MJEOL

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.