Month: March 2005

Accuser Transforms Under Cross-Examination – MJEOL Bullet #252 First short day of cross-examination of accuser shows combative accuser MARCH 14 2005 — What a difference a few questions make. Michael Jackson’s accuser, Gavin Arvizo, began cross-examination (cross) late Thursday, March 10 2005 by Michael Jackson attorney Tom Mesereau. Some observers claim that the accuser, under direct examination, came off as “engaging” and “well spoken” if not a little upset. But under cross, just in those approximate 30 minutes of defense questions, he suddenly transformed into an insincere, combative young adult with an undertone of vengefulness. Cross is scheduled to continue today in court as Mesereau will have his first full day to thoroughly ask the accuser questions that the prosecution has, up until now, been able to avoid. He has reportedly already contradicted earlier testimony from his sister and brother. For example, the accuser and his brother have different recollections of what they claim was the first time Jackson allegedly “abused” the accuser. The accuser and his sister have two different recollections of where and when she was allegedly given alcohol. He says vodka in the kitchen, she says wine in the wine cellar. Good lord. One shocking revelation that not too many people are aware of is the fact that two of the alleged “co-conspirators” took the family – evidently by their request – to meet with Jamie Masada and civil attorney Bill Dickerman at the Laugh Factory, a comedy club owned by Jamie Masada. Now, remember what the prosecution is alleging. They’re claiming that the family was kidnapped and held hostage during that timeline. They went to meet with these two after they had left the Calabasas Inn. From the transcript of the cross-examination:

1692 1 Q. And you’ve already left the Calabasas Inn 2 and gone by The Laugh Factory and met with an 3 attorney, right? 4 A. I believe so. 5 Q. So after you meet with an attorney, you 6 suddenly come up with a story that you were 7 masturbated by Michael Jackson, correct? 8 MR. SNEDDON: Object. Argumentative, Your 9 Honor. 10 THE WITNESS: No, because — 11 MR. SNEDDON: Excuse me. 12 THE COURT: Overruled. 13 You can go ahead and answer. 14 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Correct? 15 A. No, because I did not tell the attorney 16 anything about what Michael was doing. 17 Q. But you’re saying it started after — 18 A. Yes, I did not tell the attorney anything 19 about alcohol or anything like that.

Leno ‘jokes’, but Jackson May get the Last Laugh – MiniBullet #13 MARCH 12 2005 — Sickening jokes from the

Wacko Journo Drama As Cross of Accuser Begins – MiniBullet #11 Media loses their minds, drowns in conjecture and half-assed