Michael Jackson's Trial just got 5 times larger

[Trauma-san]

Michael's judge ruled today that the prosecution can bring in Testimony from 5 of the 7 children Michael has a 'history' with, including two boys that Michael gave a large sum of money to against molestation charges. 

The defense attorney, Thomas Mesereau warned the judge that the defense would absolutely make each child a mini-trial, and said "You cannot stop us from using a full blown defense, and I mean that".


So, we're finally going to get the story once and for all, if Michael really did molest a kid in 1993.  Then we'll learn if the maid who accused Michael shortly after that, of molesting her kid 3 years before, was lying or not. 

The other three children are simply kids Michael's known and been close friends with.  The prosecution claims that they show a pattern of 'grooming' children to be molested.... but the problem is, all 3 of them are close personal friends of Michael's, and have consistantly said nothing ever happened.  The first is MaCaualay Culkin, who's already said he'll testify for Michael. 

I'm kind of glad it's going down like this.  If Michael gets aquitted of ALL of these charges, then nobody's got the right to talk any shit, ever again.  This is exactly what he needed, but it's gonna be a long hard fight.  I'll bet they'll still be in trial in september. 

[Elevz]

I'm kind of glad it's going down like this.  If Michael gets aquitted of ALL of these charges, then nobody's got the right to talk any shit, ever again.  This is exactly what he needed, but it's gonna be a long hard fight.  I'll bet they'll still be in trial in september. 

Nah, most people who now think he's guilty will probably always keep on thinking that. Actually, while reading ur story, I'm starting to think there's no way the judges are going to decide he's guilty.

Props once again for keeping us up to date.

[chronic01]

thanks for the update i always check here for new shit on the trial

[Darksider]

thanks...

[red]

this shit is getting out of hand.  thanks for the info.

['EclipZe]

lol this shit is like a never ending story

[Gangstauu]

good, hes guilty
Why pay a kid 26 million dollar (or something like that) when ya haven't done anything

[KURUPTION-81]

good, hes guilty
Why pay a kid 26 million dollar (or something like that) when ya haven't done anything

peace of mind, the fact he would not have to face a year long trial with a media circus like the one that is happening now. People always go on about it been 26 mil , it seems like its a lot of money but to mj it was nothing and i believe it was 12 mil anyway. He prob made that just on endorsments from the dangerous tour the same year.

[Trauma-san]

How many people in America think "We should leave terrorists alone, and they won't bug us"?  It's the same thing.  Michael thought if he just appeased these people, they'd go away.

Think about it.  You have a boy in 93 accuse him, he pays him off.  You have another mom, accuse him of doing something three years before, immediately following the first case (she didn't say anything had happened until the other kid got his settlement)... so Michael pays her 2 million dollars too.  Finally, you have another kid start saying things in 03, Michael fights it.

It's really not that big of a deal, he twice made a bad decision, and now he's fighting it after being burned, twice.  He's not gonna let it happen a third time, and incidentally through the court, all the evidence of the first two cases is going to come out, to either clear his name or condemn him. 

[Trauma-san]

I've been reading up more on the situation, and this is actually a very, very good thing for the defense, particularly an incredible defense attorney like Thomas Mesereau. 

Anyways, the boys in question, there are 6 total.  One is the current accuser; one is the boy that Michael paid off 20 million dollars or whatever... that boy refuses to testify.  His mom's going to be there, but she hasn't seen her son in 11 years.  So no direct testimony in that case, only 3rd person, from a woman who wasn't even around to witness any kind of abuse.  The third boy is the one where his mom was a maid, and sued Michael, AFTER the first boy, for something that happened 3 years earlier... she later sold her story to "Hard Copy", and dramatically changed her story of the events that supposedly happened... she's also sold her story outside of the U.S., with further details that weren't in the first two stories, when they upped the price they'd pay her for her story, the hand slipped into the pants, so to say.  Just disgusting shit.

The Fourth, Fifth, and Six boys all three will testify for Michael that nothing ever happened, one is Macaulay. 

He has 9 witnesses to alleged 'innapropriate behavior", but yet he's trying to present in the trial, that Michael has an elaborate scheme set up to molest these kids, but yet he let 9 people SEE it?  They're not even going to testify that they saw anything... they're going to testify stuff like "I saw Michael lick Macaualay's head".  I can hear Mesereau now "Have you ever kissed a child's boo-boo, Ms. Walker?"  LOL  What the fuck? The guy licks a kid on the head, and they string him up on child molestation charges?  If that makes you a molestor, I'm guilty, I think you could probably find VIDEOTAPE of me licking or kissing kids, and I'm not even famous.

Another interesting thing is; this is CLEAR evidence that the prosecution's case is WEAK, WEAK, WEAK.  This won't be lost on Thomas Mesereau, he'll pound into the jury's head, that the D.A.'s office is presenting these boys to try and make it look like Michael is a child molestor, but yet THEY DON'T FILE CHARGES. 

Now; if Sneddon really believed Michael had done anything to any of these other 5 boys, why doesn't he file charges?  If you cannot file charges against Michael, Mr. Sneddon, then you have no case.  If you CAN file charges, but didn't, then you're letting innocent people get abused at the hands of a molestor.  Which one is it?

The boys obviously have no evidence that Michael did anything to them, or there would be a court case on those charges.  That they're being drug out into THIS court case, shows just how weak even THIS case that finally made it to court is. 

Only the boy in the current case, and the Maid's son from the fake ass "he abused me three years ago" case are going to testify.  Mesereau has already ripped the accuser, and the accuser's family to SHREDS on cross-examination, he'll destroy someone trying to remember things that allegedly occured 15 years ago... ESPECIALLY since in my opinion, the abuse never happened.  When that guy gets on the stand, in front of one of the greatest lawyers in the country, and tries to remember exactly who he lied to and about what, the entire case is going to fall apart. 

[Matrix Heart]

Thanks for nothing retard.

Some1 should just snipe michael jackson already.

[-CaliKid-]

Thanks for nothing retard.

Some1 should just snipe michael jackson already.

 

[The Watcher]

they were saying on the news here, that they have 6 kids lined up, but they're only letting one testify? what kinda shit is that? if they're takin all 6 kids to court, all 6 should be allowed to testify wether he molested them or not

[Trauma-san]

^ That's the thing.  3 aren't gonna testify, because they're not cooperating with the prosecution, because they say nothing happened.  They WILL testify for the defense, though.

One is the kid that's in the lawsuit now, so he'll testify.

One is the kid who settled in 1993, he refuses to testify.

One is the kid who's mom used to work for Michael, he'll testify.

The reason most aren't testifying is, it's a weak case.  The charges are made up allegations, and they don't want to get cut apart on the cross exam.  There's nothing in it for them to want to testify... and if it DID happen, why didn't the D.A. charge Michael with these?  ... because there's no proof it ever happened, that's why. 

[Trauma-san]

Yesterday's Testimony:

Jamie Mesada, owner of the laugh factory, basically didn't have anything to say, only that he was the one who got Michael involved, since the kid wanted to meet him.  So he called Quincy Jones and asked if Michael would call the kid.  The court laughed during his testimony, at one point from the Witness strand, Masada said "No, this is the first time I've seen him" then looked at Michael and said "How are you doing?" and Michael waved back at him, LOL.


The prosecution got yet ANOTHER blow, and ANOTHER fucked-up testimony, when they brought Michael's flight attendant to the stand.  The prosecution had claimed that she saw the boy drink wine out of a pepsi can Michael gave the boy, but the flight attendant claimed the exact opposite.  According to her (and I've gotta wonder why the prosecution even called her up? Are they crazy?)... according to her, it was HER idea to put Michael's wine in a coke can, because she said "Michael's a very private drinker"... and that she never saw Michael give the can to the boy, and that Michael's children sat beside him or on his lap the whole trip.  (The prosecution was trying to push that Michael would give the kid wine when his kids weren't around).

She also said that the accuser was a total asshole on the flight, ordering her to reheat food, and things like that.  As she left, she gave Michael a handshake. 

SHE ALSO claimed that the boy's sister (who last week testified she saw Michael give the boy a drink, and that she never drank except when Michael gave it to her in her cellar)... she testified that the sister, then 16, asked for Wine.  She carded the girl, then served it to her... (apparently the girl had a fake I.D.).  LOL  This just keeps getting better. 

And these are the PROSECUTION'S witnesses.  Wait until the DEFENSE gets to call some witnesses.  It's like a fucking circus. 

Her testimony that the kid was an asshole is to show that the kid is street-smart, and wouldn't allow a grown man to molest him in the first place.  I think the defense is doing good to continue to portray the kid (through the prosecution's own witnesses) this way.