thedoorkeeper said:

You make it seem as if MJ was forcing her!
She didn't have to do a damn thing...
But when you throw money on a table, people no longer wan't to be respected

She threw away her respect
She threw away her humanity
She signed the dotted line to become a machine...
there was no gun to her head
she did it! and she did it with a smile too
because she was riding around L.A. in a benz

Face it...
She'd do anything for money...

thedoorkeeper said:

Nob!

MJ & Debbie have a near 20 year friendship behind them. I'm sure he has respect for her.

Let me put it this way - when you dump on Debbie Rowe you are being disrespectful to the woman MJ handpicked to be the mother of 2 of his children. If MJ picked such a low life bottom feeding money grubber to be the genes he wanted to share with that says a lot about MJ's lack of ability to judge other peoples character.
Making Debbie Rowe look bad makes MJ look bad.

SefraNSue said:

especially if his brothers DID and teased him about being "too young" or something.

Cloudbuster said:

yeah and for her uteru$ too.

thedoorkeeper said:

she has at least 2 important qualities for MJ: she's white and blonde.
*
[Edited 4/26/05 15:11pm]

That part of the first big article on Thread 9 is really how I've been feeling lately.

don´t worry, I am waiting for what she has to say. I wasn´t trying to say that I condemn her already. I was just saying that if she says that he´s a child molester than, I will.


thank you Love4onanotha
anyways, I don´t think that she´s that bad. At least till now, we´ll see what she says, I just couldn´t believe what I read after all she has been saying so far.
I also believe this Cloudy

that´s why I wouldn´t say that it proves MJ¨s incapability to judge ppl. I mean I also trust ppl I know for 20 years, don´t you? Cause if I didn´t trust someone I knew so long, who else could I trust in this world?

Anyways, if some of you feel that the MJ freaks are condemning everyone criticising MJ, than I don´t know how you can justify this:




Anyways, what happened in court yesterday?

CBS NEWS

The Jackson Trial Ex Factor

Andrew Cohen

It is every divorced person's nightmare. With your liberty on the line, your ex-spouse shows up in court holding the keys to your jail cell. She can help convince jurors that you are a relatively decent if troubled man or she can cement into place the perception prosecutors want jurors to have of you as a criminal and a freak. Welcome to Michael Jackson's world tonight, on the eve of the anticipated testimony of his ex-wife, the mercurial Debbie Rowe, who also happens to be the mother of two of Jackson's young children.

No one knows precisely what Rowe will say when she finally testifies under oath in Jackson's molestation and conspiracy trial. She is the last best witness for prosecutors and one of the trial's last great unknowns, a witness whose testimony is genuinely capable of producing an epic moment inside court. She comes to the stand, as prosecutors wind down their case, alternatively described as a human broodmare (for making a deal with Jackson to have and then leave their children) or as yet another victim of Jackson's seemingly insatiable penchant for creepy and poorly-ended relationships.

What will she say? Will she try to testify about her sexual relationship with Jackson while they were married? Will she try to say that she saw Jackson act oddly toward children in a way that is relevant to this trial? When she talks about what prosecutors say they want to focus her upon -- the defendant's pattern of trying to script public perception about his relationship with the alleged victim in the case -- will she play it up or smooth it down? Each word she uses in court will have special resonance. Aside from the alleged victim and his mother, Rowe will and should garner the most attention from jurors when she tells her story.

Prosecutors hope that she will corroborate the testimony of the alleged victim and his family, who told jurors, with varying degrees of reliability, that Jackson and his entourage had engaged in a series of pre- and post-molestation acts that smack of conspiracy and cover-up. For the District Attorney, Rowe is supposed to be an ace-in-the-hole, another vital figure in Jackson's life who comes to the stand and tells jurors that the only pattern they ought to pay attention to here involves Jackson's habit of controlling dissent among the people around him to the point of criminality.

Defense attorneys hope Rowe won't say much at all. They tried to convince Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville to keep her off the witness stand altogether and got from the judge a pledge to limit Rowe's testimony to certain specific areas of the narrative that go to the heart of the conspiracy case against Jackson. Even though Rowe says on videotape that Jackson is a great guy, the defense fears that Rowe's testimony about the making of that videotape, even if it is only remotely relevant to the core allegations against Jackson, will turn jurors irretrievably against him. A mother knows, right?

And Jackson? If you are Jackson tonight you have many reasons to be worried. First, Jackson and Rowe now are engaged in a nasty fight over their children together, the two kids whom Rowe conceived with Jackson, gave birth to, and then left in Jackson's care pursuant to a complex agreement between the couple. Jackson paid her to go away and leave the kids, which she did, until recently, when she quite understandably tried to re-assert her parental and custodial rights.

This ongoing legal battle (even the kids have been given attorneys) gives the defense ammunition to discredit Rowe's motives but it also gives Rowe plenty of reason to try as best she can to stick it to her ex. As CBS News trial analyst and Jackson expert J. Randy Taraborrelli said earlier this week, the lesson here is that you don't want to tick off your ex because you'll never know when you'll need her. It's a lesson that celebrities and commoners alike ought to heed and judges ought to repeat when granting divorce decrees.

Surely Jackson knew or should have known that he would and could use Rowe's help during the course of the trial. This makes it even more mystifying that Jackson would permit another dispute to have flared up between he and his ex. Apparently, Jackson has failed or refused to pay Rowe over $1 million in alimony over the past year. Sure, it is true that the fight gives the defense more impeachment ammunition. But maybe Jackson's lawyers wouldn't need as much impeachment ammunition if Rowe were a happier camper as far as Jackson is concerned. Maybe without all the ongoing legal disputes, Rowe might even have been a defense witness. Imagine how that dynamic might have altered the course of the trial.

Rowe will not make the prosecution's case or break Jackson's defense. But she is a person Jackson selected to bear his children and for that reason alone she will command star attention. Especially from jurors starved for another witness who can cut through the static of slippery information about Jackson's posse and focus instead on the defendant himself. Call it the Ex Factor. Call it the Revenge of the Mom. Call it another day when Jackson's past choices catch up to him.

http://www.cbsnews.com/st...1127.shtml

dag said:

Exactly.



And I'm no freak!

You know. If Michael would put on a dress and sexy lingerie I could consider doing him in a softly-lit room.

Freak!

thedoorkeeper said:

Like a, like a sex machine?

doctormcmeekle said:

Get up, get on up
Get up, get on up
Stay on the scene, like a sex machine

Jackson Videographer Didn't See Rehearsal

http://news.yahoo.com/new..._jackson_6

7 minutes ago

By TIM MOLLOY, Associated Press Writer

SANTA MARIA, Calif. - The man who recorded a video featuring the family of Michael Jackson's young accuser testified Wednesday at the pop star's child molestation trial that he did not see them reading or rehearsing from a script.

The testimony of Hamid Moslehi did not support an account by the boy's mother, who alleges she was forced to closely follow a script praising Jackson as part of a scheme in which her family was held captive to get their help in rebutting a damaging television documentary about Jackson.

Moslehi testified that the boy, his brother and sister were at his house for two or three hours before the taping began and he saw them playing but not rehearsing. He said the mother was there for about an hour before the taping and that he did not see her reading or rehearsing either.

Moslehi, Jackson's former videographer, also said he did not see anyone coaching the mother as she applied her makeup for the taping in his bathroom.

The woman has testified that Jackson associate Dieter Wiesner coached her on what to say.

Wiesner and associate Ronald Konitzer, who are named as unindicted co-conspirators in the case, were also the subject of Moslehi's testimony on Tuesday.

He said the two men became Jackson's managers in late 2002, a few months before they allegedly took part in a conspiracy to hold the family captive.

Prosecutors asked Moslehi about Wiesner and Konitzer to try to link them more closely to the singer. The mother of the accuser has testified that the German businessmen intimidated her family.

On cross-examination, Jackson defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. tried to show that Jackson was a victim of Wiesner and Konitzer, not a close associate.

Mesereau asked Moslehi if he knew that Wiesner and Konitzer had stolen close to $1 million from Jackson. The question drew a prosecution objection, and the judge did not allow a direct answer. When Mesereau repeated it without the dollar figure, the witness answered no.

It was not certain who would testify after Moslehi, but prosecutors were expected to soon call Jackson's ex-wife Debbie Rowe, who is in a family court battle with him over visitation of their two children.

She is expected to say that a video in which she praised Jackson was scripted, a claim the mother of Jackson's accuser has made about video also she recorded on the pop star's behalf.

On Monday, the judge overruled defense objections to allowing Rowe to testify but stressed he would "look to ways to restrict that testimony."

Jackson is accused of molesting a 13-year-old boy in February or March 2003, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold his family captive to get them to rebut "Living With Michael Jackson," in which the singer tells an interviewer he lets children sleep in his bed, though not in a sexual way.

Moslehi said when he shot the rebuttal video and other footage to be used in a TV show defending Jackson, Wiesner and Konitzer promised him a percentage of net profits. He said he received no profits, nor was he paid for his work. He said he received only a small part of $250,000 in invoices and has a suit pending against Jackson.

Moslehi said he filmed the accuser and his family three times and that after the third taping, he gave the accuser's mother $2,000 as a loan because he felt sorry for her.

Travel agent tells of plan to send Jackson accuser's family to Brazil
SANTA MARIA, Calif. (AP) — A travel agent testified in Michael Jackson's child molestation trial that a Jackson associate ordered her to arrange a one-way trip to Brazil for the singer's accuser and his family, then canceled the journey at the last minute.
Cynthia Montgomery was called Tuesday to support a prosecution claim that Jackson was planning to kidnap the accuser and his family and send them to Brazil for an indefinite period following a damaging February 2003 documentary in which the singer said he let children sleep in his bed.

Montgomery said the orders for the planned March 1, 2003, flight were given to her by Marc Schaffel, who is among Jackson associates named by prosecutors as unindicted co-conspirators.

At the last minute, Montgomery said, the travel plans were canceled by Schaffel, who told her "his plans had changed."

Jackson is accused of molesting a 13-year-old boy in February or March 2003, giving him alcohol, and conspiring to hold his family captive to get them to rebut the TV documentary "Living With Michael Jackson."

The accuser's mother has testified that she orchestrated her family's escape from Jackson's associates by claiming her children had to visit their grandparents before they could leave for Brazil. The mother has said the family left Jackson's Neverland estate for the last time on March 12, 2003.

On cross-examination, defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. asked Montgomery: "You never spoke to Mr. Jackson about any trip to Brazil at any time, is that correct?"

"That's correct," she said.

Montgomery, who testified under a grant of immunity, also acknowledged that she is at the center of a controversy involving the secret taping of Jackson and his former attorney Mark Geragos during a charter flight the pop star took to Santa Barbara to surrender on the molestation charges on Nov. 20, 2003.

She said she has been interviewed by the FBI and acknowledged that she is suing Jackson and Jackson is suing her over the incident. But she insisted she knew nothing of the taping until after it happened.

The FBI has said it is investigating the taping to determine whether there was a violation of federal law by surreptitious interception of communications.

On cross-examination, Mesereau immediately noted that Montgomery was testifying under immunity and quizzed her about the charter flight.

Also Tuesday, Jackson's former videographer testified that two men whom prosecutors have named as the singer's unindicted co-conspirators became his managers in late 2002, a few months before they allegedly conspired to hold the family captive.

Prosecutors asked Hamid Moslehi about Dieter Wiesner and Ronald Konitzer to try to link them more closely to the singer. The mother has testified that the German businessmen helped coerce her family into taking part in the rebuttal interview.

On cross-examination, Mesereau tried to show that Jackson was a victim of Wiesner and Konitzer, not a close associate.

Mesereau asked Moslehi if he knew that Wiesner and Konitzer had stolen close to $1 million from Jackson. The question drew a prosecution objection, and the judge did not allow a direct answer. When Mesereau repeated it without the dollar figure, the witness answered no.

Moslehi was expected to return to the stand Wednesday.

Contributing: AP Special Correspondent Linda Deutsch

What do you think Ms. Rowe will have to say??? Her reasons for testifying are questionable already. She wants the kids now. She got her money, now she wants the kids that she publicly stated she never wanted...

Debbie Rowe just admitted that there WAS NO SCRIPT.

Prosecutor asked: "Why did you want to be reaquainted with Michael and the kids?"

Debbie answered: "Because Michael is my friend"

From CNN: Debbie said Michael IS the father of Prince and Paris.

SefraNSue said:

Marrk said:

I guess I should just grab an MJ avatar now, since I also know who.

CinisterCee said:

I'm lost -who is this woman everyone's referring to?

I really thought rowe was going to get MJ
now i really have to question wtf is the prosecution doing?
this is bad!
this is real bad!

their are two more days of testimony
hopefully they can redeem themselves...

meow85 said:

Dirty Diana

lilgish said:

Ross?

meow85 said:

well it's not spencer, yes ross

lilgish said:

Ew.

Debbie 100% supported MJ yesterday. Are these prosecutors dumb or something? Why do they keep calling witnesses that make MJ look good?

MJ sure looked happy when he left court yesterday...

Glad to see his smile...
i remember back in 01 he couldn't move his upper lip lol

he does look very happy...
he knows he's close to moonwalking his way to an aquittal
and when that happens you know everyones gonna be pissed...
its gonna be a great day lol

Those are Jackson eyes.

WHOOO-HOOOOO Debbie hasn´t dissapointed!!!!


Mike looks incredibly HOT!!!!!