Category: MJEOL BULLET

Jackson’s Finances Topic of Nonsensical Discussion – MJEOL Bullet #223 Recent reports speculate about Jackson’s finances with conflicting and contradictory information It wasn’t a shock that self-proclaimed Jackson know-it-all and Fox reporter Roger Friedman is out, again, with another article professing to know details of Jackson’s personal finances. He and other reporters have been riding this story into the ground for at least the past two years, alleging everything from ‘Jackson is on the very of bankruptcy’ to ‘Jackson will sell Neverland any day now’. None of these pipe dreams from those mired in the cesspool of inaccurate information have come to fruition. They also seem to sidestep the fact that none of their claims have come true to date by finding a mythical savior that always seems to swoop into Jackson’s life just in time to save him from bankruptcy…until the next resurrection of their “Jackson is broke” series of articles. How convenient. That’s why the recent article from Friedman, and assertions from former leeches, come as no surprise to those who have heard the claims before. The desire to be the one to say ‘I told you so’ of course is overshadowed by one simple fact: Jackson’s finances are simply none of our damn business.

Ex Jackson Leech Sues Just in Time for Boxset Release – MJEOL Bullet #222 An ex-employee, thrown from the Jackson gravy train months ago, is now suing Jackson for $3M according to ABC News. This lawsuit comes just in time because Jackson’s boxset was released today (Nov 16 2004). Well what’s a Jackson CD release without some loser trying to negatively affect his life…just for good measure? If you remember, Jackson’s Neverland Ranch “just so happened” to be raided on the same day Jackson’s Number Ones CD was released last year (Nov 18 2003). Now almost a year later, another CD release and a defamatory lawsuit. What a coincidence, huh? Porn producer, and probably a Fox 411 “source”, Marc Schaffel claims he has been stiffed by Jackson. Oddly enough (or maybe not), Schaffel and others who have sued Jackson and have been unsuccessful only seem to do so once their access to him—his fame, and the ability to broker secret side-deals on his behalf without him ever knowing it—have been cut off. Schaffel has complained that neither he nor ex-spokesman Stuart Backerman have had access to Jackson. Those two, thick as thieves, are also trying to sell a “tell all” book about Jackson. Surprise, surprise.

Tabloid Reporter Admits She Knew of Jackson Raid in Advance – MJEOL Bullet #221 Defamatory program + ego + big mouth = unethical behavior? In one of the most disgusting and one-sided displays of so-called “journalism” from supposedly an objective entity, UK’s Channel 5 ran a Michael Jackson bashing program called ‘Michael Jackson’s Mind’. The show featured almost no one who actually knows Jackson on a level that would allow an intelligent discussion of Jackson’s ‘mind’. The pseudo-psychoanalysis from the likes of Carole Lieberman, Ernie Rizzo and tabloid reporter Diane Dimond is completely ridiculous. And of course Jackson’s musical acumen was almost non-existent in the show. On the show, Dimond admits she knew Jackson’s Neverland Ranch would be raided ahead of time. She even offers ill-conceived, nonsensical, overly-simplistic and ignorant critiques of who she thinks Jackson is. This is the first time certain observers are aware of the actual confession from her own mouth. Previously, the highly revealing information came by way of a Hollywood Reporter article dated November 20 2003.

Letters Paint Different Picture than Earlier Prosecution Leaks – MJEOL Bullet #220 Correspondence show Dickerman may have tried to create an actionable situation where none existed For months, prosecution sympathizers have asserted that prosecutors will prove Jackson was keeping personal property from the accusing family. However, in recently released redacted court documents, correspondence between then Jackson attorney Mark Geragos and the accusing family’s attorney at the time, William (Bill) Dickerman, paint an totally different picture; with Dickerman leveling unproven allegations while Geragos kept continuing to attempt to give this stuff back to the accusing family. A gigantic red flag within these threatening and accusatory letters are their dates. Remember the family claimed to have been held hostage at Neverland and threatened? The family claims a conspiracy, but these letters were written at a time that makes a conspiracy improbable if not impossible. Most observers say it’s suspiciously odd that they would immediately hire a civil attorney to began writing accusatory letters to Jackson’s attorney about property, instead of pressing charges against Jackson for their alleged “kidnapping.” Other observers call it flat-out ridiculous and wonders how long the prosecution’s nonsensical “conspiracy theory” can last in the face of real evidence to the contrary.

Michael Jackson Speaks to Geraldo Rivera about Eminem – MJEOL Bullet #219 Jackson thanks his fans for their support and blasts rapper for wretched video & song In a Fox news exclusive phone interview with Geraldo Rivera today (Nov 11 2004), Michael Jackson talked about the disgusting and childish video ‘Just Lose It’ by Eminem (m&m). Standing outside in Times Square with dozens of fans, Rivera hears from Jackson about the “demeaning and disrespectful” video from m&m. He also says that there is a pattern of conduct in m&m’s behavior which is very demeaning to a number of people as well as the black community. Contrary to a recent Associated Press article on the matter, there were more than “16” fans outside as evidenced by the video taken when Rivera was speaking to Jackson. Jackson also took time out to thank the fan-initiated support that he’s been receiving around the world. In London over 4,000 people attended a fan rally in his support recently. And he showed his appreciation for the fans that decided to rally in New York today (Nov 11 2004). From the interview:

I wanna thank my fans for their strong support over the years. They could’ve been anywhere today, you know, and they chose to be in New York in Times Square. And I wanna thank them from the bottom of my heart. They’ve written thousands and thousands of letters and have made hundreds of calls regarding the Eminem video. And I love them so, so much. (see Your World: MJ Talks to Geraldo via phone Nov 11 2004)

Defense Discusses Different Stories Told by Accusing Family – MJEOL Bullet #218 Jackson’s defense team rips into the various stories the accusing family told various authorities Nov 9 2004 There was a late hearing yesterday (Nov 8 2004) in the Michael Jackson “case”, which began at around 2:00PM PST and lasted approx. 2 hours say sources. Jackson’s attorneys were arguing about information in relation to what prosecutors have yet to turn over to the defense. Observers inside the courtroom say that items of discussion included “emails, correspondence, [and] chronologies (time frame)” that the accusing family gave to prosecutors outlining their testimony of events. There could be huge discrepancies regarding what the accusing family first told prosecutors and what they testified to in the grand jury. All of which is in direct conflict with what they were saying at the time they now claim to have been “kidnapped/abducted” and “held” at Neverland. The defense wanted these specific items in order to “show that the Doe family” changed their story, thus committing perjury. The perjury comes in because, as reported months ago, Jackson’s attorneys have signed and sworn affidavits from the accusing family saying that absolutely nothing untoward has ever happened between any of them and Michael Jackson. There also could be a significant different from what the family initially told police in June 2003 to what they ended up telling the grand jury months later. All of which, again, directly conflicts to what they told investigative agencies during the Feb 2003 – April 2003 period. Some observers speculate that because of the Los Angeles Department of Children & Family Services (DCFS) investigation—not to mention the first two-month investigation launched in Feb 2003 by the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department (SBSD)—Jackson’s attorneys didn’t want to take any chances and may have wanted documented evidence/testimony from the accusing family as well.

No DNA, Lies, Possible Welfare Fraud & A Trip to Australia – MJEOL Bullet #217

Stunning new revelations revealed in court during a two-day hearing

Extremely damaging information came out in court during a two day (Nov 4 and 5 2004) hearing in the Michael Jackson “case”.

Among the most explosive issue is the fact that there was no DNA of the accuser found on Jackson’s mattress. Police had seized the mattress in desperate hopes of confirming claims made by the accuser.

It was brought out in court that Tom Sneddon may have flown to Australia in search of another accuser and may have allowed civil attorney Larry Feldman to lie to grand jurors to secure an indictment.

Also the accuser’s mother may be guilty of welfare fraud as new revelations came out in court. Besides hail-Mary attempts to claim the defense is somehow “orchestrating” fan-organized events in an effort to get a change of venue, prosecutors showed other signs that they are beyond ‘removal’-status.

They are on a fast-track to needing a thorough investigation from a larger agency into their beyond-biased behavior, some observers have openly complained.

What’s worse is there has yet to be one sufficient reprimand for their behavior by the current judge in the case, Rodney Melville. This was discussed earlier in MJEOL Bullet #216: Judge Again Allows Prosecutors to Invade Defense Camp.

Judge Again Allows Prosecutors to Invade Defense Camp – MJEOL Bullet #216 False stories around Miko Brando and fan rallies pushed by the media thanks to wild speculation from the prosecution Inexplicably the current judge in the Michael Jackson case has AGAIN allowed prosecutors to get away with essentially stealing, some say, privileged information from the defense team. In late September 2004 police served a search warrant on Jackson’s personal assistant in which they took information, papers, and folders labeled “Mesereau”. Yes, September 2004, almost a year after the original Neverland raid. Most observers call this an obvious violation of attorney-client privilege. However this judge, Rodney Melville, does not seem to think that these prosecutors can do any wrong. He has once again ok’ed an obviously illegal search in this case. The first involved Bradley Miller, the P.I. hired by then Jackson attorney Mark Geragos. It seems that as late as September 2004, prosecutors still did not know where Jackson was from February-March 2003, and they raided the personal assistant’s office to try to find out. Jackson’s defense team says that the search did violate attorney-client privilege and sheriff’s deputies actually used a lousy excuse of only going through “a few pages” of that information before sealing it. Some familiar with police procedure have expressed doubts about this excuse.

Sneddon Stays for Now as Defense Outlines his Misconduct – MJEOL Bullet #215 In court documents released November 2 2004, the defense replies to the prosecution’s opposition for recusal of the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s office. The defense rips into the arguments made by prosecutors in their Reply to the District Attorney’s Opposition to Motion for Recusal of Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s Office Pursuant to Penal Code 1424. The current judge in the “case”, not surprisingly, didn’t kick Sneddon off the “case” with his latest ruling. But this judge has made some questionable decisions already, so most saw him siding with prosecutors again as no surprise. But why did the defense want these prosecutors off the “case”? Their own actions are enough to get them tossed, many observers say. The defense says prosecutors don’t have a “personal” right to prosecute Jackson. They emphasize the fact that as a result of the 1993 investigation, two grand juries didn’t had down an indictment against Jackson. They also talk about the “more than sufficient” evidence which shows the prosecution’s bias. Defense attorneys say a prosecutor has an obligation to pursue cases in a fair manner, and that any deviation from this obligation should result in the removal of the prosecutor(s). They also talk about neutrality (or lack thereof) and the DA’s obvious bias:

This is a matter that has to be examined in an objective fashion by a neutral trial judge. Unfortunately from a neutral vantage point there is no question that the District Attorney crossed the line so many times during the course of this case that more than the required “reasonable possibility” exits. So be it. If Mr. Jackson ought to be prosecuted, the Attorney General will step in and do so but the Santa Barbara District Attorney should step down. (see Defense’s Reply to DA’s Opposition to Motion for Recusal pg 2)

Part 2: Absurd Excuses in Effort to Retain Jackson Prosecution – MJEOL Bullet #214B Continuing with the prosecution’s attempt to retain the Michael Jackson “case”, we pick up at the flippant “so what” quote in the Prosecution’s Opposition to Motion to Recuse the District Attorney. A little background first. There were two investigations in 2003 by the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s department surrounding this accusing family. The first one began in February 2003 and ended in April 2003. The second one began in June 2003 at the behest of civil lawyer Larry Feldman and his favorite shrink, Stan Katz. This is an essential fact which stunned many case observers, legal analysts and lawyers alike. Concerning that previous closed investigation, and the second investigation which began in June 2003, prosecutors say “so what”:

If it is that the initial investigation did not result in criminal charges, so what? It was the further investigation that followed [redacted] disclosures to a forensic psychologist that resulted in Defendant’s indictment. (see Prosecution’s Response to Recusal Motionpg 4)

“So what”? This isn’t a playground argument. The larger issue here is that the “gunning-for-Jackson” attitude omits any possibility of an impartial look being given to these allegations; especially after a previous investigation into the exact same allegation turned up nothing.