Year: 2005

Art Books Turned into ‘child porn’ by Desperate Prosecution – MB #262 Unbelievably desperate prosecutors now trying to turn two 1960s art books into ‘child porn’ MAY 1 2005 — Prosecutors have been scrambling in the past few days to put as much distance between Debbie Rowe’s explosive testimony and the end of their “case” as possible. The prosecution has introduced 2 art books seized from Neverland in 1993….yeah, we’re back to 1993…again. They hope that the jury will overlook the fact that these books are legal, available for purchase, and really have nothing to do with either the 1993 allegation or the 2003 allegation. Just when you thought it couldn’t get more ridiculous, the prosecution always takes it one step further. One of the books is called “The Boy: A Photographic Essay” and consists of photographs taken on the set of the classic movie Lord of the Flies. The other is called “Boys will be Boys” published in the 1960s….yeah, the 1960s. To be clear, none of this is child pornography. But the prosecution wants the jury to believe otherwise.

Media Pundits Look Foolish After Explosive Rowe Testimony – MJEOL Bullet #261 Now excuses are being made for her not testifying to what prosecutors promised APRIL 29 2005 – In the media, Debbie Rowe has suddenly transformed from devastating nightmare of a witness to the defense, to the “ultimate fan” who didn’t tell the truth because she still loves Jackson. What a difference a few days make! It is astonishingly infuriating to see how some media pundits have turned Rowe into a Jackson-obsessed “ultimate fan” who only testified as she did because she wants to be with Jackson again. Other legal analysts proclaim that the District Attorney must have been “spun” by Rowe. Hey, here are a few ideas: Maybe she said what she said on the stand because it’s the damn truth? How about that analysis? Maybe the DA heard what he WANTED to hear instead of what she actually said? Or worse, maybe the DA wanted to backdoor her into this trial and she didn’t really say what he claimed she said. How is it that the public is admonished by these pro-prosecution pundits to accept what a witness alleging abuse has to say at face value, but we’re suppose to disregard Rowe’s testimony because it contradicts what prosecutors promised? The majority of the media had promised that Rowe’s testimony would be a bombshell. That it would be explosive, and could be “devastating” to Jackson. It was a bombshell, alright….a bombshell for the defense. And since these talking heads can’t deal with that, they have to try to spin it away.