Category: MJEOL BULLET

Accuser’s Mother Hired Numerous Lawyers before Meeting Jackson? –MJEOL Bullet #204 Went “Attorney shopping” according to previous reports In a September 17 2004 report from the AFP entitled “Michael Jackson’s lawyers confront his accuser’s mother,” it was reported that defense attorneys brought out in court the fact that the accuser’s mother hired “numerous” attorneys.  They also report she had once accused the accuser’s father of molesting and falsely imprisoning him in Los Angeles as well.

What we also learned from courtroom observers who listened to her testimony was the fact that she had hired/retained no less than 6 (six) attorneys before she had even met Jackson in an attempt to seek a financial settlement from him.  No, that’s not a typo.

These are not speculative theories being thrown around by unnamed sources.  The six attorneys were brought up in court by Jackson’s attorney Tom Mesereau.  This is definitely not the first piece of incredibly damaging information to come out about this family.

We learned in court that the defense had taped evidence of the private investigator Brad Miller telling the mother, twice, that he was the attorney hired by Michael Jackson’s then-lawyer, Mark Geragos.  She, of course, claimed not to have paid attention to this blaring fact.   And prosecutors and police testified that they didn’t know Miller worked for Geragos either.  Yeah, right.

Judge Based Bail Reduction Denial on False Info? – MJEOL Bullet #203 Court documents dated September 10 2004 reveal that the judge in the Michael Jackson case may have based his denial for reduction of the unconstitutional $3M bail on faulty information.  The defense asked for a reduction in the bail amount on May 30 2004, sources say because it is a violation of Jackson’s rights, pure and simple.  With prosecutors and police trampling on this rights with regards to search warrants and personal property taken, its no wonder the defense doesn’t want to give an inch in the way of letting prosecutors get away with violating his rights.

Jackson’s attorneys have asked the judge to reconsider his denial of the reduction request.  The Appeals Court had previously remanded his original decision back to his court for further review.

In the defense’s Motion to Reconsider Defendant’s Motion for Bail Reduction (C. C . P 1008), they say that Judge Melville based his denial ruling on everything from what Jackson paid his previous attorney to the civil settlement over a decade ago.  They also state that the judge cited information that wasn’t even in the grand jury testimony for his decision.  From the motion:

The purported facts referenced by this Court’s order are not supported by the grand jury transcripts.  For instance, the Court referenced purported testimony that Mr. Jackson said he would join the Doe family in Brazil.  However, there is nothing in the grand jury transcripts that supports the statement that “[d]efendant said he would join them in Brazil ” (Order Denying Bail Reduction, page 2).  (see Motion to Reconsider Defendant’s Motion for Bail Reduction | pg 2)

Prosecutors Admit to Illegally Seizing Certain Items? – MJEOL Bullet #202 In court papers stamped September 13 2004, the defense team for Michael Jackson continues to question the seizure of property taken from Jackson’s Neverland Ranch.  Through the court filings, we find out the prosecutors have conceded at least 20 items taken were done so illegally because they did not fall under the “plain view exception” nor were they listed on the search warrant.

Since warrantless searches are a violation of the 4th Amendment, anything obtained as a result—even the most innocent info like a financial magazine—is a violation of Jackson’s rights and subject to what attorneys call a “suppression” of what prosecutors have labeled as “evidence”.

The defense’s Reply to the DA’s Supplemental Response in Opposition to Defense Motion to Suppress says that prosecutors try to substantiate the confiscation of property from Jackson’s home by claiming it “may be a lead to other evidence or is indicia of association among certain individuals”.  They write:

The probable cause affidavit does not request and the warrant does not authorize seizure of items that may reflect association among people. (see Defendant’s Reply to the District Attorney’s Supplemental Response in Opposition to Defense Motion to Suppress | pg2)

Prosecutors Break Atty-Client Privilege… Again – MJEOL Bullet #201 In what can only be called a deliberate seizure of material covered by the attorney-client privilege, police raided Michael Jackson’s personal assistant where they seized defense work product. This time it was blatant and obvious.

In the defense’s Emergency Application, Jackson attorney Robert Sanger is requesting that items recently seized from Jackson’s personal assistant on September 15 2004, be sealed precisely because they are protected by attorney-client privilege.

It is much more than a coincidence that this raid took place the day before a very important 2-day hearing in this case. This is outrageously disgusting behavior that won’t be appeased with a simple “I made a mistake”.

It is common knowledge to sheriff’s deputies and prosecutors who Jackson’s personal assistant is. The defense says that from the sheriff’s department Property Form, some items seized definitely pertain to Jackson’s attorneys and their representation of him in this current “case”. Those items include a fax from Jackson to his attorney Tom Mesereau and 3 (three) folders labeled “Mesereau”.

Major Bombshells, Evasive Answers, & Odd Behavior – MJEOL Bullet #200 Accusers mother seemed to have something to hide says certain courtroom observers The hearing held September 17 2004 provided a glimpse into the Michael Jackson “case” that many have not been privy to. Aside from learning that school officials send out deputies to pick up a large number of fans who skip school to see and support Michael Jackson, we learned a LOT of information during the hearing. Most importantly, for the first time, the public saw the accuser’s mother unsuccessfully try to talk her way out of very serious situations with far reaching implications. While some anti-Jackson media nuts were making jokes about Jackson, other people were watching the mother intently.

The accuser’s mother seemed to have terminal cases of selective memory, evasiveness and combativeness. She not only didn’t want to answer questions, but took every opportunity to try to distract from the issue. The theme, according to courtroom observers, was ‘I don’t know’; that is, when she wasn’t asking Mesereau to repeat the question for the 6th or 7th time.

Wrapping herself around being chosen by God, she responded to very tough questions by Tom Mesereu, Jackson’s defense attorney by telling what some observers call “obvious lies”.

At issue during the hearing was whether she knew private investigator Brad Miller worked for then-Jackson attorney Mark Geragos. If you’ll remember, previous reports from some prosecution-apologists claimed she had no idea who worked for whom and simply assumed Miller was part of Jackson’s security team. Well, we found out in court last week that this is not true.

Even More Damaging Docs of Accusing Family’s Past – MJEOL Bullet #99 REPOST Given current revelations about the accuser’s mother’s past, which includes once accusing her ex-husband of sexually molesting the accuser and falsely imprisoning them, it seems appropriate that we recap what other people have had to say about this family.

In a stunning development yesterday (March 4), the attorney who represented JCPenney in a court case involving the family now accusing Jackson, released over 100 pages of documents from that case, and blasted the mother’s motives both in their case and in the Jackson case (see transcript from replay of report).

The attorney, Tom Griffin, was interviewed by NBC’s Mike Taibbi, the same reporter who broke the story about Richard Matsuura totally blasting the defamatory Vanity Fair article about Jackson in which Matsuura is cited as one of the children allegedly “given wine by Jackson” (see Matsuura Angry at Defamatory Vanity Fair Article-Bullet #89).

Tom Griffin calls what the mother did to JCPenney a “shakedown”. What was a small altercation with security—after some of the family members were actually caught outside of the store with “an arm full of shoplifted clothes”–turned into a $3 million lawsuit.

The family claimed they were beaten severely in broad daylight by security to the extent where they all had broken bones. As of now, it is unknown if any medical records exist of the family’s alleged beating by store security. Griffin says there was absolutely nothing to backup their claims.

Defense Denounces Recent Leaks, May Seek Legal Action – MJEOL Bullet #198 Observers inside the courtroom today (Sept 16), for day one of a schedule two day hearing in the Michael Jackson “case”, report that the defense has complained about recent leaks to the media and the tirade by Ray Chandler (Charmatz) concerning the 1993 case. Reporting through MJJF, those inside the courthouse say Jackson attorney Tom Mesereau argued that there are only a certain number of people who have their hands on certain information which has been leaked to the press.

One issue was the leaking of a police video interview with the accuser’s mother that was shown on the show “The Insider” and was leaked to reporter Art Harris. The video shows the mother making “outrageous” claims of being threatened by Jackson’s “people”. They say that the mother is lying about her claims.

For the record, Harris is only one of two reporters who did an interview with Tom Sneddon before initial charges were filed against Jackson in December 2003. That other reporter, by the way, was tabloid reporter Diane Dimond. Harris has been one of many to report pro-prosecution information, and he just-so-happens to be the recipient of this leak as well. How mighty lucky of Harris. Too lucky.

Hughes Responds to Ray Chandler As Questions about the Authenticity of Certain Signatures and Audiotapes Surface – MJEOL Bullet #197 Geraldine Hughes, the writer of the book Redemption: The Truth Behind the Michael Jackson Child Molestation Allegations, has informally responded to the defamatory and one-sided tall tale recently being pushed by Ray Chandler (Charmatz).

In MJEOL Bullet #192-C, Part 3: Ray Chandler Provides More Lies to Dateline, we discussed a few of things that Chandler is claiming, and information from Hughes’s eye-witness accounts during the 1993 investigation.

Yesterday (September 13 2004) Geraldine Hughes responded to Chandler questioning her credibility. She says she’s heard that Chandler has wanted to write a book for at least 6 years now and she finds it interesting that Chandler has decided to release it at this time. She says of Chandler:

It is interesting that he tries to discredit all of my main points which I content proves the extortion theory, as opposed to child molestation. However, he refers to the transcripts and when you read them for yourself, they are validating exactly what I am saying happened. (see Redemption v. All That Glitters, I Stand Confidently Behind Redemption)

Part 3: Ray Chandler Provides More Lies to Dateline, Other Outlets – MB#192-C
Another Dateline ‘Special’ that turned out not to be so special

Another Dateline “special” aired last night, September 12 2004, with the interview of Raymond Chandler (Charmatz); chock full of distortions, inaccuracies, one-sided conversations and allegations of Jackson being the “devil”. No, I’m not kidding.

Knowing that Jackson cannot respond to the old allegation, Ray Chandler is scheduled to be on numerous programs defaming Jackson and trying to turn himself into a saint by attempting to convince parents not let their children around Michael Jackson.

We won’t rehash all of the tired, sorry story from Chandler as you’ll be hearing from the opportunist enough this week; right ahead of the current accuser’s mother set to testify in court on September 17 2004.

Ray Chandler leaks documents that he only could have gotten from the accuser’s father or other people subject to the confidentiality agreement, and claims that these documents prove molestation. The “documents” are simply the unchallenged, un-crossed-examined, unfounded allegations initially made by the accuser. Nothing more; and certainly nothing proving guilt on Jackson’s part.

R. Chandler has also claimed that he isn’t in this for money. Yeah sure. Why not give the book away for free then? Apparently he expects to profit off of being an agent of someone who has obviously broken the confidentiality agreement from 1993.

The big deal about this latest media whoring is that we don’t get to hear Michael Jackson’s recordings. We don’t get to see Michael Jackson video(s) concerning this case. We don’t get to read court documents telling Jackson’s side of the situation. We also don’t get to read sworn testimony from a number of people who, sources say, have an incredibly different story to tell than the one ‘Uncle Ray’ is now trying to sell the public.

Prosecutors Used 1993 Investigation to Get Search Warrants, Indictment in Current Case – MJEOL Bullet #196 Defense wants prosecutors to hand-over info from the 93 investigation and references exculpatory evidence found during that investigation The defense has asked the judge in the Michael Jackson “case” to make prosecutors hand over documents and exonerating evidence from the 1993-94 investigation. Prosecutors have been ignoring the defense and dragging their feet in turning over these materials, called “discovery”, since this “case” began.

It was learned through the defense’s Motion to Compel Discovery that prosecutors used information from the 1993 investigation to obtain search warrants in THIS “case”. Prosecutors also presented info of the 1993 investigation to the grand jury in THIS “case” as well.

The judge had initially ordered prosecutors to turn over info form the 93-94 ransacking of Neverland before now. Apparently prosecutors used old layouts from the 93 raid as well when raiding Jackson’s house in November 2003.

This is astonishing information because for months the public has been told by “sources close to the investigation,” through tabloid reporter Diane Dimond and others, that prosecutors had a “strong case” and that this “case” can “stand on its own.” Oh really? Obviously this is not true since they had to use info from the old 93 investigation to get search warrants and to convince grand jurors to hand down an indictment against Jackson in THIS “case”.