Created: Tuesday, 12 April 2005
Tuesday, April 12, 2005 On Day 30 of Michael Jackson’s trial the stepfather of his accuser testified that. Today’s proceedings adjourned at 11:30 a.m, three hours earlier than usual.
The stepfather took the stand as the prosecution shifted from witnesses who alleged past improprieties by Mr. Jackson back to the current allegations. The man, who married the boy’s mother in 2004, more than a year after the sex abuse accusations surfaced, never met Mr. Jackson and did not witness any molestation by the 46-year-old superstar.
Part of the stepfather’s testimony dealt with the period leading up to Feb. 19-20, 2003, when the boy, his brother, sister and mother made a rebuttal video in which they praised Mr. Jackson. Mr. Jackson’s defense team has poured scorn on the stepfather’s portrayal of the family as powerless captives and suggested that the family themselves had sought a reward in return for making the video statement.
The stepfather testified he began asking Mr. Jackson associate Frank Tyson what monetary compensation there was for the family if they participated in the rebuttal video. Tyson has been named by prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in Mr. Jackson’s case.
As the conversation continued, the witness said, Tyson “said he was going to offer a college education and a house.” The stepfather said he told Tyson the family did not need a house or college, and asked, “What are you offering them monetarily?”
At that point, the witness said, Tyson replied, “Are you trying to blackmail us?”
On cross-examination, Mr. Jackson’s lawyer Tom Mr. Mesereau suggested that the stepfather had deemed the house and college education “not enough” payment for the family’s cooperation.
The stepfather said he had no idea there was any information that could be used for blackmail. He also said he received “zero” money from Mr. Jackson. He did however admit to conducting ‘negotiations’ for large amounts of money with a British tabloid to sell stories regarding Mr. Jackson.
(Excerpt from Court Transcript)
MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Now, at one point you indicated that you spoke to Frank Tyson and wanted to know what the family was going to get out of the rebuttal video, right?
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: Yes, sir.
MR. MESEREAU: And you actually mentioned at one point to Tyson that, “You’re making millions out of this. What is this family going to get?” Right?
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: In — in essence, I did say that.
MR. MESEREAU: And I believe you said that Mr. Tyson offered a house and a college education; is that correct?
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: First he offered protection. Then he said he was going to offer a tutor. Then he was going to offer a house and a college education.
MR. MESEREAU: And you, in effect, said to Mr. Tyson, “That’s not enough,” right?
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: That would be incorrect.
MR. MESEREAU: First you said, “You guys are making millions and this family’s not getting anything,” right? Right?
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: Are you asking me the question now to answer?
MR. MESEREAU: Yes.
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: Okay. I said basically that, “I understand that they’re making four to five million dollars on this documentary. In my perception, that you should compensate this family for helping out in this video.”
MR. MESEREAU: And at the end of that conversation, you in effect communicated to Frank a house is not enough, right?
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: That was not the way it came across, no, sir.
MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Did you accept the house?
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: I still don’t have it, no. I don’t see the house yet.
MR. MESEREAU: Are you still looking for it?
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: I’m not even looking for it.
MR. MESEREAU: Okay. And are you telling the jury that there was no response to your comment that, in effect, somebody’s making four to five million dollars and the family’s not getting any money?
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: His response was, “Well, how about” — “I’m going to protect the family. We’re going to protect the family.”
MR. MESEREAU: Right.
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: “We’re going to give them a house. We’re going to give them a college education.” And I said, “Frank, but what are you going to do financially or monetarily for this family?”
(End of Excerpt from Court Transcript)
The stepfather described a tumultuous time in February 2003 when the mother and children was whisked off to Florida, purportedly to hold a news conference with Mr. Jackson, returned and taken to Neverland, then brought back to Los Angeles.
During that period, he said they gave an audio interview to a private investigator, filmed the rebuttal video and were interviewed by child welfare authorities.
Prosecutors allege the molestation occurred near the end of the family’s purported captivity.
“And in the middle of all this turmoil, to your knowledge, molestation began on the 20th (of February)?” Mr. Jackson’s attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. asked incredulously. The judge sustained an objection and the question was not answered.
(Excerpt from Court Transcript)
MR. MESEREAU: .when Janet and the children went to Miami - okay? —
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: Yes, sir.
MR. MESEREAU: — your understanding was they were going to film some kind of rebuttal for Michael Jackson -
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: Or press conference, right.
MR. MESEREAU: — Right? No, you said rebuttal.
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: I said rebuttal, but it’s the same thing. It was going to be a press conference that they were going to do to rebut what was being done — what had been — what was going to be said in the “Living with Michael Jackson.”
MR. MESEREAU: You said they were going to film a rebuttal, right?
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: Yes, sir.
MR. MESEREAU: And you said at that time Janet believed Michael Jackson was innocent, correct?
ACCUSER’S STEPFATHER: That is correct, sir.
(End of Excerpt from Court Transcript)
The stepfather said when the boy returned from Neverland for the last time his behavior was markedly changed.
Asked by the prosecution to describe the change in the boy, the stepfather said, “He’d become mean. He was using curse words. He had never done that before.”
He also said of the boy, “He was acting very cocky, kind of rude, actually. I don’t think he wanted to see me. It was almost like, ‘What are you doing here?'”
On cross-examination, Mr. Mesereau noted the accuser’s previous disciplinary problems at school, and then played for jurors a Feb. 16, 2003, audio tape in which the accuser’s mother lauds Mr. Jackson as being “like a father … unselfish, kind, exhibiting unconditional love.”
During the 20-minute tape, the stepfather rocked in his chair, occasionally rolled his eyes and shook his head.
During the family’s final trip to Neverland, the stepfather said, he heard little from them until the mother called him asking to meet at a Los Angeles area nail salon. There, he found her looking distressed and accompanied by her son and another Jackson associate.
The associate told him that the mother was not allowed to leave. “I said ‘Are you saying I can’t take her out of here?.’ He said ‘I’ve got to check on that,”‘ the stepfather told the jury. Ultimately, the mother went to her home and the boy went back to Neverland but returned home for the final time the very next day.
The man also conceded that while at the nail salon he was only blocks from a federal building and from his work — places where Mr. Mesereau suggested he could easily have sought help.
Mr. Jackson’s lawyers say the family voluntarily stayed at Neverland in the lap of luxury, were treated to shopping expeditions and beauty salon treatments at the singer’s expense and never tried to call for help.
The accuser and his two siblings have already testified to their alleged luxurious incarceration.
When he continues his cross examination Wednesday, lead defense attorney Thomas Mesereau is certain to stress that the stepfather spoke several times with a British tabloid that was offering 15,000 dollars for the family’s story.
The prosecution said Monday it would call the accuser’s mother as early as Tuesday after some legal problems with her testimony, regarding extensive welfare fraud, are resolved.
Recent Comments