迈克尔杰克逊中文网  - 歌迷论坛

 找回密码
 加入MJJCN

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

搜索
楼主: mkgenie

MJCFC新闻工作队注意,在这里接任务

[复制链接]
mkgenie 该用户已被删除
 楼主| 发表于 2005-3-30 08:17:22 | 显示全部楼层
Prior Allegations May Help Jackson Defense March 29, 2005 — The judge's decision to allow jurors in Michael Jackson's child molestation trial to hear about prior similar allegations against "The King of Pop" may not be as devastating to the defense as some experts believe. On Monday, Santa Barbara County, Calif., Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville ruled that prosecutors in Jackson's molestation trial can present testimony about allegations that the singer molested or behaved inappropriately with five other boys, including former child star Macaulay Culkin and two youngsters who reached multimillion-dollar settlements with the singer in the 1990s. Jackson is on trial for allegedly molesting a now-15-year-old boy who spent time at his Neverland ranch and appeared with him in the 2003 British documentary "Living With Michael Jackson." The entertainer has pleaded not guilty to 10 charges that include felony conspiracy with 28 overt acts involving child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion. The judge's ruling could be devastating for Jackson, who has never been criminally charged for the other allegations and has denied any wrongdoing. Melville's decision means Jackson's attorneys must now defend him against allegations that he behaved inappropriately with five other boys, in addition to the alleged victim in his trial. However, some court observers believe the testimony about the prior allegations could backfire for the prosecution. In his failed bid to get the testimony excluded from trial, lead defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. argued that some of the prosecution witnesses who want to testify about the allegations are disgruntled former Neverland employees who have a grudge against Jackson or have unsuccessfully tried to sue him. Mesereau can be expected to attack the credibility of these witnesses, arguing that Jackson has always denied wrongdoing, was never charged in connection with the prior allegations and that money motives have fueled the prior allegations. Some witnesses, the defense has argued, have sold their stories to supermarket newspaper tabloids. "I can see Mesereau arguing that the previous cases were about the money, that there was a money motive," said California-based attorney Steve Cron. "I can see him arguing that, 'Well, if something bad happened, why didn't you report it to police?'" Absence of Direct Testimony — or Support — From Some Alleged Victims In addition, three of the boys mentioned in the allegations — including Culkin — have publicly insisted that their friendships with Jackson involved nothing sexual or improper. Only one Jackson accuser — who reached a reported $2 million settlement with "The King of Pop" in the early 1990s — is expected to testify for the prosecution, along with his mother. The boy who reached a reported $20 million settlement with Jackson in 1993 has told prosecutors he does not want to testify. (Santa Barbara prosecutors decided not to pursue the 1993 case after they said the alleged victim refused to testify.) However, his mother is on the prosecution's witness list. Witnesses from the Neverland ranch who claim to have seen inappropriate behavior between Jackson and three other boys, including Culkin, are expected to testify. Melville said he would allow only witnesses who could testify to alleged actual physical, sexual misconduct. Still, the absence of direct incriminating testimony from all but one of the boys Jackson allegedly molested or had designs on may confuse jurors and give the defense more ammunition to discredit the defense. "I would not be taking a victory lap just yet if I'm the prosecution," ABC News legal analyst Joseph Tacopina, who also represents one of the unindicted co-conspirators related to the conspiracy charge in Jackson's trial, said on "Good Morning America." "We are going to hear from one of the alleged victims," said Tacopina. "Out of the other four alleged incidents, three of the four people say nothing ever happened. The other one [the 1993 alleged victim] refuses to testify. I'm not sure this is the sort of evidence that will help the prosecution if it comes in that way," he added. Culkin's representatives said after Monday's ruling that he "is presently not involved with the proceedings, and we do not expect that to change." But sources told ABC News that Jackson's defense plans to call the actor to the witness stand to refute the prosecution's claim. If Culkin testifies and denies the allegations, he could cast doubt on the credibility on the prosecution's case. "If he [Culkin] gets up on the witness stand and says, 'Nothing happened to me. Read my lips, nothing happened,' the jury has to accept that as fact," said ABC New legal analyst Dana Cole. Debate Over Propensity Evidence A change in California law in 1995 regarding sex crime cases has allowed prosecutors to present testimony on alleged bad acts or propensity evidence in Jackson's trial. The prosecution has suggested that Jackson won the trust of his younger accuser, a cancer survivor who was 13 at the time of the alleged molestation, by showering him with lavish gifts and accommodations. The singer then, prosecutors allege, took advantage of the boy after showing him adult magazines and Web sites and serving him wine, which he referred to as "Jesus juice," in soda cans. Prosecutors believe Jackson's alleged actions with his accuser in his molestation trial illustrate a pattern of bad behavior. Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon argued Monday that Jackson's inappropriate activities with the other boys included kissing, hugging and inserting his hands into their pants. He also said there was a pattern of "grooming," or preparing the boys for molestation. "The purpose of evidence like this is to show the person's modus operandi — that this is a bad person who has behaved in a certain way with others in past and that he probably behaved badly in the crime alleged in the prosecution's case in chief," said James Cohen, a professor at Fordham University School of Law in New York. Admission of propensity evidence has long been a source of legal debate. It has generally been disallowed in non-sex crime cases, although laws vary from state-to-state regarding the admissibility of propensity evidence in sex crime trials. In 1994, President Clinton signed into law the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which authorized the admission of a defendant's prior sexual offense evidence in sexual assault and child molestation cases — but only when relevant. The prosecution must tell the defense its intent to offer prior sexual misconduct evidence before trial. Law enforcement officials have argued that propensity evidence allows them to identify and protect the public from sexual predators, helps establish motives in sex cases and may empower victims who are hesitant to file reports to police. But some legal experts have argued that propensity evidence unfairly sways a jury against a defendant. Testimony about previous convictions for similar crimes or previous similar allegations, some experts say, may cause jurors to convict someone based on their past and not on the evidence directly related to their trial. Propensity evidence may empower jurors to seek revenge for the past and cloud their judgment over whether the defendant is guilty of the charges he faces in the present. "Some jurors may hear the evidence about prior bad acts and say, 'Well, we've heard about all these things and he's been out on the street. We've got to take care of business with this guy,'" said Ronald Carlson, a professor at the University of Georgia School of Law. "They're going to decide to convict him based on past similar [alleged] acts and not evidence in the current charges." Unfair Advantage for a Weak Case? In addition, some argue that prosecutors can use propensity evidence to buffer a case that lacks strong evidence. "There are some that say the prosecution will use the previous [alleged] incidents to bolster an otherwise weak case," said Cron. Jackson's defense has argued that the alleged victim and his family made up the allegations against him to force him into making a monetary settlement. The family, Jackson's defense argues, has a history of making false allegations to get money. The alleged victim's mother — whom the defense has suggested coached her children into making up the charges against Jackson — has not taken the stand yet. But Jackson's defense is expected to aggressively attempt to undermine her credibility. The alleged victim and his siblings have testified and some courtroom observers believed their testimony was not as strong as the prosecution had hoped. The alleged victim's sister testified that Jackson served her alcohol and that she saw him serve her brothers alcohol as well. She also said Jackson held her and her family virtual hostages of Neverland after the "Living With Michael Jackson" documentary aired on ABC. But the defense cast doubt on her credibility when it showed a video made after the British documentary — and the alleged abuse — that shows members of the family praising Jackson. The sister told the court the praise was coerced. The brother of the accuser — the only eyewitness to alleged molestation — told jurors he saw Jackson fondle his brother. But the cross-examination by Mesereau showed several inconsistencies in the various accounts of the alleged incident the boy described to investigators. The accuser's brother also admitted that he lied in a deposition for a 2001 civil lawsuit the family filed against J.C. Penney that ended in a $137,500 out-of-court settlement. The accuser told jurors that Jackson masturbated him on two occasions. However, he also admitted that he told a school official after "Living With Michael Jackson" aired that "nothing happened" between him and the singer. Testimony about prior similar allegations may nullify the progress Jackson's defense may have made toward undermining the credibility of the alleged victim and his siblings. "Jurors will overlook the mistakes in details made by the accuser and his siblings and figure that if Jackson did it at least once or twice, he most likely did it once again in the crime for which he is being tried," Carlson said. Testimony about the prior allegations is expected to begin in two weeks.

2

主题

162

帖子

4699

积分

中级会员

MJの保镖

Rank: 3Rank: 3

积分
4699
发表于 2005-3-30 08:23:26 | 显示全部楼层
195
Every day create your history,
Every path you take you're leaving your legacy...Michael!~~You're the King Of POP!!!!
mkgenie 该用户已被删除
 楼主| 发表于 2005-3-30 22:16:14 | 显示全部楼层
Stewardess Comes to MJ's Rescue Wednesday, March 30, 2005 By Roger Friedman Michael Jackson | Miramax | MJ Accuser's Family Stewardess Comes to MJ's Rescue Cynthia Ann Bell, an utterly charming stewardess for Xtra Jet, did a lot to save Michael Jackson's hide yesterday. In front of a jury hearing charges of child molestation, Bell recalled a flight she made with Jackson and 10 other people from Miami to Santa Barbara, Calif., on Feb. 7, 2003 by private plane. At issue was the allegation that Jackson served liquor to a minor in a Diet Coke can. Not only did Bell deny this allegation, she added some unknown details. She said that she "carded" the then-16-year-old sister of the accusing teenage boy in the Jackson case. Nevertheless, she served her liquor. Bell also said that Jackson hated turbulence and was a "private drinker," preferring to hide his wine or vodka in a container or soda can. She conceded, however, that on this flight he did not ask for the concealment — she did it on her own. She insisted that Jackson never shared his liquor with the accusing boy. But Bell had harsh words for the boy, recalling that he started a food fight on the plane, complained that his chicken dinner was cold and was "unusually rude and discourteous. It was embarrassing to have him on board, actually." The stewardess also recalled that the accusing boy talked about "getting a watch from Michael" and boasted that "it was very expensive." Bell, called as a prosecution witness, did more harm than good for District Attorney Tom Sneddon. The jury seemed captivated by her. Bell's testimony continues today MJ Accuser's Dad Set Up as Fall Guy After comedy club owner Jamie Masada and comedian George Lopez testified in the Michael Jackson trial this week, one thing is pretty clear: District Attorney Tom Sneddon is trying to separate the accuser's parents in the minds of the jury. The goal is to paint the father as a bad guy and grifter, while the mother is simply religious and pure. But guess what? The father is not going to take this lying down. His attorney told me yesterday that the father is not the selfish moneygrubber depicted by Lopez and Masada. For example, when the accuser's mother was awarded $163,000 in her settlement from JC Penney, the father's "take" was a mere $5,000. What happened to the remaining dough? "You'll have to ask her," the attorney said. Listening to Lopez and Masada, as well as to Lopez's articulate wife Ann, the jury got an earful about the accuser's mother. What's really come to light is that she had an usual knack for eliciting money and gifts without actually asking for it. Masada said in his often contentious and humorous testimony that the mother never asked him for things. Rather, she would present a dire situation — no money, no furniture, need for karate lessons — and let him finish the sentence. Masada, overly generous by his own description, would rush to fill the void. It was a clever method of passive aggressive greed on the part of the mother. And while the district attorney would like the jury to think her ex-husband was the only one who was conning celebrities, Masada told a few stories that undermined this strategy. When the accuser's mother left her husband, her boyfriend, Jay Jackson, then became her tool for doing the fundraising dirty work. It was Jay Jackson, Masada recalled, who filled in for the father. And it was Jay Jackson who let it drop to Masada that the kids needed karate lessons, but they were "expensive." "I said, how much will take it make this happen?" Masada recalled. He wrote a check immediately, not realizing he'd been suckered. Perhaps he still doesn't realize it because on the stand he said he never asked Jay Jackson how much his income was. The answer: $80,000 a year. In trading a husband for a boyfriend, the accuser's mother had moved up financially without informing her steadfast benefactor. The picture of the accuser's mother that's come in clear over the last few days shows that she was simultaneously accepting welfare, alimony, the JC Penney settlement and charity from a variety of sources — all the time keeping everyone involved in the dark. Masada ran fundraisers for her at her club, but she never told him about the JC Penney lawsuit and never mentioned the six figure settlement to him. He first heard it about after the Jackson scandal broke. Then, while erstwhile comic and radio executive Louise Palanker was giving her $20,000, Janet was not only buying DVD players and cosmetic surgery, she was also accepting charity from the LAPD in the form of a Christmas tree and presents. Within the same year, she was also soliciting press in a local weekly newspaper, which resulted in another "fund" for her poor family. I can't wait to see a PowerPoint presentation on all this in court. Done properly, it could alternate as the proposal for a book she could publish about how to have it all. There's more that will come out about the dark side of the accuser's family. I told you in February 2004 that the mother spent time in a Los Angeles mental hospital in 1988. This was revealed in court papers from her ongoing bitter custody battle with her ex-husband, who filed an affidavit with Los Angeles Superior Court on Jan. 28, 2004. The father, a union member who says he's currently taking part in the supermarket worker strike in Los Angeles, claims that his wife spent time at the Kaiser Permanente Mental Health facility in downtown L.A. in 1998. He does not specify how much time she spent there. H. Russell Halpern, the father's lawyer in his custody case, reiterated yesterday that the statement is true and that insurance records will back it up. Halpern said he didn't know how much time the accuser's mother spent in the facility. George Lopez, his wife and Jamie Masada all testified this week that the mother was not a presence when the accuser was being treated for cancer. The father was constantly on hand, even if according to testimony he was also looking for a handout. "David slept in a chair at his son's bedside," Halpern observed. "When [the mother] came to the hospital, she engaged her husband in shouting matches." In his affidavit, the father — who was accused by his ex-wife of domestic abuse during their divorce — paints a picture of an unstable woman who's convinced her children to make up stories in other situations that might benefit them. The father also claims in his affidavit that his ex-wife coached their kids to lie in her case against JC Penney. "She would write questions and answers for the kids," he writes, "to study and practice with her." According to court papers, the mother went back into Family Court on March 11, 2003 to have her child support payments increased to $1,499 a month — almost double what she'd been receiving. At the time, the mother was also the beneficiary of $769 a month in public assistance. The date of the mother's demand for more money from her ex-husband is interesting in that she filed for emergency help on March 3, 2003. Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon's charges against Jackson are seven counts of child molestation between Feb. 6 and March 10. The sudden need for more money seems to coincide with the family's ouster from Neverland after a year and a half of living off Michael's largesse
mkgenie 该用户已被删除
 楼主| 发表于 2005-3-31 09:45:55 | 显示全部楼层
198已接
mkgenie 该用户已被删除
 楼主| 发表于 2005-4-2 19:26:54 | 显示全部楼层
NEW YORK TIMES April 2, 2005 To Some, Jackson Trial Is Another Shot at TV By JOHN M. BRODER ANTA MARIA, Calif. - Anne Bremner has taken unpaid time off from her Seattle law practice to sit in the courtroom and offer television commentary on the Michael Jackson trial. The visibility the case has given her, she said, has meant millions of dollars of new business for her firm. Jim Hammer, a former prosecutor in San Francisco who hopes to one day make a living as a lawyer on television, migrated south after the Scott Peterson trial and has signed on with Fox News Channel to analyze the Jackson case. Bob Massi, a well-coiffed civil litigator from Las Vegas who is also under contract to analyze the Jackson case for Fox, says his television work has been a blessing as well as a curse for his private practice. "On the one hand, people know who you are," said Mr. Massi, who got his television start on a local station doing a segment called "Legalese" that blossomed into coverage of the O. J. Simpson trial and other prominent cases. "But some think you're too high profile and expensive. I think it's made a difference, but I don't think my income went up just because I was doing TV." Drawn by the flame of the klieg lights and the television money that powers them, lawyer-commentators have been a fixture at widely publicized trials at least since William Kennedy Smith was tried and acquitted of rape in Palm Beach, Fla., in 1991. The tribulations of O. J. Simpson, Kobe Bryant, Scott Peterson and now Michael Jackson have brought this traveling band of analysts to the media bivouacs that spring up around America's celebrity show trials. Greta Van Susteren, who cut her television teeth on Mr. Smith's trial and then gained nationwide fame covering Mr. Simpson's trial, was one of the trailblazers and remains the Platonic ideal of the talking head, with a law degree and her own television show. (Plato himself, who offered expert commentary on Socrates' bombshell trial in 399 B.C., would have been the first, except there was no cable back then.) "People have been fascinated by trials since the beginning of time," Ms. Van Susteren, now host of "On the Record" on Fox News Channel, said in a telephone interview. "After the William Kennedy Smith trial, CNN recognized that this legal stuff is interesting and actually quite simple. If you can understand a sporting event, you can understand a trial." Some of the sideline analysts at Mr. Jackson's trial are familiar from previous spectacles. Jim Moret, who is covering the trial as senior correspondent for the syndicated program "Inside Edition," was the studio anchor for CNN's coverage of Mr. Simpson's trial. Diane Dimond of Court TV, who is not a lawyer, is among the nation's foremost experts on Mr. Jackson's personal and legal issues and is reporting around the clock from a tent pitched in the driveway of the Santa Maria courthouse. Ms. Dimond's credits include the Smith trial, the Simpson case, the impeachment of President Bill Clinton and Bush v. Gore, the legal thriller that decided the 2000 presidential election. Marcia Clark, who led the prosecution's case against Mr. Simpson, has appeared here occasionally to analyze the Jackson trial for "Entertainment Tonight." With a new hairstyle and a youthful look, she enlivened the courtroom at a preliminary hearing last year when her navel ring set off the courthouse metal detector. Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles who has become an expert on celebrity and crime, has shown up for big moments in the Jackson trial and is readily available for television interviews. A colleague of hers at Loyola, Stanley Goldman, is the legal affairs editor for Fox News and a frequent contributor to the network's Jackson coverage. Ms. Levenson is a former prosecutor, Mr. Goldman a former public defender, but neither has been a predictable shill for either side in this case. The Jackson trial has also provided a venue for lesser-known lawyers and courthouse denizens to break into the crimecaster industry. Its extremely tight security offers a ready-made platform for television commentary inside the courthouse complex at a spot dubbed Hyde Park, after the site of the famous speakers' corner in London. Peter Shaplen, a freelance television producer who has served as media coordinator for the Peterson and Jackson trials, set up a microphone just outside the courtroom for analysts to use during the three short breaks in the testimony each day. There a revolving cast of talking heads offers up comment on the proceedings. The video is made available to the networks participating in a pool arrangement, which explains why Ms. Bremner or Mr. Moret, say, may show up on two or three different networks in a single day. "Hyde Park feeds the beast," Mr. Shaplen said. "But I also think in an odd way it makes the coverage better. If you can hear commentary from people who just came out of court, highly qualified people, it improves the coverage across the board." Ms. Bremner, a former sex crimes prosecutor in Seattle and now a partner at the law firm Stafford Frey Cooper, has flown down to Santa Maria almost every week since the jury began hearing testimony nearly five weeks ago. Wearing a distinctive long blond ponytail, Ms. Bremner has appeared on Court TV, Fox News, MSNBC and CNN; she said she prefers the freedom of being able to speak to anyone at any time to the lucrative security of a network contract. "Trials are like public morality plays," Ms. Bremner said. "And there's a public-education aspect to it, in this case more so than in many others." She said the Jackson case had provided an occasion to debate a state law on sex crimes cases that allowed the introduction of evidence of past offenses, even if they were not reported or prosecuted. The case has also illumined the vulnerability of a celebrity suspect to possible swindlers or to a prosecutor on a mission, she said. Mr. Hammer, the former prosecutor from San Francisco, is covering the trial for Fox News after getting his start at the Peterson trial. He gained some fame and television exposure as the lead prosecutor in the murder case against a woman who owned Presa Canario dogs that fatally mauled a neighbor in 2001. Mr. Hammer, whose military appearance belies a puckish sense of humor, said he was following the lead of Ms. Van Susteren and hoped to one day occupy a chair like hers on one of the networks. "Greta's a real lawyer," he said, comparing her with some the freelance commentators in Santa Maria. "Some of these other people up here no one's ever heard of." Some analysts appear to have been hired because of their connections to the prosecution or the defense. NBC has contracted Jim Thomas, the former sheriff of Santa Barbara County, to analyze the trial. Mr. Thomas, who worked closely for years with Thomas W. Sneddon Jr., the Santa Barbara district attorney who is leading the Jackson prosecution, offers insight from the perspective of law enforcement officers and prosecutors. NBC has also contracted Ronald Richards, who describes himself as a "professional friend" of Thomas A. Mesereau Jr., Mr. Jackson's chief defense lawyer. Mr. Richards said he tried to be neutral but added that the network hired him because of his expertise on criminal defense issues. "I was never a prosecutor," he said. He also said that working the Jackson case was costing him money but that he did not mind. "The exposure is good, and it's nice taking a break from clients and all their problems," Mr. Richards said. "I like breaking down complicated issues into a simplistic format. Plus, my mom and grandma love watching. That's why I do it." Mr. Richards said no one but a blockhead did legal commentary without being paid. "I don't understand these lawyers who come up here and do it for free," he said. "I guess some people are addicted to the camera. It's like a shot of heroin. If they think it's good for their legal business, they're just rationalizing their addiction."

3

主题

64

帖子

1万

积分

王者传奇

Rank: 7Rank: 7Rank: 7

积分
14691
QQ
发表于 2005-4-2 21:14:39 | 显示全部楼层
200楼!
mkgenie 该用户已被删除
 楼主| 发表于 2005-4-2 21:48:44 | 显示全部楼层
Anti-war protest takes advantage of Jackson media circus for attention The protest lasted a mere 45 minutes - not enough time for hostilities between the anti-war activists and Michael Jackson fans to crescendo past a slogan shouting match, but plenty of time to draw the lens of the national press toward their cause. That was the intention of the 30 protesters who marched the length of the courthouse Friday morning in opposition to the U.S. occupation of Iraq. It may have been partially successful - both Reuters and Associated Press mentioned the protesters in the final paragraph of their stories about the day's preceedings "There are certain issues that get a huge amount of media attention, but they are not necessarily the ones that affect us the most," said Leonard Carpenter, 57, about what motivated him to drive from Arroyo Grande at 7 a.m. to participate in the rally. "Few will be affected by Terri Schiavo's death or even the Michael Jackson case, but so many families are affected by the war in Iraq." The idea to exploit the cameras pointed toward Jackson's arrival every day came from the ranks of the Allan Hancock College Progessive Student Alliance, but the actual protest drew a multigenerational crowd - from 4 years old to "pushing 80." No arrests resulted from the largely peaceful march, though "words were exchanged" between fans and protesters, and one marcher was reprimanded for carrying an American flag upside down, said Lt. Chris Vaughan of the Santa Maria Police Department. "It would not surprise me that several people asked him to turn it right side up as that's a very disrespectful thing to do," said Vaughan, who learned of the protest plans early Friday morning. "However, I don't know of any law that prohibits it." Terry McConnell, the carrier of the flag who also helped organize the march, said the group did make a point of contacting Jackson's lawyer before the protest to let them know they had no intention of disrupting the trial. Nonetheless, after Jackson entered the courtroom the dozen or so supporters of the pop singer and the anti-war activists all clustered near the complex fence and facing the courthouse. The two groups shouted alternate messages, from the fan's "Love is what we need - love is what it takes" to the protester's "people are dying." "I'm expecting the national and the local news to underplay us - to not even show us at all," predicted Joe Payne, a sophomore at Righetti High School, who carried a sign that read, 'No more politics of fear.' "The worldwide media will definitely show us, but I'm not expecting to see myself on the TV when I get home." The group plans to make its appearance a regular Friday event at the trial, said McConnell.
Supernannan 该用户已被删除
发表于 2005-4-2 22:34:25 | 显示全部楼层
202!
mkgenie 该用户已被删除
 楼主| 发表于 2005-4-3 22:32:40 | 显示全部楼层
Jackson Fans Render Their Own Verdict A weekend rally blends support for the singer with expressions of anger at prosecutors. By Steve Chawkins Times Staff Writer April 3, 2005 SANTA MARIA — It took only 10 slaps to split open the Tom Sneddon piñata strung up Saturday on a pepper tree at a local park. Cheers went up, hard candies and Tootsie Rolls came down and a few Michael Jackson fans scrambled for the loot cascading onto the lawn. If the child-molestation case against their hero collapses as quickly as the effigy of his chief prosecutor, justice will, indeed, be sweet. But the several hundred fans expected for the Many Nations, One Voice rally, which started Friday and is to continue through Monday morning, know all too well that Jackson is engaged in the fight of his life. And although they are quick to point out that they are driven only by love, quite a few are also downright angry. From chat rooms to courtrooms to candlelight vigils, outraged fans sound variations on the theme offered at the rally: Jackson is being railroaded. "Obviously, they're fairly upset," said Michael Jackson Fan Club president Deborah Dannelly, a legal assistant from Corpus Christi, Texas, who organized the rally. "It's a difficult time." On Saturday, a couple of dozen fans gathered at a park pavilion to make posters for their Monday morning march, arrange for rides to a candlelight vigil at Jackson's Neverland ranch and smash the daylights out of an Incredible Hulk piñata whose face was a photograph of Sneddon, the Santa Barbara County district attorney. Vernay Lewis, one of Dannelly's 14 volunteer assistants at the fan club, reminded the group that Jackson fans recognize Sneddon as "a child of God" and then invited the piñata smashers to step forward. Blindfolded with a purple silk scarf, they walloped the Sneddon stand-in mercilessly. Seany O'Kane, a 23-year-old Irishman living in Liverpool, struck the coup de prosecutor. "I'm a big fan of justice," he said. "At the very end of all this, when Michael is acquitted, there will be all these people who will say they knew he was innocent all along. Well, I ask you, where are they now?" Some of Jackson's supporters have few kind words for journalists, whom many tend to see as uncharged co-conspirators in a plot to bring the pop star down. At the gates of Neverland one afternoon last week, a wary fan ended an interview moments after it started by trying to rip a reporter's notebook from his hands. "Give me my words back!" she screamed. "I want my words back!" Early the next morning, three young women who had flown in from Germany were standing at a corner that Jackson's convoy would glide by on the way to court. They carried a doll with a photo of Sneddon pasted to its face and the letters %%% stitched onto its striped prison outfit. They unfurled a large German flag on which they had lettered: "Germany loves and supports you — you'll never walk alone." Although their props were eye-popping, their lips were sealed. They wouldn't talk to a reporter, beyond explaining that the words of fans had been too often twisted to make both them and Jackson look weird. "We're not here to do interviews," one of them said. "We're here to support Michael." Jackson has attracted millions of fans with his chart-busting songs and elastic dance moves. Even in jury selection for his current trial, a number of prospective jurors talked fondly about how much they enjoyed his music. Early on, the pop star's support was a lot louder, with hundreds of Jackson's supporters massing in Santa Maria for several significant pretrial hearings. For Jackson's Jan. 16 arraignment, the "convoy of love" bus flotilla had picked up fans at church parking lots throughout Los Angeles before dawn and taken them to the courthouse. After he was done in court that day, Jackson pleased the faithful by doing a few dance moves on top of his SUV. Now the scene outside the courthouse is a study in serenity. Chatting groups of police officers outnumber the few fans who were unable to snag any of the courtroom's 50 seats reserved for the public. Despite the low numbers in Santa Maria, Jackson's support has only increased, said Dannelly, who helped establish the Michael Jackson Fan Club in 1992. Charges against Jackson have boosted membership to 17,000, she estimates — a jump of 20% to 30% in about a year. Hers is just one of numerous Jackson fan groups. "A lot of people weren't members but have always had an inner liking for the artist," she said. "When something like this happens, they feel it's time to get up and speak. They want to be heard." The weekend rally is guaranteed "massive media coverage," the club promises on its website. "The eyes of the world will be on Santa Maria — will you be there?" Planned events include a fans' tribute to Jackson tonight and an Olympic-style procession to the courthouse Monday morning, with fans bearing their nations' flags. Participants in the Monday event are urged to carry candles and wear white. Gold armbands — like Jackson's — will be provided. Over the years, Jackson's fans have been famously loyal, with a few displaying their devotion in ways that even some other fans see as extreme. Among the regulars at the courthouse are people who say they gave up jobs and dropped out of school to advance the Jackson cause. One woman, who was rushed to a hospital after fainting at the courthouse earlier this month, said she has been celibate for years as a personal show of faith in Jackson. Of course, most of the fans converging on Santa Maria choose less dramatic actions, staying on hand for days instead of months. "The people that move here? They've got issues," said Lisa Marie Flores, a 21-year-old dog groomer from Clovis, Calif. "I've heard them refer to Michael as Jesus Christ. That bothers me." Flores and her friend Stellanie Saunders, a media student from Queens College in New York, were among those gathered at the gates of Neverland for Jackson's return from court one afternoon last week. Saunders, 21, was delighted when Jackson rolled down the window of his SUV and complimented her on her choice of pocketbook and cellphone case, both from a line of products called Baby Phat. "He's so humble and so loving," Saunders said. "He talks to us like we're family." In court, no interchange is permitted between Jackson and his admirers. Fans start showing up at 6 a.m. for a seat in court. Those who don't get in remain behind police barriers, chanting and cheering at the sight of Jackson and his attorneys but otherwise sitting for hours on beach chairs or on the pavement. Now and then, chants are aimed at prosecutors. "Leave him alone!" the fans demand. Or they recite a couplet unlikely to be heard at the trial of any other alleged child molester: "It's cold, cold, cold out here. Must be a liar in the atmosphere." There also are simple statements of support, like the lilting rendition of a standard cry offered by a Nigerian woman in a pink muumuu: "The King of the Pop is inn-o-cent," she yelled, with others following suit. One regular carries a sign about Sony, suggesting that the multinational entertainment company is conspiring to ruin Jackson. The company wants Jackson's lucrative share of rights to songs by the Beatles, or so the theory goes. However Jackson's troubles came to pass, many fans say they're trying to help him as he has helped them. Bad relationships, severe illness, even molestation: Fans have had their problems, and some say Jackson has pulled them through. A 29-year-old woman in a black felt hat said that since January, she has twice flown from Scotland to spend a week at a time in Santa Maria. After she goes home, she said, she'll scrape together more money from her job with a caterer, and she'll be back. "It's a hard thing to balance your career and Michael," said the woman, who has Jackson's name and dancing feet tattooed on her shoulder

10

主题

196

帖子

9944

积分

侠之大者

Rank: 4

积分
9944
发表于 2005-4-4 12:11:33 | 显示全部楼层

hi 偶暂时回来了……

204楼接走~ 顺便问一下,这一楼的第一句里面 It took only 10 slaps to split open the Tom Sneddon piñata strung up Saturday on a pepper tree at a local park. piñata 是什么语………… [ Last edited by vivienne on 2005-4-4 at 12:49 PM ]
Sleep in peace, dear.
Wish you ever peace!
mkgenie 该用户已被删除
 楼主| 发表于 2005-4-10 09:31:04 | 显示全部楼层
Witnesses in Jackson Case Surprise Lawyers By TIM MOLLOY, Associated Press Writer SANTA MARIA, Calif. - They may not be as unpredictable as Michael Jackson, but witnesses in the singer's child molestation case have surprised lawyers on both sides with unexpected testimony. Flight attendant Cynthia Bell had been expected to testify this past week that Jackson shared wine with his young accuser on an airplane trip — but she said no such thing. Bell testified she served Jackson wine in a Diet Coke can but did not see the boy drink from it. Prosecutors also thought Jesus Salas, the pop star's former house manager, would say he served wine to Jackson and several boys. But on the witness stand, Salas suddenly remembered he had also brought soda for the boys. Jackson, 46, is on trial on charges of molesting a 13-year-old boy at his Neverland ranch in 2003, and one of the counts alleges he plied his accuser with alcohol, but the testimony left prosecutors with no direct evidence to prove that allegation. "The DA's come up empty-handed," said Jim Hammer, an analyst at Fox News and a former San Francisco prosecutor. "You shouldn't be surprised by your own witnesses." The Jackson case has seen an unusual number of people change key aspects of their testimony or say something unexpected, said Loyola Law School professor Laurie Levenson. It could be a sign that prosecutors are overwhelmed by the number of witnesses or by how quickly the case went to trial, she said. "When you do last-minute preparation, you're more likely to have surprises," Levenson said. Defense attorneys also have faced unexpected testimony. They had hoped comedian George Lopez would say the accuser once tried to con him out of $300 by claiming that Lopez took money from the boy's wallet. During testimony, however, Lopez accused the boy's father of orchestrating the scheme. Prosecutors have occasionally looked frustrated as their witnesses strayed. Jackson's accuser told a grand jury last year that the pop star once appeared nude in front of him and his brother and told them it was "natural." But while testifying last month, the boy did not initially recall the statement. When prosecutor Tom Sneddon pressed the boy, asking if he recalled what he told the grand jury, defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. accused Sneddon of coaching the witness. "I agree," Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville said. "I can't refresh his memory?" Sneddon asked. "Not if he says 'I can't recollect,'" the judge said. "I can't recollect," the boy said. Eventually, the boy was allowed to review his grand jury testimony and then said he remembered Jackson making the statement. Several witnesses testified that they met with prosecutors only a day or two before taking the stand, suggesting they had little time to review earlier statements to sheriff's investigators, grand jurors or during lawsuits. Salas seemed to catch prosecutor Gordon Auchincloss off guard when asked if he had served wine to Jackson and children. The former house manager said he did bring wine but also had brought soda for the children. "When you talked to the Sheriff's Department about this, you never mentioned anything about any soda," Auchincloss said. "It just flipped into my mind right now," Salas testified.

3

主题

64

帖子

1万

积分

王者传奇

Rank: 7Rank: 7Rank: 7

积分
14691
QQ
发表于 2005-4-10 09:33:08 | 显示全部楼层
206
mkgenie 该用户已被删除
 楼主| 发表于 2005-4-11 09:40:45 | 显示全部楼层
Case of the Ex – employees In the trial of Michael Jackson, prosecutors in the case called upon ex-employees of Mr. Jackson to give their account of ‘alleged’ acts they supposedly witnessed which would be deemed inappropriate. The ex-employees of Mr. Jackson all confessed to having sold salacious stories to the highest profiting tabloid. These professed stories contained information on Mr. Jackson and his personal relationships with his long-time friend, Mr. Macauley Culkin and ex-wife, Lisa Marie-Presley. In testimony by Adrian McManus, she admitted she did not have knowledge on the personal relationship between Ms. Presley and Mr. Jackson, yet she signed contracts agreeing to give insight on how they spent their intimate time together. It was also said by Ms. McManus that all the ex-employees used ‘media brokers' to profit off of hearsay to pay for the multi-million-dollar wrongful termination suit against Mr. Jackson; this case they lost in court and were given the mandate to pay Mr. Jackson $1.4 million. Ralph Chacon, an ex-security guard who was also a part of the suit against Mr. Jackson, gave a testimony giving explicit details on an act Mr. Jackson allegedly committed with a young child. The defense for Mr. Jackson depicted Mr. Chacon’s account as a way ‘to get even’ for being pushed into filing bankruptcy due to a court’s judgment in favor of Michael Jackson. In addition to the ex-employees, former chef Phillip LeMarque requested $500,000 to tell a tabloid that he witnessed Mr. Jackson’s hand in an inappropriate place on Macauley Culkin when he was a child. Mr. LeMarque has said, “Everybody was trying to sell our stories.” Although Mr. Culkin has always remained grounded with his statement that nothing improper has ever taken place between Mr. Jackson and himself, he has been quoted by his spokesperson that he will not have anything to do with the current case against Michael Jackson. It is an inquiry among experts whether the testimonies given by the ex-employees helps or damages the case against Michael Jackson. Loyola Law Professor and former prosecutor Laurie Levenson speaks, “These witnesses are totally eclipsing the current case. Tom Sneddon is trying the case he didn’t get to try in 1993.” She is also noted saying, “For prosecutors the Achilles’ heel of presenting this type of evidence is they have these low-life witnesses who sold their souls to the tabloids.” However CBS News Analyst and author of Michael Jackson: The Magic and the Madness, J. Randy Taraborrelli, stated that as he was researching for his book twelve years earlier, he interviewed several Neverland employees that are now testifying. He decided not to quote them due to their financial motives. Mr. Taraborrelli said, “If these people did not have this baggage and if their stories ended with, ‘And then I went to the police’, my reaction would be - ‘Oh my God,’" he said. “But if you saw these things, a normal person would call the police; you don’t call the National Enquirer.” It is true that none of the ex-employees phoned the authorities until after they were contacted and were asked for evidence against Mr. Jackson. What kind of a person would wait to telephone protection for someone who was allegedly abused in such a foul manner? “The legislation was never intended to just take all the garbage you can find in the defendant’s past and smear him enough to convict him. At this point, the case is looking like a smear campaign. It’s a legal free-for-all.” – Laurie Levenson, Loyola Law School Professor.
mkgenie 该用户已被删除
 楼主| 发表于 2005-4-11 22:21:39 | 显示全部楼层
208已接
mkgenie 该用户已被删除
 楼主| 发表于 2005-4-13 08:07:44 | 显示全部楼层
Mother's Testimony Gives Jackson a Licking Tuesday, April 12, 2005 By Roger Friedman June Chandler might not be the best mother of the decade, but she tried her best yesterday to make up for a lot of wrongs. Chandler — elegant, articulate, fashionable — stood her ground as a prosecution witness in Michael Jackson's child molestation trial after a morning discussion of "licking" vs. "kissing" that left most court observers either annoyed or bored. Chandler's son received about $20 million in a settlement from Jackson back in 1993, and opened the door for various lawsuits that still resonate today. Jackson, his mother Katherine Jackson, as well as brothers Tito Jackson and Jackie Jackson, attended yesterday's session. There was no sign of his father, Joseph Jackson, or other family members. Throughout some of the session, Brian Oxman, erstwhile defense attorney for both Katherine and Michael Jackson, dozed. Under cross-examination, Chandler conceded that her son, now 25, hasn't spoken to her in 11 years. Her friends say that the boy's father has convinced him that she was responsible for all his problems. In court, June Chandler was hard-pressed to explain why she let Jackson sleep in the same bed with her son 30 to 50 times in 1993. She was equally hard-pressed to rationalize taking expensive gifts from the pop star at the same time. The jury did not hear the amount of cash that Chandler, her first ex-husband and her most recent ex-husband each received in settlements from Jackson. But each is said to have gotten around $1.5 million. But June Chandler didn't make any allegation of sexual molestation by Jackson. All she said was that her son slept in Jackson's bedroom, and that Jackson slept in her son's bedroom. Unlike previous witnesses, who had graphic descriptions of preposterous acts, June Chandler had nothing but hurt, sadness and regret. On the other hand, she left a very clear impression that Jackson, then around 34 years old, was desperate to be alone with her 13-year-old son. Her testimony made it clear that he would pay for that privilege by including her and her daughter in expensive trips just so he could be close to the boy. In that sense, the prosecution scored points for showing that Jackson has a habit of "grooming" young boys whom he plans to seduce with fame and fortune. But jurors may also have been angry that Chandler literally sold her child to Jackson for a brief whirlwind ride that destroyed her family. She would not be the first mother to do this, prosecutors implied. Also on their list are choreographer Wade Robson and his mother Joy; another Australian boy and his single mother; plus the boy in the current case and his mother. The latter will likely begin testimony today. Robson has insisted that Jackson did nothing inappropriate to him. The other Australian boy, whose family I've spoken with, refuses to comment on the Jackson trial. In the past he's also denied that anything happened. Some people who were in court today had a lot of questions about June Chandler. Not only did she take the $1.5 million in 1994, she kept it. She did not, for example, donate the money to charity or start a foundation for abused children. According to real-estate records, she bought a new home in an excellent Los Angeles neighborhood in 1995 for about $750,000. That house would have doubled in value by now. Chandler's biggest dilemma in the Jackson matter is her lack of reasonable explanations for letting the singer sleep with her son. A source close to her told me recently: "She thought Michael Jackson was gay." But that's no explanation, even if, as she related, "she thought he'd only be interested in adults and was harmless." This does not compute, as they say. June Chandler also didn't recount anecdotes of Jackson with other boys. Her ex-brother-in-law Ray Chandler, who wrote the book "All That Glitters" on the subject, assured me last week that June would regale the jury with such stories. None came. Three other witnesses testified yesterday, all backfiring for the prosecution. Each of them was also involved in selling his story to a publisher. Two were disgruntled former Jackson employees. One, Stacy Brown, is co-writer of a Jackson book with one of the ex-employees. Brown claimed to have "a lot of love for members of the Jackson family." Certainly a way to show it is to publish a scandalous book about them. The pair already has a publisher, Select Books. Brown, who is co-authoring former Jackson flack Bob Jones' book, almost got caught in his own testimony. Prosecutor Gordon Auchincloss asked him if there was a correlation between Jones suddenly not remembering on the stand whether or not Jackson licked a boy's head on a plane flight — as Jones had said in previous statements — and Jones' sudden lack of financial trouble. Brown answered affirmatively, but Auchincloss failed to make his point that perhaps Jones' memory loss was convenient and motivated. Defense attorney Tom Mesereau drove up court instead and turned the tables on Brown in a beautifully executed slam-dunk. "So you mean that when Mr. Jones needed the money, there was licking, but when he didn't need it, there wasn't any?" he asked. So much for that. Odd things happened in court today, too. One wonders what will happen now that June Chandler has correctly identified pictures of her son and the Australian boy, which were shown on an overhead projector in the courtroom. Last week, a former Jackson employee confidently misidentified the boys. Will anyone remember to use that in impeaching that witness? And Neverland, as usual, was described as a place where every single employee (with the sole exception of Jackson's loyal assistant Evvy Tavasci) was looking for ways to make money off the former King of Pop. Duane Swingler, who worked as house manager there for five weeks in the summer of 2003, testified for the prosecution, but looked like an idiot when he admitted: "I was going to cash in, like everyone else." That got a laugh from the room. Swingler apparently has been negotiating with the British tabloid News of the World to sell his story, "Entering Neverland: Secrets from Behind the Gates." That's after five weeks of employment and — as he described it — friendly treatment from Jackson. Also from court yesterday: Judge Rodney Melville told prosecutor Tom Sneddon to "stop talking" when he was trying to respond to a question. And the judge also laughed when June Chandler, under cross-examination by the defense, objected to an question by calling out "speculation" before one of the district attorneys could. "Sustained, and sustained," the judge quipped.
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 加入MJJCN

本版积分规则

Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|迈克尔杰克逊中文网(Michael Jackson Chinese Fanclub)[官方认证歌迷站] ( 桂ICP备18010620号-7 )

GMT+8, 2024-11-15 06:54

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2017 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表