heehee



he certainly has a NOSE for NEWS ;D


Howard

NOT GUILTY...... There are to many inconsistencies with the accusers family.  The mother of the accuser, daughter and 2 sons are compulsive liars.  The family is out to get money.  The abuse and molesting is coming from the MOTHER of the children.  Michael has to be proven guilty without a reasonable doubt.  I have a lot of doubt and think he is Innocent.  The family has sued JC Penney for sexual abuse and lied.  The mother had the children lie against their own father and accused him of sexual abuse.  The guilty parties are the crazy mother and her children.   


                                                  NOT GUILTY

SANTA MARIA – Michael Jackson arrived late to his child molestation trial Thursday to face a judge who threatened to arrest him and revoke his $3 million bail, but the judge took no action against the singer in open court and the pop star's accuser resumed testifying, saying the singer once gave him wine.

Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville had issued an arrest warrant when Jackson failed to arrive on time, but told defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. he would hold it for one hour.

Mesereau, who told the judge Jackson had suffered a severe back problem and was being treated at a hospital, paced outside court and talked on his cell phone until the singer arrived, a few minutes past the deadline.

Jackson walked in gingerly, dressed in a jacket over pajamas and looked distressed.

Attorneys met with the judge in chambers before court resumed and Melville addressed the jury.

"Mr. Jackson had a medical – problem and it was necessary for me to order his appearance," Melville said.

He said he didn't want jurors to draw any negative inferences from the fact that Jackson did not appear or that the judge had to order him to appear.

"The trial is going to go forward. In doing that I'm not expressing any opinion about the case or Mr. Jackson or the district attorney," Melville said.

Jackson spokeswoman Raymone K. Bain said outside court that Jackson woke up around 4:30 a.m. and his "back gave out on him." She said he notified his attorney and others and was rushed to an emergency room, arriving at 5:45 a.m. She said Jackson had wanted to be in court to hear from his accuser, who took the stand Wednesday.

"I talked to Mr. Jackson about four or five times yesterday. He was not intimated at all. He is wanting to be in court every day. This is about his life. This is not a joke to him.

"He knows the seriousness of this. He's not play acting," she said.

The 15-year-old accuser returned to the stand and testified about a TV documentary in which he appeared with Jackson, showed them holding hands and then putting his head on Jackson's shoulder. The boy was a 13-year-old cancer survivor at the time.

The documentary, aired on Feb. 6, 2003, raised a furor because of Jackson's comment that he shared his bed with children. The prosecution claims Jackson molested the boy after the documentary aired and conspired to hold the boy's family captive to get them to rebut the documentary.

The accuser's 14-year-old brother has testified he twice saw Jackson molesting his sleeping brother in the master bedroom at Jackson's Neverland ranch.

The accuser testified that Jackson suggested they hold hands in the documentary and he spontaneously put his head on the singer's shoulder.

"I was really close to Michael and he was like my best friend. I just put my head on his shoulder," he testified.

The boy also testified that Jackson invited him to Miami because he wanted the boy to be with him when he held a news conference to respond to the documentary.

The boy said Jackson was initially reluctant to let his mother come along but agreed when the boy said he might not be allowed to go otherwise.

He described several private meetings with Jackson in Miami on the day the documentary aired, including one in which he did an "audition" for the singer in which he pretended to be a student in trouble and Jackson played his principal.

He also said Jackson gave him wine in a Diet Coke can, saying it would help him relax amid all the media reports about the documentary.

"He told me if I had ever heard of Jesus juice. He told me, 'Like you know how Jesus drank wine? We call it Jesus juice,'" he said.

"I drank a little bit of it and I told him it tasted ugly. ... He said he knew I was stressed out from all the media stuff going on and the Jesus juice would relax me."

The boy said he had previously sipped wine in church.

The witness said he also shared the soda can on a private jet flight back from Miami. He said Jackson offered it to him after the singer said he used to be afraid of flying.

"He told me to drink the Jesus juice, it would relax me," the boy said, adding that they also shared the can with his brother.

He said Jackson gave him a jacket when the left the Miami hotel and gave him a watch on the plane.

"He told me not to tell anyone about the Jesus juice. He said that this is a symbol that we will be friends together," the witness said.

The boy said he gave the watch to an attorney, Larry Feldman, who represented his family after they left Neverland for the last time.

He was asked if Jackson employee Dieter Wiesner ever tried to get the watch back from him and he said no.

His brother previously testified that Wiesner had tried to get the watch back. Wiesner is named in Jackson's indictment as an unindicted co-conspirator.


 
Howard



 

I wonder if he made it to court today?  Last I heard, he was uber late and had 30 minutes or the judge was going to revoke his bail....


Yep he made it, he was 1 hour and 5 minutes late.

He was wearing his pj's. ::)


Howard

He was wearing his pj's. ::)


Howard


http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050311/images/michael300.jpg

He looks like he just climbed out of bed and forgot to shower :P


Howard

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050311/images/michael300.jpg
That picture reminds me a television set we had when I was young, a  Black And White ;D

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050311/images/michael300.jpg
He hee, look at Joe's face. He's like, "WTF are you doing, turnin up in yo PJ's???" Lol! Still not as funny as the priest doing the crocth grab, but still good!

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050311/images/michael300.jpg
Well, at least he wasn't "trawling."  ;D ;D ;D

Yeah, it's allright to joke, but you've gotta realise what actually happened. He was practise his dance routines and tripped over and hurt his back. He couldn't move at all. He rang his attorney's and they told him to go to hospital. He turned up anyway. If it was Sneddon or one of the Arizo's. they'd have the whole day off.

Well, then why didn't the attorney tell the judge that?  From what I heard from a friend who was IN the courtroom, noone seemed to have a clue where he was ???

Well, your friend was paying attention because T Mez called twice to exlain the situation, that's why Melville gave the 1 hour time limit. Michael was 5 minutes late, on top of the 1 hour which Melville allowed.

The mutherfudgecer is guiilty as helll........he is incapable of having intercourse with a woman and now he takes out his frustration oin inocent kids,hes going down.....we frgave him the firs time,but 2 kids is really too mutch!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Guilty - he is just too bizarre for words  :P

Even though I was an audience member at all 3 of the guys trials responsible for Blaines death, I had the decency to wear decent clothes...h ell, if OJ dressed nice for his circus trial! This just goes to show more of what an above the law "Oh, let's use this to make people know I'm waay out there", crap the this jerk thrives on! sore back or not..put some slacks on you freak  >:(

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050311/images/michael300.jpg
He hee, look at Joe's face. He's like, "WTF are you doing, turnin up in yo PJ's???" Lol! Still not as funny as the priest doing the crocth grab, but still good!



His Father should've slapped him silly >:(



Howard

1 day he rocked up in PJ's. Everyother day his looked fine. Stop your complaining, geez, your worse then a mob of of bloody sheila's.

1 day he rocked up in PJ's. Everyother day his looked fine. Stop your complaining, geez, your worse then a mob of of bloody sheila's.
You DON't show up in a court of law in pj's EVER...oh, poor baby had a sore back....he couldn't sloide into a pair of slacks. Get real :D

You DON't show up in a court of law in pj's EVER...oh, poor baby had a sore back....he couldn't sloide into a pair of slacks. Get real :D
He couldn't move at all! He had ot be carried to the hospital. As sson as the docotr said he would be able to walk, he rushed as quickly as he could to the court room. He got changed in the car, but his body guards forgot to bring his slacks. Big deal.

He couldn't move at all! He had ot be carried to the hospital. As sson as the docotr said he would be able to walk, he rushed as quickly as he could to the court room. He got changed in the car, but his body guards forgot to bring his slacks. Big deal.
So he couldn't move at all....people could "Dress" him...yes it IS a big deal! It's a fricking Court Of LAW. My freind was asked to leave the courtroom for wearing shorts. It's all about celebrity and getting "star" treatment....and anyway it's spun it's still BS ::)

Don't buy it.  I've been in courtrooms enough to know that if a defendant is being treated at a hospital (and the judge can verify that he really needs to be there), there is NO JUDGE in the world who would order them to appear in court.  They can be censured for doing something like that.  Oh, and let's not forget that his excuse for missing court another time was......*drumroll please*......he was in the hospital.  I think the judge sees through his crap just like 90% of the world. ::)

Yes, your right, Melville (the judge), can see through his "crap". But it's unfortunate for him (and as you claim, 90% of the world) that the jury can see through the prosecution's "crap" and are allready prepared to deliver a "not guilty" verdict. It's also unfortunate for you, that despite Michael turning up in PJ's a few days ago, it still doesn't make him "guilty" and 70% believe so to. Based on today's proceedings, 70% of people who voted on the E! Online poll, say he is not guilty!
It seems that despite your continued argument that Michael Jackson is guilty, it was clear that he was innocent, when today, the accuser admitted to telling his school teacher that Michael never ever molested him. There goes your theory!

Oh, you've talked to them?  How nice for you.  So, are they voting not guilty on ALL charges or just some of them?    Never said him in his PJ's had anything to do with it.  Also funny how when they're saying bad stuff about your close personal friend Michael, you're against the "tabloids", but have no problem quoting them like they're gospel when it's in HIS favor ::) No, I think my theory still stands.  If you knew anything about kids who have been molested, you would know it is very common for them to lie about it and say it didn't happen.  How do I know this?  I was molested as a child and I did the exact same thing.  I had priests and teachers and counselors and friends ask me, flat out, if I was being molested and I told them No.  It wasn't until I was an adult that I found the courage to finally tell the truth.  So, there goes YOUR theory.
I absolutely LOVE what you said, Kim...couldn't agree more http://elouai.com/images/yahoo/35.gif

Oh, you've talked to them?  How nice for you.  So, are they voting not guilty on ALL charges or just some of them?    Never said him in his PJ's had anything to do with it.   Also funny how when they're saying bad stuff about your close personal friend Michael, you're against the "tabloids", but have no problem quoting them like they're gospel when it's in HIS favor ::) No, I think my theory still stands.  If you knew anything about kids who have been molested, you would know it is very common for them to lie about it and say it didn't happen.  How do I know this?  I was molested as a child and I did the exact same thing.  I had priests and teachers and counselors and friends ask me, flat out, if I was being molested and I told them No.  It wasn't until I was an adult that I found the courage to finally tell the truth.  So, there goes YOUR theory.


I sure hope those kids aren't telling the truth  :\'(  Molestation sounds like such a horrible thing.
Sorry to hear about you having to go through that.  I hope you feel better  :)

-DR

Michael Jackson's accuser left the witness stand Tuesday after declaring, "I don't like him anymore," and claiming that he was ridiculed at school for his relationship with the pop idol.


The 15-year-old boy, in his fourth day of testimony, was questioned by the prosecutor in an attempt to have the witness explain potentially damaging admissions he had made to Jackson's defense attorney.


District Attorney Tom Sneddon asked why he told a school administrator that Jackson did nothing to him.


"All the kids would laugh at me and try to push me around and say, 'That's the kid that got raped by Michael Jackson,'" said the boy, who claims Jackson twice molested him at his Neverland ranch in 2003.


"Sometimes I would fight them. I didn't like to throw the first punch," the boy added.


But he said that he did fight and then was summoned to the office of a school dean and that was when "I told him that it didn't happen."


"Why did you tell him that?" asked Sneddon.


"All the kids were already making fun of me in school and I didn't want them to think it happened," the boy said.


The defense revealed Monday that the boy told Jeffrey Alpert, a dean at John Burroughs Middle School in Los Angeles, that Jackson had done nothing to him.


The conversation was prompted by the Feb. 6, 2003, TV documentary that showed Jackson with the boy and in which Jackson acknowledged sharing his bed with children, although he characterized it as innocent and non-sexual.


Sneddon's redirect questioning came after defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. concluded an interrogation in which he asked the boy if he realized that he could profit by filing a lawsuit against Jackson before he turns 18.


The boy said he did not know that.


Prosecutors claim Jackson conspired to hold the boy, his mother, sister and brother captive to get them to record a video rebutting the TV documentary. The family heaped praise on Jackson in the rebuttal video.


Mesereau also asked repeatedly why the boy and his family did not alert anyone if they thought they were being held against their will at Jackson's fairytale Neverland estate.


At one point the boy said, "They hardly ever let us be apart. They wanted to keep us together."


But he added, "I was actually happy to be at Neverland the whole time," and compared it to Disneyland.


"I was having a lot of fun," he said. "My mother was the one that was worried. I didn't realize 'til the last time that I didn't want to be there."


Sneddon's redirect questioning was relatively brief. He had the boy talk again about his bout with cancer, how he had become close to God and what he thinks of Jackson now.


"I don't really like him anymore," the boy said. "I don't really think he's deserving of the respect I was giving him as the coolest guy in the world."


The prosecution then called a series of law enforcement witnesses.


Santa Barbara County sheriff's Sgt. Steve Robel showed items seized from Neverland during a Nov. 18, 2003, search, including a sex magazine called Teenage with a woman on the cover, a black-and-white image of a nude woman and a book called "The Chop Suey Club" by photographer Bruce Weber.


Robel said he found the items in a closed box at the foot of Jackson's bed.


The relevance of the items was attacked by defense attorney Robert Sanger.


"You know of no witness who saw any of these items," he asked.


"No," Robel said.


"None of these items are per se illegal to possess?" asked the lawyer.


"No, they are not illegal to possess," Robel said.


Asked if the models in the magazine were over age 18, Robel said, "They're supposed to be, yes."


Sanger said the black-and-white photo is a collector's item called "The Glory of de Dienes Women," and he asked Robel if the "The Chop Suey Club," featuring a young man in a straw hat on the cover, was seized because investigators believed it to be sexual in nature. Robel said yes.


Sanger said the book was sent to Jackson unsolicited by Weber, who has photographed the Jackson 5 and other famous people. Asked if he was aware that it had a photo of Jackson friend Elizabeth Taylor, Robel said he was not.


Terry Flaa, a former sheriff's investigator who is now with the Santa Maria Police Department, testified about early stages of the Jackson case.


Flaa said that in March 2003 he decided not to investigate two child welfare complaints involving Jackson after learning of an interview by Los Angeles County children's services authorities in which the boy's family said nothing had happened. The complaints were demands for investigations made by Los Angeles attorney Gloria Allred and psychologist Carole Lieberman after the documentary aired.


The next witness, sheriff's Lt. Jeff Klapackis, said he ordered the Jackson investigation reopened after talking with the family's attorney, Larry Feldman, and psychologist Stan Katz, who had interviewed the boy and his brother.


Prosecutors say the molestation allegations came to light came during the boys' interviews with Katz.

Here is another story for you to read.^



Howard

I do too, but as a survivor, it makes my blood boil when people try to use the "but he denied it at first" defense.  I checked in my psych book and there have been studies done on victims of molestation...the stats varied from 87% to 96% of victims in various studies who have initially denied claims that they were molested.  There was even a case of a woman who was molested as a young teen, became pregnant, gave birth, and kept the secret for over 70 years, until her son passed away :(


That's terrible  :\'(  I now understand why many think it's up there with murder.  I don't think it's quite THAT bad, at least not to me personally, but I can imagine how some might feel that way.  It is truly tragic. 

How many out of those 87% - 96% have a background of making false allegations against celebrities and big companies for their own financial gain? Or are driven by a district attorney who hates the defendant with a passion, and has been scheming a way to take him down for over ten years now? Or how about this. How many of thos 96% were allegedly molested by a celebrity, and not any celebrity, one of the most famous names in music?
The defence are kickin some serious @$$, and they are doing so well that come the time they have to present their case, they will have the jury eating out of their hand.

We've got alot of puzzle pieces, and it's getting clearer and clearer each day how to put them together. We've got the edges and the corners, but we're still missing all the pieces in the middle. So far, from gathering the puzzle pieces and putting them together, this is what we've learnt.

I wonder WTF Stevie Wonder, Diana Ross and all them have to do with the case? I have an idea, but not 100% sure if it's right. Would be cool if it was right. I think I heard Michael actually say something about it in very early 2003 (January, February) about it, so it could be right.

I think Michael and a whole lot of celebrity singers got together to record a song like We Are The World, but a song furious, angry song about racism, instead of the soft and subtle peace song Michael usually records in these situations (e.g. We Are The World, What More Can I Give). I think this was recorded on the same day the alleged molestation happened.

SANTA MARIA, California (CNN) -- The lead investigator in the Michael Jackson child molestation case testified Wednesday that the police probe remains active.

"We're currently continuing to investigate this case," Santa Barbara County deputy sheriff Sgt. Steve Robel said during testimony in Jackson's trial. "We're also having other people come forward."

Robel did not provide details. His comments came in response to a suggestion by defense attorney Robert Sanger that investigators prematurely searched Jackson's Neverland Ranch when they should have first gathered more information.

Robel also said authorities had obtained a search warrant and an arrest warrant for Jackson before investigators went to Neverland on November 18, 2003, to search the property. Jackson was arrested two days later.

Robel said investigators decided to draw up a search warrant and serve it when they did because of concerns that "evidence would be destroyed or not be there."

He testified that items found in Jackson's home matched items mentioned in police interviews with his accuser and members of his family, including a life-sized mannequin of a young black girl; a jukebox in the ranch's arcade that concealed an entrance to a wine cellar; and a briefcase containing sexually explicit material.

Robel also said that during his initial interview with Jackson's teenage accuser, the boy's demeanor underwent "a major change," and he became "very quiet" when he was asked to detail sexual allegations involving Jackson.

"He folded his arms, and he sank down in his chair," Robel said, adding that it took him 10 minutes to reassure the boy that he was doing the right thing by coming forward.

The boy, now 15, was 13 when he says Jackson molested him while they were sleeping alone together at Neverland two years ago.

Under questioning by Santa Barbara County District Attorney Thomas Sneddon, Robel also said the boy told him that he believed there could have been five to seven incidents of molestation, although he only remembered two in detail.

Tuesday, the defense -- trying to characterize inconsistencies in the boy's version of events -- introduced an excerpt from a police interview in which the boy said Jackson had masturbated him until ejaculation five times. During his trial testimony, he said he only remembered two such incidents, although he did say that he felt like there were more.

Sneddon's line of questioning on the issue appeared to be an attempt to explain the discrepancy to the jury.

Jackson is charged with four counts of performing a lewd act on a child -- the two incidents the boy remembers and two others that his younger brother says he witnessed while the accuser was asleep.

On Tuesday, Robel also testified that during two sets of interviews with police in the summer of 2003, neither the accuser nor his brother or sister mentioned that they had made video and audio tapes lauding Jackson and denying the child molestation allegations. He said the boy's mother "may have mentioned" the videotape in her interviews.

Robel said he did not become aware of the existence of the tapes until five months into his investigation, when investigators searched Neverland.

Sneddon sought to counter that testimony by having Robel review a report from another investigator, Detective Paul Zelis, which said that the children had in fact talked about making the rebuttal tape.

Zelis followed Robel to the stand for questioning.

Jackson arrived at the courthouse Wednesday morning accompanied by his parents. Wearing a royal blue blazer, black pants and a blue shirt, Jackson twice paused to wave and give a thumbs-up sign to supporters who were screaming "Michael is innocent" and "fight, Michael, fight."

Jackson, 46, has pleaded not guilty to an April 2004 indictment by a state grand jury which includes 10 felony counts for incidents that allegedly occurred in February and March 2003.

The incidents named in the indictment include four counts of committing a lewd act on a child; one count of conspiracy to commit child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion; one count of attempting to commit a lewd act on a child; and four counts of administering an intoxicating agent to assist in the commission of a felony.

During Tuesday's testimony, Jackson's accuser said he twice denied to a dean at his middle school that anything sexual had happened between him and Jackson because he was embarrassed and "the kids were making fun of me." (Full story)


Howard

Thanks, Mark :)
Your Welcome, Kim! I'm really sorry that you went through what you did though...so did my ex but like you, she found the courage to bring it out.  I wish nothing but the best for you in staying strong....you have a friend in me ;)

How does WHO allegedly molested them matter?  Just because someone is an artistic "genius" (as you say) doesn't necessarily mean they aren't sick mofos.  And, what other "false allegations" has the defendant himself made?  You would've thought that after the first case, MJ would've been a little more careful about how he acted so there wouldn't be a chance of something like this happening again.

I sincerely hope these allegations ARE made up.  I wouldn't want anyone to ever have to go through the pain of being molested.  If they're true, however, he should burn in hell.


I'm not saying his musical genius means his not guilty, I'm saying his celebrity status gives even more moyive for the family to make these allegations against him.
The boy himself has made numerous false allegations of abbuse against his own father. But you must remember, the boy isn't involved in this case as such. The mother is who the defence want to get stuck into. But I'm afraid it'll blow up in the defence's face because the mother will sit there on the stand saying ridiculous things, making stupid gestures, and making weird sounds with her mouth so that she can claim insanity so she wont go to jail. That's what I think'll happen. If it does happen, Melville will have to through the case out. If Melville doesn't, T Mez will got to a higher court. This case is the biggest load of BS. What's Sneddon tring to do? Write the next storyline for South Park? It's easier to believe little green aliens are going to invade Earth, then to believe Michael Jackson molested this boy!

**********JACKSON CASE BOMBSELL!!!**********

It's not that big, but the defence have a way of proving how Gavin and Sneddon came up with such graphic details on how Michael allegedly molested the boy.
In a task set by the school Gavin attends, they had to write about themselves. They had to write what they aspire to become when they are older, what's their favourite song, what's their favourite movie etc. For the question "What's Your Favourite Movie?" Gavin wrote "Jeppers Creepers" and said he knows the script off by heart. The defence are using this as evidence because it just so happens that the details of the molestation sound a hell of alot like the events that occured in the film, "Jeepers Creepers". It's also just so happens that the writer of "Jeepers Creepers" is a convicted child molester. He used the same acts on children as the monster used in the movie. They are also the exact same details Gavin gave in his testimony. Tom Sneddon told the boy to use "Jeepers Creepers" as a basis for the details of the molestation because he knew that everything that happened in that movie were actually real life events of child molestation. So it'd sound believable, and the boy would be able to get his story straight because he knows the script off by heart.