Trial Review: The Evasive Davellin Arvizo & Shocking Defense Info – MB #292 DECEMBER 23 2005 – MJEOL is continuing its look back at the Michael Jackson trial and providing details which have often gone unreported by the general media. The vapid and shallow-assed “review” segments about this “case” thus far often highlighted such incidences as Jackson showing up one day in his pajamas; as if it had an affect AT ALL on the jury’s decision or the bombshells dropped by the defense. I suppose its too painful for many slobbering media bosses to take a look back at the way millions of dollars were snatched from their grasp as 14 not guilty verdicts were read; each not guilty cutting like a knife through the heart of dozens of opportunistic producers, executives, editors, fame-chasing media whores and glorified tabloid reporters. Like so many witnesses, Davellin Arvizo’s (Davellin A.) testimony was just as revealing. And according to other information dug up by the defense, she may have committed perjury on the stand. She also seemed to have stock-answers which she used to avoid answering questions. Another problem with her testimony is that she would suddenly remember facts when pushed by Mesereau. For example, she’d previously said she knew nothing about the J.C. Penney case and wasn’t involved in it at all. When confronted with the defense evidence, she suddenly remembered she was sitting next to Gavin Arvizo, the accuser, when he gave his deposition in that case. I’d call that “involvement”. Tom Sneddon’s questioning of Davellin A. was disorganized and herky-jerky. But the jury learned that she and her entire family – biological father included – were invited to Neverland after Gavin got ill. They all stayed overnight at Neverland with Gavin Arvizo, who by the way asked to sleep in Jackson’s “bedroom” on the first night of his visit to Neverland. Oh no, that request isn’t suspicious at all….yeah right. It’s important to note that Jackson’s “bedroom” isn’t a bedroom in the traditional sense. It is the size of a large condo. It’s 2-stories high and so large that it alone has 3 bathrooms within it. There is also at least 2 beds in it; one on the upstairs floor and another downstairs according to trial evidence. Getting back to Davellin A.’s testimony, she said after their first visit to Neverland, they didn’t go back until Chris Tucker took them. Jackson wasn’t with them at all during both times Tucker took the family to Neverland, she said. On one of their return trips, she said the family was brought to Neverland to film a little interview with Martin Bashir for what was to the ill-titled “Living with Michael Jackson” hit-piece aired by Bashir’s current employers, ABC. At some point, Chris Tucker flew the family with him to Florida – during their alleged kidnapping, mind you. And on the flight back from Miami, Davellin A. claimed she saw both the accuser and Jackson drinking out of the same “Diet Coke can”. Keep this detail in mind for future testimony from the accuser’s bother. Media pundits have suggested that the idea of “scripting” the Arvizos for the Fox rebuttal (Take Two: The Footage You Were Never Meant to See) interview was solely the mother’s allegation. The interview with the Arvizos never made it into the final version which aired on Fox television. However, Davellin A.’s testimony directly contradicted this media interpretation because on the stand under prosecution questioning, she too made the allegation that Jackson’s people gave them a script of things to say (p 683-684). So it didn’t just come of the mother. She also claimed she walked into the wine cellar at Neverland and saw Jackson, Star Arvizo (the brother), Gavin Arvizo (the accuser) and someone named “Aldo” drinking wine out of cups. On the stand, she alleged she was given wine and saw Jackson pouring it into the cups. She also told the jury that she didn’t know anything about alcohol. Keep this fact in mind when the testimony of Cynthia Bell is reviewed. Under cross-examination by Jackson attorney Thomas Mesereau, Davellin A. appeared evasive. He cornered her in her supposed “recollection” of that alleged cellar incident. It turned out she had never told the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s dept. that she saw Jackson pouring wine into a cup. Check out this exchange between she and Mesereau:

MESEREAU: Okay. Do you remember you were interviewed by the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department July 6th, 14 2003, and asked questions about that? DAVELLIN A.: I know I was asked questions about it, yes. MESEREAU: You were asked by a Santa Barbara sheriff how you knew it was wine, right? DAVELLIN A.: Yes. MESEREAU: And your answer was, you knew it was wine because it’s a wine cellar and there’s nothing else to be drinking in a wine cellar, right? DAVELLIN A.: Yes, there is wine bottles along the left wall. MESEREAU: Never told them you had seen Michael Jackson pouring wine from any bottle, correct? DAVELLIN A.: They never asked me that question, but I did see him. MESEREAU: Well, they asked you how you knew it was wine, and your answer was, “They were in a wine cellar and there’s nothing else to be drinking in a wine cellar,” correct? DAVELLIN A.: I’m not going to grab a cup off the counter. It was handed to me. MESEREAU: Well, why didn’t you tell that to the Santa Barbara sheriffs then? DAVELLIN A.: They didn’t ask me about it. MESEREAU: Well, they actually did. Would it refresh your recollection to show you the police report? DAVELLIN A.: I just told them about the building. And they said how did I know it was wine? Because it was a wine cellar. MESEREAU: But yesterday, you said you saw Michael Jackson pouring a bottle of wine into a cup, true? DAVELLIN A.: Yes. MESEREAU: That’s not what you told the sheriffs on that day, right? DAVELLIN A.: Well, I was in a wine cellar also. I didn’t know I had to say every little detail. I was young back then. I didn’t know I had to say every little detail for it to be right. Different things come up. (p 927 lines 12-28; p 928 lines 1-23)

She was “young back then?” She was around 16 at the time, though she made the comment as if she was only 6 when it happened. She didn’t know she had to say “every little detail”? Ha! Who the hell would have thought that allegedly seeing Michael Jackson pouring wine into cups and handing them off to little kids would be a “little detail”? This is simply incredulous. It’s the kind of excuse one makes when they’re trying to get out of telling a lie. Previously, she’d told sheriffs that she had been down in Jackson’s wine cellar “many times.” But on the stand, she only claimed she went there once. Mesereau called her on it by bringing up that previous interview on August 13 2003 she gave to sheriffs:

MESEREAU: Do you remember, you were asked when you observed the wine cellar, and you said “many times” during your visits to Neverland? DAVELLIN A.: Well, many times I’ve seen it. But I never went down there many times. MESEREAU: How can you see it if you don’t go down the stairs into the wine cellar? DAVELLIN A.: Maybe I misunderstood the questions… (p 973 lines 6-13)

Maybe she “misunderstood” Mesereau’s level of intelligence? When asked if she knew of an incident where her brothers were caught in Jackson’s wine cellar, she claimed she didn’t remember. It was almost mind-numbing to read through her testimony because so many times she said she didn’t remember. And she especially used it when cornered numerous times by Mesereau. As mentioned earlier, she often claimed she was “too young” to remember things which happened just 2 years ago. She was 18 when she testified. Davellin A. used the phrases “I don’t remember. I was too young” and “It was so long ago” like they were safety nets. Needless to say it damaged her credibility and spurred Mesereau to ask her point blank:

MESEREAU: Did someone tell you that when the defense lawyer asks you questions in court, if you’ve got a problem, to say, “I was very young and I just don’t remember”? DAVELLIN A.: No, that’s — I have no way of knowing, because it was years ago. I was very young.

She was “too young” to remember details in 2003, but she wasn’t too young in 2003 to move in with her then-boyfriend Manuel Ramirez. The defense found out that Davellin A. moved into Ramirez’s mother’s house in 2003 and had a shared bank account with him. Defense attorneys wanted Ramirez to be allowed to testify at trial and filed a motion detailing this information. From that motion:

We have further reason to believe that Davellin Arvizo moved out of her mother’s residence, and into Mr. Ramirez’s home, due to her initial unwillingness to participate in her mother’s plan to make false allegations against Mr. Jackson. (pg 2-3) (see Delayed Court Doc Reveals Startling Info – HOT DOC / MiniBullet #20)

Oops! Maybe she didn’t remember this because she was too young. Before allegedly shacking up with Ramirez, she was seeing a person by the name of Angel Vivanco. She was with Vivanco from Feb – April 2003; right through the prosecution’s “abduction/conspiracy” timeline. Vivanco was a Neverland employee who testified during the trial. In that defense motion by Robert Sanger, Davellin A. is said to have made exculpatory statements to Vivanco about her mother planning “something big” with regard to Jackson. From the defense’s motion:

Davellin told Mr. Vivanco that: (1) she did not get along with her mother; and (2) her mother was planning “something big” with regard to Mr. Jackson and that she did not wish to participate in these plans. (see Delayed Court Doc Reveals Startling Info – HOT DOC / MiniBullet #20)

Later in her testimony she claimed not to know any of the employees at Neverland and only spoke to them on a “hi and bye” basis (p 948, lines 13-22). Clearly this was a lie as evidence by her relationship with a Neverland employee. Davellin A. claimed Dieter Wiesner told her mother about the Bashir “documentary” and that none of her family had seen it. However, the mother is quoted on the family’s Feb 19-20 2003 interview — which never actually aired — as saying “we want to hold hands like in the Bashir documentary”. Wiesner told the mother to say that, the sister claimed. She also alleged that Mark Geragos’s private investigator, Brad Miller, was watching the family and would report back to Wiesner if they didn’t say what they were allegedly instructed to say. In an interview with MSNBC done before any gag orders were issued, Miller denied the family was scripted or threatened by him in any way. __Confessions to Carol Lamir?__ Mesereau also asked her about Carol Lamir (or Lemere). Lamir met the family at a dance studio according to the sister. And Davellin A. lived with her at her house from time to time. The name Carol Lamir may sound familiar. Court documents stamped April 20 2005 but released June 2 2005 details incredibly damaging allegations which Davellin A. made about her mother. According to the court doc, Davellin A. told Lamir that the mother physically abused her and her brothers, and taught them how to shoplift. The J.C. Penney incident — according to what Lamir says the sister told her – was a shoplifting session gone bad when they were caught by security. Though she claimed to be close to her mother on the stand, she allegedly told Lamir that she didn’t get along with Janet Arvizo. Allegations of abuse by the mother have allegedly also come from Gavin Arvizo. If you remember, MSNBC broke a news story that in 1996, the accuser once told a school officer that his mother was gong to beat him if she learned he was in trouble at school again. An investigation was begun into the family according to documents obtained by NBC News. Gavin A. changed his story and recanted the abuse allegations against the mother. From a Feb 22 2005 NBC article titled “Accuser has history of changing his story”:

In March 1996, the then 7-year-old accuser became sick at school. He became upset, however, when a school official tried to call his mother, saying that she had beaten him and was afraid she would beat him again if the school notified her… …Documents obtained exclusively by NBC News show an investigation was begun by family services into alleged abuse of the boy by his parents. But the boy changed his story and the allegation was declared “unfounded.” (see Accuser has history of changing his story)

So apparently there was more than one allegation of abuse made against the mother: one by the accuser to a school official in 1996 and others made by Davellin A. to Carol Lamir. On the stand, Davellin A. completely denied that her brother had ever made any allegation against anyone before the Jackson “case”. She told Mesereau: “He never did. He never has.” And “He never has made any allegations against anybody” (p 871 lines 13-14). And, “Never made an allegation against my mother” (p 872 lines 6-7). The public knows that not to be true based on the aforementioned documentation obtained by NBC News. Lamir confirmed to a defense investigator that Davellin A. started to live with her at some point. During that time, Davellin A. relayed to her how the mother would beat her with a cord, sometimes in the middle of the night. The defense investigator’s report was the basis for the defense motion which detailed these allegations. From that court doc:

She would tell stories about being awakened at 2:00 in the morning by Janet; being beaten with a cord by their mother; and being forced to clean the house. [Davellin] also would tell how Janet would hit their father, David. Ms. Lemere said that [Davellin] would cry constantly and indicated that Janet would hit the children, all three of them. She was concerned about the behavior displayed by Star, indicating Star would flirt with grown women in an “unnatural manner.” Each time Davellin appeared at the house, she would have new stories about Janet and at one point in the summer of 2000 said that they were going to get a big house in the Hollywood Hills. She had no idea what that meant. (see Delayed Court Doc Reveals Startling Info – HOT DOC / MiniBullet #20)

Coincidentally (or maybe not) 2000 was the year they met Michael Jackson. Whether the allegations about being beaten by the mother were true, they all certainly were very experienced at making abuse allegations by the time the Jackson trial rolled around. Lamir told defense investigators the mother would tell Gavin A. that he was going to die and actually began making funeral plans (pg 9 of court doc). Lamir said that it was the biological father who would comfort the accuser and that Davellin A. would be “very upset about Janet trying to bury Gavin before he was dead” (pg 9 of court doc). On the stand, Davellin A. completely denied ever telling Lamir (Lemere) anything about her mother. This is what she told the jury:

MESEREAU: You never said anything like that to Carol Lamir? DAVELLIN A.: No. MESEREAU: You constantly told Carol about Janet hitting you and your brothers, true? DAVELLIN A.: No. MESEREAU: And at one point you told Carol Lamir that your family was going to move into a big house in the Hollywood Hills, correct? DAVELLIN A.: I never told her that. MESEREAU: Never said that at all? DAVELLIN A.: No. … MESEREAU: Are you saying you never complained about your mother at all to Carol Lamir? DAVELLIN A.: No. My mom’s a very, very, very good mother to me. MESEREAU: And you never complained about her one bit? DAVELLIN A.: No. MESEREAU: Never complained about her to Carol? DAVELLIN A.: No. (p 864 lines 1-12; p 866 lines 16-23)

I bet Lamir would disagree with this testimony. __Who’s got their hand out?__ Davellin A. made the claim that her mother had “never tried to raise money from anybody” for Gavin Arvizo. Of course the public knew that not to be true long before the sister’s testimony. The apparently now-defunct Celebrity Justice (CJ) broke a story involving a newspaper whom the mother solicited to write a story about her son and to send them donations. In a January 3 2005 article titled “Did Jackson Accuser’s Mom Falsely Solicit Aid for Son’s Treatments?”, CJ interviewed the editor of the Mid Valley News newspaper. The editor, Connie Keenan – who also testified during the trial – said it was the mother who approached the paper pitching her story. From that report:

In 2000, Keenan told us, the boy’s mother approached the Mid Valley news and pitched her story: “She pleaded her case that her son needed all sorts of medical care and they had no financial means to provide it.” Keenan agreed to run the heartfelt story inviting readers to help, but recalled that, almost from the get go, there were red flags, including the fact that, according to Keenan, the mother, “Wanted the money sent to her in her name, at her home address.” (see Did Jackson Accuser’s Mom Falsely Solicit Aid for Son’s Treatments?)

Keenan told CJ that her gut feeling was the mother is a “shark” who was “after money”. More from the article:

“My gut level: she’s a shark. She was after money,” Keenan told us. “My readers were used. My staff was used. It’s sickening.” (Did Jackson Accuser’s Mom Falsely Solicit Aid for Son’s Treatments?)

I guess this incident slipped the sister’s mind when she repeatedly denied that the mother ever tried to get money on behalf of the accuser. Mesereau too brought this incident up to Davellin A., who made a half-assed attempt to explain it away. She claimed the newspaper just so happened to have found out about the then-sickly Gavin Arvizo and wanted to do a story on him. From her testimony:

MESEREAU: Okay. Do you have any knowledge of your mother going to a newspaper in El Monte to place an ad in the paper to raise money for Gavin? DAVELLIN A.: No. What that was, was my aunt’s — that’s her friend, and she wanted to do a story, because they found out of Gavin’s illness. MESEREAU: Do you have knowledge about that? DAVELLIN A.: A little bit. Not really. MESEREAU: Do you know if your mother ever spoke to anyone with that newspaper about raising money for Gavin? DAVELLIN A.: No. Not that I remember. … MESEREAU: Do you have any knowledge of your mother calling the paper up and complaining that they hadn’t put the bank account in the ad? DAVELLIN A.: I don’t remember that. MESEREAU: Never heard anything about that? DAVELLIN A.: I don’t remember that. (p 857 lines 7-18, 25-28; p 858 lines 1-2)

She doesn’t remember. Figures. __Evasive Liar?__ And then Mesereau got the sister to say she lied to social workers from the Los Angeles Department of Children & Family Services (DCFS) during a Feb 20 2003 interview. For a minute set aside the fact that they were interviewed by the DCFS at Major Jay Jackson’s house (stepfather)…….right in the middle of their captivity at Neverland. Good grief. Mesereau cited information from her interview with the DCFS. When asked if she wanted to see a copy of the DCFS report, she refused. To certain questions she replied: “Well, I know I said that, but that’s not true,” (p 846, lines 6-7). From her testimony:

MESEREAU: And you told the social workers your mother, “Always knows what’s going on when she is at Neverland with us,” right? DAVELLIN A.: Yeah. MESEREAU: You told them that? DAVELLIN A.: Yeah. MESEREAU: Was that true? DAVELLIN A.: No. MESEREAU: That was a lie? DAVELLIN A.: Yeah. (p 846 21-28)

She claimed not to remember anything she told them and fought Mesereau’s repeated attempts to show her a report of what the family told them. That good ole’ selective memory kicked in just in the nick of time. Davellin A. told jurors that she would lie about some things and tell the truth about others. Because of the verdict, it evidently left the jury wondering if she was telling the truth on the stand. She also said she never had an attorney before and never gotten advice from one either. However, Mesereau brought up a conversation she had with a physician at Kaiser Permanente Hospital in California where she told the doctor she couldn’t give details about her family life because a lawyer told her not to. In fact, Mesereau established that she had met with 2 civil attorneys, William Dickerman and Larry Feldman, sometime before her little trip to the hospital June 26 2003 complaining about headaches and insomnia:

MESEREAU: And after meeting with Mr. Dickerman, you met with Attorney Larry Feldman, correct? DAVELLIN A.: Yes. MESEREAU: And after meeting with Attorney Larry Feldman, you went to Kaiser, true? … DAVELLIN A.: Yes. MESEREAU: And you went to Kaiser because you were putting together a claim for damages, correct? DAVELLIN A.: No. This had nothing to do with it. I had — I still get those headaches to this day. Those are headaches of lack of sleep. I don’t — it’s hard for me to sleep. (p 823 lines 21-25, p 824 lines 3-9)

I wonder why she had such trouble sleeping? Guilty conscience perhaps? Moving on. Davellin A. apparently lied to… [pagebreak] …the physician to get that medical treatment by pretending her grandmother was her mother. She said, “Well I call my grandmother my mother and because of like – because I was underaged”. She wanted medical attention but apparently couldn’t get or didn’t want her real mother to go with her. What’s one little doctor scam, huh? __ ‘I don’t know. I was too young’__ Throughout her testimony, she claimed she never discussed a number of highly important issues with her family. They “never” discussed the Bashir “documentary”. They “never” discussed the Jackson case. They “never” discussed the reasons for the accuser’s fund-raisers. They “never” discussed the Bradley Miller interview. They “never” discussed the interview with the social workers. And they “never” discussed the J.C. Penney lawsuit the family filed. It is simply incredulous that they wouldn’t have discussed some or all of these important family issues at some point in time. Of the J.C. Penney case, she alleged not to know anything; alleging it was “too long ago”. Mesereau clearly caught her being very evasive and trying to come up with excuses about previous statements she made. Her cries of being “too young” to remember things as recently as 2003, seemed to be a set answer thrown out much too often. I had no idea it was such a long time between 2003 and 2005. Geez. She also testified that Gavin Arvizo was never thrown out of school but it turns out she was present during the J.C. Penney deposition where he clearly said – under oath – that he got into “lots of fights” and got kicked out of school. From the transcript:

MESEREAU: Okay. Now, you also told the jury last week you have no knowledge of Gavin having disciplinary problems at school before he ever met Mr. Jackson, right? DAVELLIN A.: I know he talks a lot, yes. MESEREAU: Well, that’s what you said, the only problem you were aware of is that he was talkative, correct? DAVELLIN A.: Yes. MESEREAU: You also said to — you were asked by me,”To your knowledge, was he ever asked to leave school,” and you said you don’t know, right? DAVELLIN A.: I don’t — no, I don’t remember. MESEREAU: Well, you sat there in Gavin’s deposition in the J.C. Penney case where he admitted that he got in lots of fights and got thrown out of school, right? You were sitting right there, right? DAVELLIN A.: He’s never been thrown out of school. MESEREAU: You heard him say it under oath, didn’t you? DAVELLIN A.: I don’t remember. It was a long time ago. All I remember, I was in my grandmother’s house, and I was holding his hand, and they were taping the deposition. That’s all I remember. (p 967 lines 5-26)

__Hostage…all over the place__ And let’s not even get into the ludicrous conspiracy allegations! First, the mere fact of them being at Maj. Jay Jackson’s house during a time the mother claimed they were being held hostage, is reason enough to discount the conspiracy allegations. Davellin A. was asked about that interview with Brad Miller at Jay Jackson’s place. It turned out that not only were they apparently not intimidated by Miller, but Jay Jackson was sitting right there during the Miller interview. From her testimony about that interview:

MESEREAU: And Jay Jackson was actually in and out, wasn’t he? DAVELLIN A.: No, he was sitting right there. MESEREAU: Okay. So you’re at Jay Jackson’s home, with Jay Jackson sitting there, and an investigator is taking a statement. And nobody complains about Dieter, Konitzer, Frank, Vinnie, Schaffel, or anybody, right? DAVELLIN A.: I don’t think it was at that point. He just asked us to speak of things of my father. MESEREAU: Okay. But I’m asking if your mother at that point ever called the police or did anything that suggested that Ronald, Dieter, Frank, Vinnie, anybody was causing problems? DAVELLIN A.: I guess — I don’t know… (p 914 lines 24-28; p 915 lines 1-10)

This also didn’t stop her from claiming not to remember what she told Miller during the interview. And again, she claimed it was “very long ago”. Yeah…way back in 2003. By the way, she refused to look at a copy of the transcript of that interview, too. The defense played the audio tape of the Miller interview. On the tape Miller told them, twice, that he was working for Mark Geragos. Remember how the D.A. raided Brad Miller’s office and took attorney-client information? He later claimed not to know Miller was working for the defense attorney Mark Geragos. I suppose it never crossed his or any prosecutor’s mind to simply ask. Anyway, one of the pieces of evidence taken was this audio interview with the Arvizo family. After Davellin A. claimed on the stand she thought Miller was one of Jackson’s people, the tape clearly showed that Miller told all of them, twice, that he was working for Geragos. But of course, she didn’t remember. Shocker! Again, totally stomping on the conspiracy/kidnapping allegation, Mesereau asked Davellin A. about the trip she and her family took to get passports at a federal building in Los Angeles:

MESEREAU: Did you ever hear anybody scream, “Help, we’re being held against our will,” or words to that effect? DAVELLIN A.: No. MESEREAU: There were federal employees and agents all over that building, right? DAVELLIN A.: Yeah. (p 936 lines 6-12)

He also cornered her by making it clear that on more than one occasion, when they wanted to leave, they left. And it was one of Jackson’s people who drove them to their chosen destination. __Shot with a BB gun__ Davellin A. also testified that the accuser shot both her and her mother with a BB gun after they left Neverland for the final time. The first time we heard the story in the media, there was nothing about the sister also being shot by Gavin Arvizo. The story was reported by the baby-‘E.T’. show ‘The Insider’. She claimed that the accuser was never aggressive before he shot them with the BB gun. The public would later learn that this wasn’t true because he was a constant discipline problem and gave flight attendant Cynthia Bell hell on a flight back from Miami in early Feb 2003. He had also gotten kicked out of school before the family ever met Jackson. The sister alleged she never talked about anything she was going to say to any family member before the grand jury or the jury in the actual trial. She claimed not to know whether or not any of her family members – accuser, brother, or mother – were even represented by an attorney. __Joke #157: Two a$$holes walk into a bar. One a$$hole turns to the other and says…__ She was caught appearing to try to hide information, like the fact that loudmouth comic-wanna-be Louise Palanker gave the family thousands of dollars. At first she snapped at Mesereau, then changed her answer:

MESEREAU: Now, she gave your family $20,000? DAVELLIN A.: No, she gave us ten. MESEREAU: Two checks for $10,000, right? DAVELLIN A.: I don’t know anything. You got to ask my mom. (p 834 lines 12-16)

Palanker’s road-dog, the disgustingly annoying Jay Leno also came up. She knew nothing about her brother calling Jay Leno on the phone. She told the court “I don’t remember that. I was never told anything like that,” (p 838 lines 23-24). Despite his obnoxious and inappropriate joking, Leno would later confirm during his testimony that he did talk to Gavin Arvizo over the phone. It is rather odd that Davellin A. wouldn’t know that her then-sickly brother had talked to his allegedly favorite comedian. Or maybe she was lying about not knowing. Through their connections, they met all kinds of celebrities including Chris Tucker, Kobe Bryant, George Lopez and Mike Tyson. They had even gone to Mike Tyson’s house at one point. Between her “I don’t know”s and her “I was too young”s, Davellin Arvizo gave the impression of not knowing a damn thing about very significant issues. It was enough to make you wonder if she was solely memory-challenged or simply there to tow the line and backup whatever allegations other members of her family were making; a built-in “corroborating witness”. But what these people apparently didn’t figure is that Jackson’s defense team would do their homework on a number of issues. Because during her testimony she admitted to lying several times, it forced the jury to ask the question “Was she lying then, or is she lying now”. My money’s on the latter. Next up, the testimony of the accuser’s younger brother will be discussed. That is…if I remember. I’m too young, you know. Good grief. Stay tuned. -MJEOL

Leave a Reply

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