Month: February 2005

SBSD Warned DCFS to Stay Away from Family During Timeline? – MJEOL Bullet #248 New details about the accusing family along with social workers who appear on the defense witness list FEB 25 2005 — With opening statements set to begin Monday, Feb 28 2005, truly stunning and suspicious new details in the Michael Jackson so-called “case” have come out recently. And we’re not talking about the hackneyed media terms here. These are really huge bombshells. Two reports, one from NBC’s Mike Taibbi and another from Celebrity Justice (CJ) provide much more insight into the accusing family’s past and the goings-on of this “case” before it materialized. The Taibbi report talks about the accuser’s past history of accusing his mother of abuse. No, that’s not a typo. Apparently, in the past, the accuser broke down to a teacher and said that his mother was beating him. The teacher, being a mandatory child abuse reporter, contacted the Dept. of Child and Family Services (DCFS). They began an investigation into the family. The boy later recanted the allegations, but it’s highly possible that this will play a huge role in illustrating how the accuser changes his stories and will speak to his credibility. More on that info will be discussed in the future (see Accuser has history of changing his story – MSNBC). Probably the more astonishing bombshell, with all sorts of implications, comes from CJ. They got their hands on information about what happened before this “case” came to fruition. According to their Feb 23 2005 article “Sheriffs Cleared Jackson before Charging Him”, a two month investigation by the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Dept (SBSD) cleared him of these molestation allegations, as reported by Mike Taibbi almost a year earlier. However, there now comes word that the sheriff’s department called child services and told them not to interview this family. This would make the second independent investigation done right during the prosecution’s timeline which has cleared Jackson of these allegations. The first investigation being the one done by LA Department of Child & Family Services (DCFS, also known as “Child Services”) and child services workers (CSW, also known as social workers).

Outrage over Decision Not to Cite Bashir for Contempt – MiniBullet #6 FEB 24 2005 – The judge in the Michael Jackson “case” has allowed accused blackmailer Martin Bashir to both report on the case AND be a witness in it at the same time. This ridiculous decision has drawn blistering criticism from a number of both pro-defense and pro-prosecution “case” watchers. The judge refused to cite Bashir, whose two programs for ABC were rife with everything from speculative nonsense to defamatory, malicious remarks. The two programs failed to pull in the ratings ABC was hoping for, and caused a number of people to criticize ABC/Bashir even on their own public message boards (see Tempest in a Thimble | and | Jackson Bash-fest a Ratings Loser). Some say Judge Rodney Melville has allowed the “glorified tabloid reporter” get away with breaking the gag order in a way that he certainly wouldn’t have allowed any pro-defense witness to do. Long time Jackson friend and former manager Frank Dileo talked to Carol Davis of thejusticesystem.net about Bashir’s total lack of being held accountable for his role in this “case”. Needless to say, Dileo was outraged. He says inane commentary about Jackson’s wardrobe draws media attention when what they should really be investigating are the decisions being made – or the things being allowed to happen – by the current judge. From a transcript of the Feb 22 2005 show:

FRANK DILEO: This offends every person’s rights. If the press doesn’t pick up on this, or if somebody doesn’t stand up like Al Sharpton or Alan Dershowitz or somebody like that, who knows where this country could be heading. I mean, those reporters out there — there’s gangs of them — standing around reporting on every move: ‘he showed up in an SUV’, ‘he had on a black jacket’, ‘he had on white pants.’ Who cares what Michael’s wearing! You wanna report on that stuff? Go to Joan Rivers on the red carpet. What they should be saying is ‘hey this jury pool might be tainted.’ How did the judge allow Martin Bashir — let that program air? How come he didn’t stop that? How come he didn’t stop Corey Feldman? (see Frank Dileo blasts decision not to cite Bashir for contempt thejusticesystem.net)

Jackson Jury Selected without African-Americans – MJEOL Bullet #247 FEB 23 2005 – The jury currently selected to hear the prosecution’s alleged “case” against Michael Jackson has been seated in less than 3 full days. There is not a single African American on the panel of reportedly 8 women and 4 men. The prosecution removed both of the remaining blacks in the pool through their peremptory challenges. Conflicting reports set the jury makeup as 8 whites, 3 Hispanics, and 1 Asian. However, some reports set the number at 7 whites, 4 Hispanics and 1 Asian. According to news reports, the jurors range in age from 20 years old to 79 years old. They have various occupations. But as “varied” as the panel is, it’s probably going to be known as the “all white jury” as opposed to the attitudes of the people on it. Some of those who made the cut are very interesting indeed. One of the women allowed to sit on this panel has an extensive history of sexual abuse in her family. Mesereau wanted to question the woman further in the Judge’s chambers as agreed upon previously by this same judge. Inexplicably, he refused to allow further questioning of her by the defense. Prosecution supporter Ann Bremner said on Court TV (Feb 23 2005) that she was surprised the judge didn’t allow defense attorney Mesereau to follow up in the judge’s chambers. As good as she may look to the prosecution, this could come back to bite the prosecution in their proverbial asses, however. She may not take too kindly to the behavior of the accuser’s mother in this “case”: the mother not calling the police when she claims she saw Jackson abusing her son on a plane ride and the mother going to a civil attorney after she claims she “escaped” from Neverland, instead of going to the police and pressing charges. These are simply a few examples.