Pt 1: Explosive Court Declaration Shows Damning Info – MJEOL Bullet #227 Declaration by Jackson attorney Brian Oxman discusses incredibly damaging info about the accusing family’s credibility and current allegations NOVEMBER 29 2004 — Explosive new court documents (docs) were released recently that may have completely obliterated the accusing family’s conspiracy allegations in the Michael Jackson “case”. The info is so damaging that most of the general media has so far stayed away from even reporting in detail what was stated in the redacted defense docs. What are they afraid of? Jackson attorney Brian Oxman discussed the accusing family’s changing stories and request for psychological examinations. Even though a number of lines are blacked out in the court doc, much more info about the history of the accusing family is revealed. The history of this family is relevant because what some commentators don’t yet understand is that this is no longer a he-said/he-said “case”. The accusing family—the mother, the sister, and the accuser’s brother—are also leveling specific allegations against Jackson about the way they were treated and what they allegedly suffered at the hands of Jackson or his employees. That makes their history and credibility fair game as well. Oxman is the attorney who issued a subpoena which sparked the prosecution’s cry-baby motion as discussed in MJEOL Bullet #225: Prosecutors Whining After Obtaining Numerous Search Warrants. In his declaration, Oxman states that contrary to what prosecutors are claiming, the subpoena does not violate the privacy of any of the accusing family members. As a matter of fact, Oxman writes, the Court has already endorsed these subpoenas. The mere fact that prosecutors even know about these subpoenas is a violation of the Court’s order. Whoever is the recipient of these subpoenas is not allowed to even notify prosecutors of what the defense is asking for in any way, shape, or form. Numerous times the Court’s order has been violated: apparently by Larry Feldman (yeah him), by Stan Katz (Feldman’s favorite psychologist), by the accuser’s stepfather, and possibly by other people that have been subpoenaed by the defense. These people not only notified prosecutors that they were subpoenaed, but also told prosecutors about what the defense requested. The defense writes that certain subpoenaed witnesses were so compelled by their financial interests that they violated the Court’s order by alerting prosecutors:

4. In direct violation of this Court’s July 9 2004, Order [redacted] have informed the prosecution of the existence of a subpoena. Their disregard for this Court’s orders after being served with a copy of the July 9 2004 Order, demonstrates an overriding bias that is the product of their vested financial interest in this case that is so strong that it compels them to violate Court orders. These individuals have no excuse for their inexcusable flaunting of the July 9 2004 Order. (see Download Declaration of Brian Oxman in Opposition of Motion to Modify Teal Order | or image files and excepts of the declaration) pg 3 of .pdf file

This is not the first time the accusing family has been accused of having a financial interest in this “case”. It’s been long since reported that these allegations only surfaced after these people were ejected from the Jackson gravy train. The public may also find out about other scams in which the family has been involved as well as other money motives. It has already been reported that the family is receiving money from the Victim’s Compensation Fund and has filed a claim against the Los Angeles Department of Children & Family Services (DCFS). In his declaration, Oxman writes that the prosecution has already made the family’s medical condition an issue. In a failed attempt to quash a subpoena for the mother to testify at a pre-trial hearing, prosecutors provided the Court with an August 12 2004 medical report. That report claimed she was “physically incapacitated and unable to attend [court].” Now Jackson’s attorneys are trying to verify this info and prosecutors are trying to keep them from doing so. From the motion:

There was no limitation on the August 12 2004 [redacted], and not only did plaintiff open the door to permit Mr. Jackson’s inquiry into the medical representations made in that letter, but also under Evidence Code section 998, there is no physician-patient privilege in criminal proceedings. Evidence Code section 998. 7. The physician-patient privilege did not exist at common law and is strictly controlled by statute. Kramer v Policy Holders Life Ins. Assn 5 Cal. App. 2d 38, 384 (1935). Evidence Code section 998 provides, “There is no privilege under this article in a criminal proceeding.” (see pg 4 of .pdf)

Already some lawyers are claiming that Victim’s Rights Advocates are or should be up in arms about the defense’s request. This is ridiculous and shows that either these said commentators haven’t read Oxman’s declaration or don’t understand what the Court order regarding the Teal motion entails. What these lawyers fail to realize is that the law is the law and if the mother is shown to have been lying about her condition to the judge and/or to prosecutors, that’s yet another reason why her word cannot be trusted. This is certainly not a case for Victim’s Rights advocates to be hanging their hats on by any stretch of the imagination…unless they are going to support Jackson as being the victim of false allegations and being prosecuted unjustly by the state. Again, much of the information is redacted but it appears that further requests for medical records came into play by the mother’s own allegations and testimony. On the issue of lab tests, the defense the tests are necessary for a number of reasons. Some of the most explosive reasons, of course, were redacted from the motion. What is left in, however, pertains to the mother’s use and non-use of certain medications:

Laboratory tests will reveal her use and non-use of medications, and those tests also reveal the non-existence of various other illnesses and body complaints ___________________. (see pg 5 of .pdf)

Evidently, she may have been lying about medical conditions she claims she had and/or was hospitalized for various mental problems. As revealed earlier this year from highly explosive documents, at one point the mother admitted to police—in an unrelated incident—that she was hospitalized for mental issues. These damaging docs came to the media’s attention some months ago. The accuser’s father also confirmed that the mother was previously institutionalized. Celebrity Justice (CJ) posted these documents from October 2001 on their website. In the State of California Health and Welfare Agency Report is the following information:

…During the interviews, mother told the officers that Kobe Bryant, Fritz Coleman, Michael Jackson and other celebrities are helping her. The officers asked mother if she’s ever had psychiatric treatment and she said yes. In the past but not currently. (see State of California Health and Welfare Agency Report pg 1)

Not to mention all of the other half-truths, allegations and lies they were caught in telling during that period. The defense is likely to make an issue of this as well they should. This kind of behavior directly impacts their credibility. __99 bottles of………what!__ One scandalous allegation leveled by the accusing family was a nonsensical claim that Jackson’s associates threw a bottle of the accuser’s urine out of a vehicle while taking the accuser to the doctor so the urine test wouldn’t detect any alcohol. An ABC report recounted the leaked allegation earlier this year. First, it’s ridiculous that the accuser would be taken to the doctor while they were supposedly being held/abducted at Neverland. Second, it would be nonsensical to “dispose of” a urine sample by throwing it out of a car on the way to the doctor’s office. Not one reporter pushing this story asked anyone to explain why this makes any sense because 1) the accuser would have just given another sample once he reached the doctor’s office; and 2) why didn’t they alert the doctor that they were being threatened or held hostage? The defense speaks to this incredulous allegation in their motion. While some of the info is redacted, the defense manages to insinuate that lab reports confirm there was no alcohol detected in the accuser’s system:

14. Laboratory tests for the complaining witnesses are critical in this case because the prosecution has claimed that Mr. Jackson was part of a vast conspiracy to dump a urine sample jar so that alcohol would not be detected in the older son’s urine [redacted]. There was sufficient urine to test on the occasion in question, and the laboratory reports will demonstrate that fact. 15. The defense believes additional and other urine samples from both the mother and her children will demonstrate [redacted info] is the complaining witnesses who has raised these issue[s] and opened the door to the examination of their medical records. Mr. Jackson is entitled to subpoena those records. (see pg 5-6 of .pdf file)

__Head Injury?__ Apparently, the accuser’s mother claimed she sustained a head injury at some point apparently during a time within the prosecution’s timeline. To that end, the defense wants to confirm or deny this with medical records. In the motion, they say that Jackson is: “entitled to MRI scans that demonstrate the nature and extent of _______ injuries to these complaining witnesses. In addition, MRI films will demonstrate the presence [or] absence of injury. pg 6 of .pdf file Of course some of the info is redacted concerning this situation, but it is incredibly interesting as to the extent of the allegation they have leveled against Jackson. And it could be incredibly damaging as the accusing family gets caught up in some of these stories. Unlike the misconceptions by Craig Mitnik, who appeared on Fox News Live Nov 25 2004 to discuss the latest in the “case”, the defense does not seek gynecological records just for the hell of it or just to invade the mother’s privacy. The records will help show what medications she was using and contain a history of…something that is redacted from the court documents. From the motion:

The records are relevant because they disclose other medical information dealing with the truth of her claims and not for the sake of the gynecological portions of the records. 18. The mother testified before the Grand Jury without the benefit of medications, [redacted info]. The complaining mother’s gynecological records will demonstrate the fact she failed to take her medication. (see pg 6 of .pdf file)

__Customer Service, how would you like to be defrauded today?__ There is also an issue as to whether the mother may have defrauded Jackson. Some observers have speculated that this defrauding may have something to do with the mother procuring money from Jackson under false pretenses for things such as medical bills. This is based on the fact that the defense says medical bills from certain health care providers will prove that Jackson was defrauded. It wouldn’t be the first time this family was accused of defrauding and/lying to someone to try to gain financially. There was a previous case involving department store JC Penneys. The lawyer representing JC Penneys against the family’s allegation says that allegation turned into a scam to extract money from the store. It all began when the accusing family was stopped by store security for shoplifting merchandise out of the store. NBC News obtained over 100 pages of documents regarding that case. From the March 4 2004 report:

(voice-over): But NBC News has obtained more than 100 pages of documents not on the public record, including defense deposition excerpts and psychiatric reports and the documents give a far more detailed version of J.C. Penney‘s case. That the psychiatrist hired by Penney‘s found the mother to be schizophrenic and delusional and severely depressed. Sad over being a nobody, she‘d said, a sad housewife getting fat, even though her own therapist found her to be anxious and depressed after the incident, but not delusional. Penney‘s says that more than two years after the incident, the mother added on the charge that one security guard had also fondled her breasts and pelvic area for up to seven minutes. And that Penney‘s psychiatrist said she rehearsed her two sons to back up her far-fetched story in what sounded like scripted copies of her testimony that they and she had all suffered broken bones, in addition to her sexual assault. Penney‘s insist there was no evidence to back up any of the allegations. (see ‘The Abrams Report’ for March 4 2004: JC Penny lawyer speaks out)

So this wasn’t the first time they leveled sexual allegations against someone. Why security guards would sexually fondle the accusing mother in broad daylight…in a parking lot…in front of family members hasn’t been asked as of yet. It is also interesting that this allegation only surfaced two years after the original allegation. It is also very telling that one of the psychiatrists revealed that she had rehearsed her children’s testimony so that they could back up her incredulous story. Kinda like what’s going on with the Jackson “case”, say some observers. Of that JC Penney case, it was reported back on November 25 2003 that the father had actually seen a “script” of lies that the mother had written down for her children to recite under oath. If these children have a history of lying under oath at the mother’s behest, then it is incredibly relevant to this current case. From that Associated Press report:

Halpern said the father once showed him a script his wife had allegedly written for their children to use when they were questioned in a civil deposition. “She wrote all of their testimony. I actually saw the script,” Halpern said. “I remember my client showing me, bringing the paperwork to me.” . (see Accuser’s Mother Said to Praise Jackson (Nov 25 03) – AP)

On top of this information was the fact that the mother also previously accused the accuser’s biological father of sexually abusing one of the kids; one report says the mother accused the father of molesting the accuser, while another report says she accused him of molesting the daughter. __I got’cha ‘privacy’ right heh!__ The defense also says Jackson’s right to a fair trial greatly outweighs the mother’s right to privacy. Since the accusing mother has alleged injuries to her and has previously offered testimony about her medical condition, the door is now opened for the defense to confirm or deny their allegations. They say the mother used a report from a redacted source claiming she was “physically unable to attend court on September 27 2004.” (pg 7). It is rightly lawful for Jackson’s attorneys to try to confirm that she was being truthful and not lying to the court. For those lawyers like Mitnik who simply don’t get it, the mother is claiming physical injuries happened as part of her allegation towards Jackson. These are allegations leveled by her against Jackson. That makes her medical history open to scrutiny. For example, if she claimed to have been physically incapacitated or injured, then there should be medical records showing that she was treated for these physical injuries. And the defense points out:

It is improper for anyone to offer a doctor’s report to a court of law [redacted info] and then attempt to hide the medical records. Mr. Jackson has a right to determine the veracity of not only the complaining mother, but also the physicians involved, and the court should compel production of the medical records. (see pg 8 of .pdf file)

The defense has also apparently dug up information concerning a strange financial situation involving the accusing family’s American Express records. Although an entire section is blacked out in the court doc, the defense attached two exhibits “C” and “D”. The exhibits were redacted as well. But what was revealed is that checks from the County of Los Angeles were cashed in relation to this American Express account. The defense cited these two checks, each in the amount of $769.00, and both were cashed. The full meaning is yet to be known, and again much of the data is redacted. From the Oxman declaration:

25. Attached as Exhibit “C” and “D” are copies of two (2) checks from the County of Los Angeles made out to _____________. The first check (Exhibit “C”) is dated January 2 2003, in the amount of $769.00, and was cashed _________ on January 2 2003, the same day the check was issue[d]. [redacted info] 26. [mostly redacted] That American Express card is also the means by which the funds collected by Fritz Coleman and others are expended. 27. But the second check (Exhibit “D”) is _______ a check dated February 19 2003, in the amount of $769.00 from the County of Los Angeles ___________. It was ___________ cashed through _________ bank account on February 24 2003, right in the middle of the alleged child abduction, false imprisonment, and extortion. (see pg 8-9 of .pdf file)

The defense revealed in court that that the mother was cashing her state welfare checks through her now-husband’s bank account. So this could be referring to those checks she received. The only problem is that Jay Jackson, according to reports, makes $80,000 a year. One wouldn’t need welfare checks if they had a spouse or living with a mate that makes $80,000 a year. In MJEOL Bullet #217: No DNA, Lies, Possible Welfare Fraud & A Trip to Australia, it was discussed whether or not the mother receiving benefits while living with someone making $80,000 a year is welfare fraud. From a Santa Barbara News-Press report dated November 2004:

Mr. Mesereau also said that the accuser’s mother deposited her welfare checks into the account of her husband — who makes more than $80,000 per year. He was attempting to show that prosecutors had failed to look into her background and question her credibility. (see NO DNA found of the Accuser in Jackson’s Bedroom; Mother depositing welfare checks)

She was also receiving child support payments from the accuser’s biological father. If you remember, it was reported by Fox News that in March 2003 the mother went to court to get the father’s child support payments increased. According to online resources, a person is committing welfare fraud if they:

*intentionally fail to report a change in the household composition, income or resources that would affect their eligibility for benefits. *intentionally fail to report any changes in circumstances that would affect their eligibility for benefits (see What is Welfare Fraud?)

Will this mother be prosecuted or at least investigated for possible welfare fraud? It is unknowable at this time. But the track record of this accusing family is such that everything out of their mouths should definitely be questioned. Part 2 of this special MJEOL Bullet will discuss fire storms raging around psychologist Stan Katz and civil lawyer Larry Feldman, as well as these people breaking the Court’s order by alerting prosecutors they were subpoenaed. Stay tuned… Parts Two & Three have been added here: :nav Pt. 2: Explosive Court Docs Reveal Accusing Family’s Stormy Past – MJEOL Bullet #227 :nav Pt. 3: Explosive Revelations about Accusing Family – MJEOL Bullet #227 -MJEOL

Leave a Reply

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