March 28 2005 Trial Update #3

Posted by

MARCH 28 2005 (3:53 PM) — Earlier a report from Mike Taibbi was mentioned. Here are excerpts of that report:

MIKE TAIBBI: …Three of the five have denied publicly that they were ever abused by Michael Jackson. The other two accepted financial settlements in the millions of dollars. …Tom Mesereau, Jackson’s lead defense attorney on the other hand brought back judge Melville’s own statement in a pre-trial hearing to him saying that the judge once said in court — he did, I was there — that he would not allow this old evidence to be brought in rescue a weak case in chief. And Mesereau said in court that this case is a bad case that’s going to get worse — his words. That he’d been able to successfully impeach the testimony not just of the accuser, but of his key corroborating witnesses: his brother and his sister. …I keep saying “alleged” because it is that. It’s going to be challenged. In fact Tom Mesereau said there will be, in his words, ‘full blown trials’ to challenge the credibility of each of these witnesses. By some estimates, outside the courtroom, this could add months to this trial. … TAIBBI:…One of the witnesses who’s allowed to testify according to the judge’s ruling is Bob Jones who was an associate of Michael Jackson’s for some years. And had in the past, according to Tom Sneddon the prosecutor, made statements that were incriminating about Michael Jackson. Tom Sneddon said in court today that it is in fact true that Bob Jones has recanted those statements. So, he’s gonna get on the stand. He’ll say whatever he’s going to say. Tom Sneddon said he didn’t know what he was gonna say. He will certainly be challenged vigorously by the defense. Some of these witnesses have made as many as 8 statements in prior depositions and in court testimony and in interviews with law enforcement. So there’s a lot of material from which these impeaching bit of testimony and interview statements can be drawn in order to challenge whatever they say in court. So this is going to extend the trial. Source: MSNBC : Mike Taibbi report about previous “allegations” March 28 2005

A number of observers who are aware of these facts have said that this will more than likely backfire for the prosecution. What is going to happen if the prosecution’s witnesses-come-lately claim that these kids were molested and the defense calls these people to testify for Jackson? Some have speculated how Sneddon’s cross examination of these so-called “accusers” will go, with Sneddon foaming at the mouth trying to convince a grown man on the stand that he was molested when he really wasn’t. Those reporters who know better aren’t as enthused as those pro-prosecution reporters who somehow think this is the be-all-end-all decision of this trial. Like a number of them, theirs is extreme hesitance to call this a “prosecution victory” given the way this could play out in the actual courtroom. As for Bob Jones, he’s just all over the map. Even the prosecution had to admit today that he made allegations that he, too, later recanted. As said previously, the prosecution better be careful what they’ve wished for. If that smile on Jackson’s face in court today is any indication, prosecutors may have never wished they asked for this.

MARCH 28 2005 — Jackson arrived to court today to continue the trial after the 1108 hearing. The defense said in open court that allowing past allegations will turn into full trials as they do intend to put on evidence/challenge the accusations in court. Not looking the least bit worried at all, Jackson arrives with a smile on his face. That smile may be because of the lopsided and almost ‘looney toon’ way the prosecution has gone about trying this “case”; or more appropriately, how they’ve gone about trying to convict Jackson of past tabloid stories. It’s important to understand the prosecution’s actions. They aren’t going to actually call all of these “alleged victims”. They’re relying on 3rd party former employees who were either fired or sued into bankruptcy by Jackson. So, you’ll have an ex-employee saying ‘I saw Jackson do this to that kid…’. Thus, all the defense may have to do is call THAT kid to the stand to rebut the allegation. During a report today, NBC’s Mike Taibbi reported that at least 3 of these prosecution-alleged “victims” have never made any allegation against Jackson and have publicly denied being molested by him. The prosecution has made them “victims” based on the word of these former employees. One other person the prosecution wants to make a “victim” according to grapevine reports, is Jimmy Safechuck. However, sources say Safechuck actually had his wedding ceremony at Jackson’s Neverland Ranch. So “bad news” for the defense? You’ve got to be kidding.

MARCH 28 2005 — Not surprising to observers who have been watching this “case”, the judge will allow past allegations — some not even made by any accuser, but rather by 3rd party “witnesses” — into this current case. Those who aren’t surprised say that the judge was definitely going to allow it in to help the prosecution bolster a collapsing current “case”. In some instances, as just mentioned, it isn’t even an “accuser” making an allegation. But rather, it’s the word of 3rd party, fired and sued ex-employees who claimed they “saw something”; claimed they actually witnessed a molestation that they didn’t report and that Jackson wasn’t charged with. Something that will definitely blow up in the prosecution’s face is that some of these allegations are said to involved Mac Culkin, Wade Robson, and Brett Barnes. Both Culkin and Robson — that we know of so far — are cooperating with the defense. All 3 have NEVER alleged Jackson did anything to them, repeatedly and vehemently denied anything untoward happened both to the prosecution and police over the past 10 years. Thus, I guess if Sneddon doesn’t have actual “victims”, he’s now in the process of manufacturing them. It has already been confirmed that Culkin is on the defense list and will testify for Jackson if need be. Robson as well has publicly and repeatedly denied this prosecution allegation as well. Of course more information is coming out now — some actually being reported by certain mainstream media outlets — about the sordid past of these 3rd party miraculous “witnesses”. One such person, former maid Blanca Francia, is already on record recanting her “witness” allegations during a deposition ten years ago. It is her son that prosecutor have subpoenaed to testify. Needless to say, the prosecution has opened the door for this and the defense will now have an unfettered chance to address all of this information, including introducing that deposition where the maid recanted her allegations. This is the point of no-return for the prosecution. The prosecution should have been careful what they wished for because they’re going to get it. But what they get, they won’t like.

Leave a Reply