Created: Friday, 11 March 2005
Day 10 of Michael Jackson’s trial consisted of a series of motions from both sides. Mr. Jackson was not required to attend and remained at home to recuperate from a back injury, Friday, while his attorneys were in court battling prosecution efforts and questioning the relevance, to expose his private financial records. Judge Melville said he would allow only minimal evidence on Mr. Jackson’s financial condition, saying “I don’t want to inundate the jury with a lot of figures that don’t tell a story. I don’t think you can turn the jury into accountants.”
In spite of defense denials, Assistant District Attorney Gordon Auchincloss repeated his assertions that Mr. Jackson is in “financial peril” and all of his troubles “will all come crashing down on him in December of 2005.”
Defense attorney Robert Sanger angrily objected to Auchincloss’ technique of providing “sound bites for the media” in his arguments rather than addressing issues pertinent to the case. He said the prosecutor’s focus on Mr. Jackson’s finances has no relevance to his finances in 2003, the year at issue in the trial.
The judge responded: “I do not wish to extend this trial with a lot of emphasis on his finances,” and Auchincloss finally agreed that “all we are looking for is a concise snapshot of the defendant’s financial condition.”
Judge Melville suggested that is all he will allow. He said he understood the prosecution theory that Mr. Jackson had reason to “take drastic actions to protect his image” after the airing of a damaging documentary called “Living With Michael Jackson.”
But he urged lawyers to confer and reach an agreement by next Thursday on the issue of financial records.
Defense attorneys also requested that the sexual conduct of two of the complaining witnesses be brought into evidence. It is, as yet, unclear as to who these ‘complaining witnesses’ might be. The judge refused the motion to consider the female complaining witness, but advised Attorney Susan Yu, who prepared the motion, that he would consider it if she added a missing detail.
Mr. Jackson’s spokeswoman Raymone Bain told The Associated Press that Mr. Jackson continued to be in pain Friday from a back injury that caused him to be late for court on Thursday, an incident that incurred the judge’s wrath. There was no discussion of the matter in court Friday.
Meanwhile, Melville issued a number of other rulings, among them:
-He said that comedian Jay Leno, an expected witness in the molestation trial, can continue to crack jokes at Mr. Jackson’s expense as long as he doesn’t discuss the facts of his testimony.
-He refused to let the jurors take a field trip to Mr. Jackson’s Neverland estate. Mr. Jackson lawyer Thomas Mr. Mesereau Jr. said it was essential for jurors to see the locations that have been central to testimony. “I don’t think there’s ever been a crime scene that cries out for a jury view more than this,” Mr. Mesereau said, adding that he did not believe video “snippets” of tapes were adequate to give a proper impression of Neverland. The judge said the jury was seeing enough through videotapes. “I’ve never seen so many videotapes,” he said, “and I’m sure I haven’t seen the end of them.”
-Judge Melville rejected a request by media attorney Theodore Boutrous Jr. to release video exhibits in the case for broadcast by TV outlets. “The public funds the courts, and the public has the right to see this evidence,” said Boutrous. The judge said those who want to see the videos can come to court. Boutrous said he will appeal the ruling.
-Judge Melville reiterated that he won’t let the defense “relitigate” a lawsuit brought by the accuser’s mother against J.C. Penny stores that resulted in her receiving a $150,000 settlement after claiming sexual abuse and battery. The defense seeks to show the family has a history of making false claims to get money.
-The judge said rulings he has made in the past about testimony involving comedian George Lopez will stand, but added, “There is more involvement with Mr. Lopez and his family than was originally thought, and you might want to call him (as a witness) for other purposes.” He did not elaborate.
Recent Comments