we need a new thread.

sosgemini said:

Nipsy - maybe.

Joan - haaiiillll naw.
She has no love for MJ.

Ok enough is enough

i know Mez wan'ts to keep this wittness as long as he can on the stand

but she's making a mockery of the court...

The mother of Michael Jackson’s accuser lashed out at the pop star from the witness stand Monday, declaring that Jackson “really didn’t care about children; he cared about what he was doing with children.”

The woman resisted answering questions by defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. and began her fourth day on the witness stand by making speeches to the jury.

She looked at Jackson and said, “He managed to fool the world. Now, because of this criminal case, people know who he really is.”

Source: Associated Press


She's unruly, not even following the directions of the prosecution.
The let loose a Canon-ball thats going to sink their case

Hell i haven't seen this woman testify and its obvious she's acting

Even Diane Dimond criticized the mother
AND THATS SAYING ALOT!

Screw the defenses case let the jury decide now...
This case is over...

It´s a shame that this thing is still going on. Leave MJ alone and LET HIM DO HIS MUSIC AGAIN!!!!!

dag said:

aight...now finally!! finally the brotha put the right colors, textures and patterns together on the same suite...

MJ likes to claim that his sleeping with little boys is completely innocent.
I've yet to see any of his Jackson brothers come forth & say
"Sure - I've let my 10 year old sleep with his Uncle Michael plenty of times."
Why doesn't MJ like to sleep with his nephews?
Or does the Jackson family draw the line there?
Where are the Jackson nephews with stories
of sleep-overs with Uncle Michael?

thedoorkeeper said:

Your not serious are you?


if im not mistaken he has had sleep overs with his nephews as well, that was way back in the day though
The police interviewed them as well, results came out negative...
Pedophiles don't stop molesting children because its incest,
Its a impulse that is triggered whenever a child is around...
this is why Pedophiles always have numerous victims, they don't discriminate.
Their is no such thing as the Common pedophile, but statistically they turn up Molesting their own children or nephews because those targets are easily apprehended...

lets get one thing straight, Pedophilia is something that is often demonized for the wrong reasons, when in actuality its a diseased triggered by a chemical imbalance much like Manic deppressives. Pedophiles have to prey on children. they can't help feeling attracted to them... Pedophiles who KNOW they are causing harm to society usually turn themselves in and have themselves castrated(liquidly). Because in order to cure pedophilia it takes years of psycholigical therapy, Expensive type.

The reason why this case is so fallable is because it doesn't mix with pedophilia research. The police believe Jackson is the common pedophile when in actuality their is no Common pedophile...
Police always assume their is and this why the false arrest of child abuse is at a rate of 69%
They keep arresting people trying to use regular police work... when no police work can really been done(outside of forensics) for child abuse cases, its more psychological


But you've got to be kidding right?
You seem somewhat interested , why don't you do your home work on child molestation and pedophilia...
Hell i did...

stop wasting time on the thread...

MODS btw its time to make another thread

http://www.cnn.com/2005/L...son.trial/

Jackson defense challenges accuser's mom over money, photos
Woman concludes five days of testimony
Tuesday, April 19, 2005 Posted: 3:28 PM EDT (1928 GMT)

SANTA MARIA, California (CNN) -- Michael Jackson's lead attorney on Tuesday continued to attack the credibility of the mother of the teenager accusing the pop star of molestation, questioning her about how she paid for plastic surgery and photographs from an alleged beating at the hands of store security guards.

Concluding five days of often-combative testimony, the woman left the witness stand after defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. tried to make one final assault on her credibility.

Trying to bolster the defense's contention that the accuser's mother used her son's bout with cancer to solicit money for her personal benefit, Mesereau asked her if she had paid for plastic surgery out of money raised for the boy.

"I used a credit card (for the surgery) ... which is still outstanding," she said.

The mother also admitted that in the fall of 2001, after the family had received money because of her son's illness, she talked to "a nice man " at a Los Angeles car dealership about buying a car. But she said she never went through with the purchase.

She also said she never had a discussion with comedian Louise Palanker about $20,000 she had given the family, which she said was arranged by her then husband. But she admitted that at his request, she endorsed one of Palanker's checks.

On the stand Monday, the mother had said she did not know how the money from Palanker had been used. But Tuesday, after an overnight conversation with prosecutor Ron Zonen, she said she remembered that the money was used to construct a special sterile room at her parents' home, where her son stayed while recovering from chemotherapy.

Zonen "refreshed my memory," she said.

Mesereau also questioned the mother about the authenticity of photographs taken from an altercation with security guards at a retail store, which led to a $152,000 civil settlement with the family in 2000.

In a deposition she gave in the lawsuit, the accuser's mother said she was "smashed like a cockroach," after being severely beaten by security guards. She and her husband were both arrested, and her parents came to the store to pick up their children, who also were injured in the melee.

On Tuesday, Mesereau produced a photograph of her face taken shortly after the incident that showed that while she had red marks, there were no bruises. She explained that the bruises developed later and that she had been wearing makeup when the photo was taken.

Mesereau then moved to pictures introduced Monday by the prosecution, which did show deep bruising on her face and body. She said those photos were taken later, at the suggestion of the defense attorney representing her on the criminal charges, which were eventually dropped.

Questioned about the photos, she first said her husband had taken her to a one-hour photo studio "immediately" after the incident. But when Mesereau pointed out that she did not have bruises at that point, she corrected the time frame to say that the photos were taken after they talked with the attorney.

The mother also said that she did not ask her parents to take her children for medical attention, even though both of her sons had been beaten in the fracas. She said she didn't suggest a trip to the hospital because her mother was good at "first aid."

However, her son -- the accuser -- had a broken elbow, and the boy's grandmother sought medical treatment for him because "it was beyond her capabilities," the mother said.

The altercation began when her son was accused of shoplifting items from the J.C. Penney store. The mother said she was in another store in the same shopping center, at an appointment for pre-employment drug screening, when she saw her husband being beaten by two guards and tried to intervene.

Mesereau pressed the woman about a statement she made to police after the altercation, in which she told them that her husband, whom she later divorced, abused her throughout their marriage. "Finally, I said something," she explained.

However, in her deposition, the woman had denied that husband had abused her, and she also said that she was late to her job appointment because she was kissing her husband outside in the car.

Asked by Mesereau about that seeming contradiction, the woman explained the kissing by saying she was excited about her new job and "he was my husband."

A grand jury indicted Jackson last year on charges of molesting the boy giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold him and his family captive in 2003. Jackson has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Dimond’s Benefits From Possible Civil Settlement MJSD Entry #11

As the prosecution experiences several setbacks throughout the past weeks, I have uncovered some information regarding the impropriety among several media pundits who have polluted the media atmosphere. Diane Dimond, a tabloid reporter who has placed her fangs into Jackson’s neck since 1993, has ties to a possible civil settlement after the criminal proceedings in this ‘case’.

She isn’t worth a di(a)mond or pearl...

I have been absent for the past weeks uncovering some disturbing information regarding Diane Dimond’s ties with Sneddon and a possible civil settlement after the process of these criminal proceedings.

To many case observers’ knowledge, Dimond has had a turbulent, questionable history and closeness to this ‘case’. After the termination of her tabloid-gossip show, Hard Copy in 94’, Dimond has associated herself to Jackson’s legal woes for the past decade.

Dimond was also reprimanded and eventually sued by Jackson in the late 90’s due to slander allegations against her. She has received a lot of ‘bullying’ by faithful Jackson supporters. However, that does not dismiss the fact that she had a stroke of luck on November 18th of 2003, when an arrest warrant was issued for Jackson, and another child-molestation case was activated.

Meet Joe...

Over the past 2 weeks, I have communicated with a well-known lawyer whose residence is in Chicago, Illinois. We conversed and discussed his outlook regarding Dimond’s persistence for her association within this case. When I informed this lawyer that I was reporting the substance of our conversation, he kindly requested that I do not disclose his name or personal information; he permitted that I report that he has worked closely to the Santa Maria government and had past ties with Diane Dimond in the late 90’s. So, we’ll respectfully refer to him as Joe.

Late last week, when Janet Arviso, under cross and direct examination claimed that she had no intention of filing a civil suit, Joe had a troubling doubt regarding that remark. However, I’ll refrain from discussing all possibilities and situations into where Arviso contradicts that statement.

Joe has obtained and sent me copies of secretive documents dated back to 1999, where he and Dimond had had a personal conflict that led to their emancipation months later. I have agreed and signed confidential agreements stating that I cannot leak these documents or directly take quotes from the text.

Within these documents that I’m not permitted to elaborate upon...yet, Joe explains meetings he has had with Sneddon and Dimond. The meetings conducted discussed about her signing a 5-year agreement. However, Dimond was referred to Larry Feldman, who, on November 20, 1999, signed an agreement with Sneddon about his benefits from the civil suit.

12 other people have also signed this deal between the District Attorney and Civil Lawyer. One of them, unsurprisingly, is...yes...you guessed it: Jason Francia.

Dimond won’t go home empty handed...

In all likelihood, Janet Arviso will file a civil suit with the assistance of Larry Feldman and cooperation of Sneddon.

Now, to rebut the claim that Arviso will not file this suit because it’s ‘not in her nature’, well, then one may ask...why the hell was she at Feldman’s in the first place? Forget, for a minute, about the fact that she went to him first before reporting abuse to the police...in all circumstances...she was still at the office of a CIVIL LAWYER!

According to these documents, Sneddon has agreed to give Dimond 3% of the money gained from the settlement. However, Sneddon emphasized that it would be a different situation if there was an acquittal. She would only receive 2% of that now POSSIBLE settlement.

A civil suit can obviously be filed regardless of the verdict within the trial. The prime example would be that O.J. Simpson was acquitted thus his accusers filed and won a $30,000,000 settlement.

If, for any reason, there was a conviction within this case, Dimond would pocket $420,000 from that settlement: 3%.

When Jackson is acquitted, Dimond will still pocket $280,000, the 2%.

Joe, who removed himself from Sneddon’s presence in December of 2004, also informed me that despite negotiations of the amount within the settlement and regardless of a conviction or acquittal, the Arvisos’ will aim for $14 million.

So, the unfair coverage by Dimond may result from her desperations for Jackson to be convicted.

Financial Ordeal Rumors

Meanwhile, Fox News’ Rita Cosby reported, Saturday, April 16th, that Jackson and his financial advisors will conduct a secret meeting at the Neverland premises regarding rumors that Jackson is having financial ordeals.

The conclusion of the basis of the meeting will determine if, according to Fox News’ Roger Freidman, Jackson would have to sell the Beatles ATV catalogue.

Stay tuned as MJSD will discuss more startling details of my conversation with Joe.

Copyright 2005 All Rights Reserved Jordan MJSD (copyright shmopyright! )

Luv4oneanotha said:

I wasn't commenting on molestation or pedophilia - I was commenting on the lack of support that I see from MJ's family. Sure mom & dad & an occassional sibling are there to add support but I thought there were nephews & nieces. Why does MJ enter the courtroom with Mom & Dad & not surrounded by his nieces & nephews? Who knows maybe they will pop up when the defense takes over. Heres a man who has made his love of children well known yet we seldom see or hear from the children in his family. I would think if my uncle were world famous I would step up with a statement proclaiming his innocence.
I find that odd.
Maybe the lawyers have done such a good job that they have convinced the family not to talk to the press since it always turns around & bites them on the ass.
Maybe the family is worried that if this all goes bad lets minimize the damage & not give the media extra material.
Just wondering - just thinking out loud.

And if you think thats a waste of your time - well tough shit.

thedoorkeeper said:

That's a different story...

mmm...

Jackson has alot of family...
and im sure the court restricts how many people are allowed to go to the preceedings
in the begginning everyone was there
Janet,Latoya,Marlon,Randy,Jermaine and jackie

now its just basically jackie marlon and katie and joe
The nephews support him...
but they all have lives of their own
plus im sure it hurts a great deal to see their uncle and brother go through this elongating procedure

but im not in the Jackson family so i can't comment on it...
Im sure they support him...

thedoorkeeper said:

You're just not up on it....You have to be a Jacksonite to really follow this stuff. The reporter Daphne Barrack has interviewed Tito's sons and sneddon boy's interviewed (harassed) Jermaine's youngest son Jermajesty

you know even good people can have sick, bad children.., so MJ fans shouldn't use this against Sneddon, I think.





*
[Edited 4/19/05 22:58pm]

Luv4oneanotha said:

Aww, poor widdle misunderstood pedophiles. They just need a hug.

Marrk said:

he would sell half of his half so he would be left with 1/4. good deal.
[Edited 4/20/05 7:55am]

Diane Dimond

(you know I am loving person )

http://www.sky.com/skynew...06,00.html

PROSECUTION ENDING CASE

The mother of Michael Jackson's alleged child abuse victim has finished her fiery and rambling testimony at his trial.

The end of Janet Arvizo's five days' evidence was followed by the winding up of the prosecution's case after two months of Jackson-bashing.


Prosecutor Tom Sneddon told the court in Santa Maria, California, that he plans to end his case next week.

And then the trial, which has often simmered but rarely boiled, is set to become the media circus many had predicted with the start of the defence and a roll call of showbiz superstars.

Jackson's lawyer, Thomas Mesereau, named actress Elizabeth Taylor, singers Stevie Wonder and Diana Ross and basketball star Kobe Bryant among potential witnesses.

The end of the prosecution case saw Ms Arvizo, mother Jackson's accuser Gavin, continuing to deny defence accusations that she makes a habit of falsely suing people.

Mr Mesereau had attempted to portray her as a swindler who used her son's cancer as a tool to con money out of the rich.

As Jackson, 46, left the court he was asked whether the end of the prosecution case, earlier than observers some had expected, was good news for him.

He replied: "I think it's going well, thank you."

The singer denies 10 charges relating to the abuse of Gavin and conspiracy to imprison his family.

Awwww, shit. It's about to jump off now. I expect to see some Moonwalking, a monkey flinging feces...something!

NadiaAdare said:

*u*
*u*