laugh Factory in June 2004. He’s just rolling in it, isn’t he? But I digress. If the accuser’s mother didn’t spend the money raised for the medical bills of the accuser, then she has many more problems than the world of trouble she’s already in for making false accusations against Jackson. A very revealing report was written by Bill Heard, dated December 21 2001, entitled “Chance Encounters with Cops Lead to Merry Christmas for LA Family.” The report details this same family being the recipients of more charity: this time from the Los Angeles Police Department. Keeping in mind, this is Dec 2001. Also note the timeline with the J.C. Penney case and their subsequent $137,000 settlement given to the family. Wanting to do something special for the accusing family, after learning their “story”, police officers took up a collection of about $200 out of their own pockets to buy gifts and school supplies for the kids. From the article:

On Thursday, they dropped by the family’s apartment to find a Christmas tree that had been donated by the LAPD’s Hollenbeck Division officers, but no ornaments. And no gifts. The officers bought a stock of ornaments with their own money, then talked to their sergeant, Eric Windham, about further help for the family. So, at roll call this morning, Windham asked his troops to look into their hearts and their pockets for the Arvizos. They did, and out came some $200. It was enough to buy some gifts for the kids…and a little left over for a holiday dinner. The MTA also contributed school supplies for the youngsters. (see 2001 Article about Accuser’s family LAPD – 2001 )

Now, apparently they met Jackson in late 2000. So you had Jackson, Fritz Coleman, and who knows who else donating to the family at, around, or closely after that time. And they were the recipients of charity from the LAPD as well. I guess they get around… __Conspiracy to Falsely Accuse Jackson?__ During her testimony at a previous hearing September 17 2004, the accusing mother confirmed that she met Jackson in August 2000. Courtroom observers comments were highlighted in MJEOL Bullet #204: Accuser’s Mother Hired Numerous Lawyers before Meeting Jackson?. They said the conversation between Jackson attorney Tom Mesereau and the mother was “heated”. One even scribbled down an unofficial transcript of the convo:

TOM MESEREAU: When did you meet Michael? ACCUSER’S MOTHER: August 2000. MESEREAU: According to this official statement, sworn declaration that you gave to the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s department and district attorney, you retained an attorney and investigator in January 2000 for the sole purpose of finding out information about Michael Jackson and settling with him. You discussed a settlement concerning Michael Jackson before you even knew him? ACCUSER’S MOTHER: I…I…well… PROSECUTORS: Objection! Irrelevant. JUDGE MELVILLE: Sustained.

It seems as if this woman hired both an attorney and private investigator BEFORE she even met Jackson in an attempt to seek a settlement for child abuse—BEFORE Jackson had even met her kid. It is information like this that will come out during a possible trial. Besides being incredibly suspicious, it would open the door for Jackson’s attorneys to show their own pattern: a pattern of people seeking contact with Jackson, hooking up with the same attorney and psychologist, leveling allegations and threatening a lawsuit. Why didn’t they file a lawsuit against Jackson? Because they were stopped by current DA Tom Sneddon. The civil suit cover-up was talking about in a report months ago by the Santa Barbara News Press. They report that Sneddon struck a secret deal with the accusing family’s then-attorney Larry Feldman. Reportedly, he had to “solemnly swear” not to file a civil suit until after criminal proceedings were resolved (see Civil Suit Cover-up?–Bullet #109). For the record, California Penal Code Section 182-185 deals with conspiracy by two or more persons to falsely indict another person:

o California Penal Code + PENAL CODE SECTION 182-185 182. (a) If two or more persons conspire: (1) To commit any crime. (2) Falsely and maliciously to indict another for any crime, or to procure another to be charged or arrested for any crime. (3) Falsely to move or maintain any suit, action, or proceeding.

Did they conspire to falsely accuse/indict/arrest Jackson? What else is waiting in the wings to come out about the accusing family? Have any other celebrities and/or people come forward—besides J.C. Penneys–to talk about other scams the family has run on them? Time will tell. Subsequent MJEOL Bullets will continue to break down some of the allegations of prosecutorial misconduct leveled against the district attorney; more about the Brian Oxman declarations; prosecutors flying as far away as Australia looking for mythical “victims” in 1999; certain media personalities who have strong doubts about this “case” (some of whom were at Neverland during the prosecution’s timeline); whether or not the defense should be worried at all about the 1993 investigation, as well as a number of other topics around this incredulous “case”. Stay tuned. -MJEOL

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *