Category: MJEOL BULLET

Defense Continues to Knock Down Prosecution Allegations – MB#265 Testimonies of Violet Silva and Joe Marcus paint much different picture of Arvizo family than prosecutors have MAY 11 2005 — Michael Jackson’s defense team continues to tear down the charges against him with two very important witnesses who have all but completely obliterated the conspiracy theory. Much has been made about a directive at the gates of Neverland instructing that the Arvizo boys were not to be let off the property. The prosecution, and their sympathetic media pundits alike, used that directive as proof to suggest the family was being held hostage. One thing that never made sense was – if the prosecution’s allegation was correct – why the directive didn’t say not to let the “entire family” off the Ranch. Now through testimony, we have the full story that prosecutors didn’t want to tell the jury. The defense revealed that Ranch Manager Joe Marcus issued the directive because these specific children, reportedly 13 and 12 at the time, had actually gotten into some of the Neverland vehicles and started driving them around the property. The staff had to physically stop them. The children were also scheduled on that day, Feb 19 2003, to be at Neverland because their interview for the Fox rebuttal documentary was at first scheduled to be recorded at Neverland. Their interview never made it in the final cut, by the way. The directive was also there because they were currently unaccompanied by an adult; not even Jackson. These specific kids, the Arvizos, were very disruptive and there was concern by the staff that they would again get into these vehicles and take them onto the open road outside of the gates of the Ranch. The staff could have just kicked them off the Ranch and made them society’s problem, but for whatever reason, they may have wanted to make sure these kids were ok.

Mothers Testify While Delusional Media Downplay Defense Bombshells – MB #264 Update Two mothers testify that they trust Jackson, while some media pundits seem to have completely lost the plot After their sons testified under oath that Jackson never molested or acted inappropriately with them, the mothers and sisters of both Wade Robson and Brett Barnes took the stand as well. These two, Wade and Brett, are important because they have specifically been named as “victims” by the prosecution. They aren’t children the defense just pulled out of the sky for no reason. Joy Robson and Marie Barnes provided a stark contrast to the three mothers the prosecution put on to testify in their “case”. For the prosecution, it was June Chandler, Blanca Francia and Janet Arvizo. June Chandler hasn’t seen or spoken to her son, Jordan (the 1993 accuser), in 11 years. Blanca Francia sold stories to tabloids, took $20,000 from Hard Copy for an interview, and changed her story during a deposition in 1993 and 1994. Janet Arvizo came off as a complete nut-job, and “escaped” from Neverland numerous times with one of those times being right before she got a body wax paid for by Jackson. I could go on and on about her. Joy Robson testified that she has known Jackson for a very long time and that she’s spent hours talking to him about a number of things. She said of Jackson, “I feel like he’s a member of my family. I trust him with my children,” (see Mothers of two boys testify to deep trust in Michael Jackson). She says that she and her family have visited Jackson’s Neverland ranch about 4 times a year since 1991, but that Jackson himself was only present a handful of times (see Witnesses say no improper sexual activity occurred). J. Robson also says she, too, has logged time in Jackson’s bed. On the stand, she recounted one episode where she and her son spent the day sitting in Jackson’s bed, with Jackson, watching cartoons and eating popcorn.

Powerful Testimony from Falsely Alleged ‘Victims’ – MB #263
Two prosecution-alleged “victims” testify that they were never molested by Jackson

 There was powerful testimony in the first two days of the defense case in the Michael Jackson trial. Two of the children — now grown men — involved around speculation and innuendo for the last 12 years, took the stand to refute the prosecution claims. These two men say that unlike what shady prosecution witnesses have suggested, they were never molested by Jackson nor did he ever act inappropriately with them.

This testimony completely obliterates the third-party claims made by at least two 1108 prosecution witnesses. One witness, Blanca Francia, claimed Jackson took a shower with Wade Robson. Robson testified that he never took a shower with Jackson. Brett Barnes also testified that Jackson never molested or acted inappropriately with him.

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.

Previous Statements from Rowe Could Undermine Pros. Plans – MB#260 APRIL 25 2005 – Stunning details about Debbie Rowe and the termination of her parental rights were revealed by Celebrity Justice (CJ) a few months ago in an article dated Feb 4 2005. The “buzz” in the media now is that Rowe will be called by the prosecution dealing with an alleged “conspiracy” allegation in the Michael Jackson trial. According to prosecution pundits, she may claim she was given a script to say in that 2003 rebuttal interview which aired on Fox called “Take Two: The Footage You Were Never Meant to See”. There were very revealing details about what Rowe said at that Oct 2001 hearing where she officially terminated her parental rights. Unfortunately for the prosecution, in that 2001 hearing, she said some of the exact same things she said in that 2003 rebuttal interview. Just because the prosecution has subpoenaed Rowe, doesn’t necessarily make her that great of a prosecution witness. A subpoena doesn’t always equate with cooperation. For example, the defense subpoenaed Jamie Masada a while ago. Does that make him a witness for the defense? Of course not. As always, we have to be careful with proclamations about what a witness will say. The prosecution and the media have gotten into trouble repeatedly for promising/hyping up what a prosecution witness would say only to be “let down” when the witness testifies.

Pt 2: Testimony Turns into a Pile of Garbage on Cross-examination – MB#257 APRIL 22 2005 — In part one of this MJEOL Bullet on Ralph Chacon, his testimony under cross-examination was discussed. Chacon is one of the unbelievable witnesses who claimed to have seen a child getting molested and didn’t do any thing to stop it, nor did he call the police at that moment. When he was thrown from the Neverland gravy train, he sued for “wrongful termination”, lost, and lost a countersuit filed against him by Jackson. Chacon may have also bragged to various people that he was going to make $2-3 Million dollars and would be a “star witness” in the trial. He and his cohorts like Adrian McManus and Kassim Abdool sold stories to the tabloids and were found by a previous Santa Maria jury to have defrauded, stolen from, and acted with malice against Jackson. They were each ordered to pay over a $1.5 million dollars to Jackson in legal fees according to later testimony from Adrian McManus. On top of Chacon’s judgment, he was ordered to pay Jackson another $25,000 for the property he stole from Jackson. Chacon testified April 7 2005. We pick up with Mesereau asking Chacon about his reasons for going to the tabloids and whether or not he knew other people had started selling stories to the tabs.

Pros. to Rest ‘Case’ Next Week, More Holes in Arvizo Story – MB#259 APRIL 19 2005 — A lot of information is coming out today about what happened in court. Probably the biggest news is that the prosecution announced that it intends to rest its “case” next week, reports the AP. After a year of investigation and 100+ search warrants, the only thing prosecutors have proven beyond a reasonable doubt is that Jackson loves to look at naked women. The AP reports that the prosecution is having problems with witness availability for Friday, April 22 2005. So there won’t be any court on that day. It has been a grueling past couple of days for the prosecution with the unbelievable testimony of the accuser’s mother, both under direct and cross-examination. It got to a point where during day 2 of the cross-examination, even the prosecution was objecting to some of the answers Janet Arvizo was being allowed to give due to her rambling and volunteering information; info that could be used as ammunition by Jackson’s defense. This comes after her pleading the 5th Amendment not to incriminate herself about welfare fraud and perjury committed against Los Angeles County. An attorney not on this Jackson “case”, Tony Cappozola, has officially actually asked that the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office launch an investigation into the accuser’s mother because of that. According to explosive reports from NBC via Mike Taibbi, the mother accepted tens of thousands of dollars from various sources and that $150,000 settlement from JC Penney, and didn’t declare any of this money on her welfare applications. It is rather ridiculous that she would scam the welfare system after receiving thousands of dollars anyway. That smacks of pure greed. She also didn’t disclose, on those welfare applications, that they were covered 100% by the father’s Teamster health insurance. It got more ridiculous today (April 19 2005). Under re-cross examination, at still combative J. Arvizo claimed that she “never solicited money from celebrities for her son when he was stricken with cancer” (see Jackson prosecution plans to rest next week – AP).

False Info from Brown – MiniBullet #19 APRIL 18 2005 — Well, well, well.  In yet another whiny article written

Maybe It’s Brown Who Needs A Reality Check? – MiniBullet #18

Imagine my interest when someone mentioned a recent article from Stacy Brown, who has parlayed his marginal (at best) connection directly to Michael Jackson into a job at MSNBC as a trial “analyst”.

Brown, touted as a “Jackson family friend” seems to be using whatever position he has to profit from this Jackson connection; be it through co-writing a book with the fired Bob Jones or that cushy “analyst” job with MSNBC.

Both Brown and Jones had to testify in court recently where Jones waffled about what he claims he saw with Jackson in 1993.

Since Jones is writing a book and has to put something salacious in it, it was interesting when he told Tom Mesereau on the stand that he had not approved the accuracy of what was written thus far in a rough draft of the book concerning this all-too-conveniently-remembered “head licking”.

Brown was called by the prosecution to try to impeach Jones’s waffling on the stand.

It was a wishy-washy assertion….or non-assertion….or assertion….or non-assertion…that Bob Jones witnessed “head licking” on a plane with the 1993 accuser.

Now, why the hell Jones wouldn’t have called the police or tried to stop what he claims he didn’t see…did see….didn’t see….is beyond me.

But what can Jones, and co-writer Stacy Brown, say now? Their book seems to be shot to hell after the prosecution yanked them up and put them on the witness stand.  If they both suddenly come up with a bunch of salacious garbage now, people are going to be wondering why they didn’t testify to such claims under oath.

In a ridiculous article <a href=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6308419/>“Jackson needs a reality check”</a>, Brown takes shots at Jackson, his fans, and asserts that it’s a “ridiculous notion” that the media is biased against Jackson when covering this trial.