MJ: schuldig of niet?

quote:

The judge said he would allow testimony concerning five males prosecutors say Jackson molested when they were boys.

The judge said he would allow testimony by a 1990 accuser who received a $2.4 million settlement from Jackson and testimony by that boy's mother, The Associated Press reported.

A boy who reached a multimillion-dollar settlement from Jackson in 1993 will not testify, according to AP. Other testimony will be allowed from people who allegedly have knowledge of the case.

quote:

Op maandag 28 maart 2005 21:42 schreef MJboard het volgende:
Zoals de zaken er nu voorstaan gaat Michael Jackson deze zaak winnen. Er is nog helemaal niks naar voren gekomen en de getuigenissen van de kinderen zijn twijfelachtig.

quote:

Op maandag 28 maart 2005 21:42 schreef MJboard het volgende:
Zoals de zaken er nu voorstaan gaat Michael Jackson deze zaak winnen. Er is nog helemaal niks naar voren gekomen en de getuigenissen van de kinderen zijn twijfelachtig.

quote:

Op maandag 28 maart 2005 21:40 schreef Brave_Sir_Robin het volgende:
Nou, laat alle shit dan ook maar naar buiten komen, dan kan de jury een goed oordeel vellen en kan de media bij vrijspraak ook niet meer over de afgekochte zaak van 93 blijven doorgaan.

quote:

Jackson's 'past' allowed in court

The judge in the Michael Jackson case has ruled that previous allegations of child abuse against the singer can be introduced as evidence in his trial.

The prosecution wants to call five witnesses, including former child film star, Macaulay Culkin - although he has always said he was never mistreated.

Mr Jackson denies 10 charges, claiming a conspiracy against him.

Observers say the ruling is a blow for Mr Jackson and could have a significant impact on the direction of the trial.

Judge Rodney Melville announced his decision on Monday after hearing submissions in the jury's absence.

'Parade'
The judge said he would allow the jury to hear about five boys whom the prosecution claim were sexually abused by the singer.

"I'm going to permit testimony with regard to sexual offences and the alleged pattern of grooming activity by the defendant," Judge Melville said.

However, prosecutor Thomas Sneddon said that only one alleged victim will testify.

The most widely reported case involved a teenager, Jordan Chandler, who said he was abused by the pop star in 1993. The case was settled out of court, reportedly involving a payment of $26m.

At the time, Mr Jackson vehemently denied anything improper ever took place and later said he chose to pay the boy a "considerable sum of money" to avoid being subjected to a "media circus" at a trial. No criminal charges were ever filed.

The prosecution wants such evidence to back up and give credibility to the claim of Gavin Arvizo - the boy at the centre of the current trial. Gavin Arvizo says he was abused by the singer in 2003.

The prosecution is hoping to expose similarities between the nature of the current allegations and those from a decade ago, says the BBC's Peter Bowes in Santa Maria, California.

Mr Jackson's lawyer fought the admission of evidence, arguing that prosecutors were trying to bring in witnesses with grudges against the singer.

"How can you just allow a parade of third-party characters to come in without any victims?" Thomas Mesereau asked.

He pledged to stage a "mini-trial" for each individual allegation.

"You can't stop the defence from putting on a full-blown defence and I mean just that," he said.

BRON: NEWS.BBC.CO.UK

quote:

Op maandag 28 maart 2005 23:04 schreef De.dronken.pinguin het volgende:
Schuldig, Ik zie het aan zijn neus!

quote:

Op vrijdag 18 maart 2005 19:03 schreef Natalie het volgende:
't Zou me niets verbazen als ie gewoon niet schuldig is en dag jochie en zijn familie gewoon snel rijk willen worden.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 maart 2005 00:34 schreef DrDentz het volgende:
nu maar hopen dat ie niet schuldig bevonden wordt, ik wil verdomme naar dat concert van hem in duitsland volgend jaar toe

quote:

Op dinsdag 29 maart 2005 17:15 schreef dancemacabre het volgende:
't zou me niks verbazen dat de waarheid naar boven komt, wie nu nog niet door heeft hier met een doortrapt pedo te maken te hebben, zou beter wat literatuur ter hand nemen, de man is een schoolvoorbeeld.

quote:

Doctor who interviewed accuser says Jackson no pedophile; tells cops teenager invoked name of boy who brought 1993 molestation charges

MARCH 15--Michael Jackson "doesn't really qualify as a pedophile. He's really just this regressed 10-year-old."

That was the surprising evaluation offered to police by Dr. Stanley Katz, the Los Angeles psychologist who interviewed the singer's teenage accuser and the boy's brother--and who is expected to soon testify as a government witness at Jackson's molestation trial.

In a taped June 2003 telephone interview, Katz, 55, gave a Santa Barbara sheriff's investigator his "off the record" opinion of the 46-year-old entertainer. Jackson, Katz told Det. Paul Zelis, "is a guy that's like a 10-year-old child. And, you know, he's doing what a 10-year-old would do with his little buddies. You know, they're gonna jack off, watch movies, drink wine, you know. And, you know, he doesn't even really qualify as a pedophile. He's really just this regressed 10-year-old."

"Yeah, yeah, I agree," replied Zelis.

According to Katz, he twice interviewed Jackson's alleged victim and the teenager's younger brother in his Beverly Hills office, once on May 29, 2003 and again the following month. During those interviews, the younger boy spoke openly of Jackson's alleged illicit behavior, while the older boy broke down when Katz asked whether he had ever been molested by the performer.

It was during these sessions that the older boy surprisingly revealed that he was aware that Jackson had faced prior child abuse allegations (a criminal probe evaporated after an eight-figure civil settlement was struck in 1994 with accuser Jordan Chandler and his family).

Katz told Zelis that it took a lot of time to get the older boy to trust him, noting that he was aided by the child's mother, who "had to really spell out" that the psychologist was "helping us, working for us." Katz told Zelis that he assured the child he was doing the right thing by relating his experiences at Neverland Ranch. "We talked all about how courageous this was," Katz told Zelis, "and I said to him, 'You know, you don't want Jackson to do these things to kids again, do you?'"

Katz recalled that the boy responded, "Well, Jordy Chandler did not stop him."

The child's reference to Jackson's original accuser will likely be seized upon by defense attorney Thomas Mesereau, who has argued that the current molestation allegations are a sham, part of a extortion scheme that has similarities to the 1993 case (while denying the original allegations, Jackson has said he paid more than $20 million to settle the case because he feared prolonged litigation would affect his career).

A Santa Barbara Sheriff's Department report of Zelis's June 2003 interview with Katz, which The Smoking Gun has reviewed, does not address how the boy knew of the Chandler case or whether he had discussed the 1993 matter with his mother, whom Mesereau has branded the grifting mastermind of her children's abuse tales. The woman has claimed that she first learned that her son was molested by Jackson on September 30, 2003, when several investigators, including District Attorney Tom Sneddon, broke the news to her during a meeting at an L.A. hotel.

The lawyer for the current accuser's family is Larry Feldman, the Century City litigator who represented Chandler and filed a sexual battery lawsuit against Jackson in September 1993. Testifying last year before the Jackson grand jury, Feldman said that he had a "sixth sense" that the older boy wasn't telling him what "really happened" with Jackson. So, Feldman testified, he sent the boy and his family to Katz, a child abuse specialist, for further interviews. Feldman also testified that he had retained Katz during the 1993 case, but that he never got around to using the psychologist "because the case ultimately settled about four or five months into the litigation."

While the accuser and his mother have repeatedly denied ever contemplating a lawsuit against Jackson, Katz left a different impression during his debriefing by Zelis. The child psychologist noted that "Mr. Feldman actually referred these kids to me. Because they had come to him in this lawsuit." After remarking that he was left with the impression that the accuser and his brother were not fabricating their claims, Katz said, "Now there's a lawsuit that Feldman's gonna file. And I don't get the idea that they're [the brothers] doing this for money. Whether mother's motive is to do it for money, I can't tell you. I mean, certainly they're, they're kind of a poor family."

"I don't think they see the financial motive here because when I sat down with [the accuser]," Katz continued, "I said,'...look, if you go ahead with the civil lawsuit your family will get money if you win.'" When he told the boy that his identity could become public via such a legal proceeding, Katz said, "he sat there and started crying. So I don't feel like you know, from [the boy]'s point of view at all, this is something he wants to do. I think he feels really caught."

Katz told Zelis that he found the accuser and his siblings credible, though "it's a very bizarre story, to be honest with you."

BRON: www.thesmokinggun.com

quote:

Op woensdag 30 maart 2005 01:17 schreef Iwan1976 het volgende:

Daar denkt de expert heel anders over:

quote:

In a taped June 2003 telephone interview, Katz, 55, gave a Santa Barbara sheriff's investigator his "off the record" opinion of the 46-year-old entertainer. Jackson, Katz told Det. Paul Zelis, "is a guy that's like a 10-year-old child. And, you know, he's doing what a 10-year-old would do with his little buddies. You know, they're gonna jack off, watch movies, drink wine, you know. And, you know, he doesn't even really qualify as a pedophile. He's really just this regressed 10-year-old."

quote:

Cynthia Ann Bell contradicted a prosecution claim that Jackson ordered wine to be served in Coke cans and then shared the wine with the accuser. Bell said the idea of serving Jackson alcoholic beverages in soda cans was her idea, and that it became a routine on all of his flights because "Michael Jackson is a very private drinker."

She also described Jackson as a nervous flier who could not stand turbulence and sometimes had a flight land because of it. She suggested the drinking was to relieve his anxiety.

She said she did not see Jackson share his drink with anyone and that she saw the accuser sitting next to Jackson but that Jackson's children Prince and Paris were always either beside him or on his lap during the flight.

She also described the accuser on that flight as "loud, obnoxious, like 'Serve me my food, this isn't warm.' It was embarrassing to have him on board."