sosgemini said:

He should do himself a solid and not dress to fit the image painted by his prosecutors.

namepeace said:

but that could work against him too though...i recall watching something where a defense lawyer was saying you want the jury to be reminded that your client is a celebrity...so, i can see how the crazy accessories might be doing just that..

but it still looks butt ugly..i think he should have went for a real tailored armani look.....

sosgemini said:

I understand that too, but he dresses in this wacky Victorian military-style dress which seems to suggest that he considers himself royalty. I'm with you . . . he can dress the part of a megastar without all the drama he has on every day.

(It may seem picky to criticize the man's dress, but everything is important when 12 people hold your life in their hands . . .)

namepeace said:

Or, maybe he's just being himself... and has decided to continue being himself. Have you ever seen MJ dress "normal" by our standards?

June7 said:

he seemed to o just fine until the success of Thriller got to his head....

June7 said:

Look, every day, you have cats who have never worn suits in their lives suiting up to go to court. Because they realize a jury is watching and will judge them based on their appearance.

Wearing a pinpoint collar and tie, sans armband, doesn't take away MJ's talents. He's a defendant in a criminal trial. It's a small price to pay for him look better in the eyes of a jury. I hope the jury is open minded enough not to convict him for his fashion sense, but it could happen! And if I'm MJ or an MJ fan I'd want to take NO CHANCES.

This ain't metaphysics or philosophy, this is real, however unfair it may be (or seem) to MJ and his fans.

I am with June on this one.

OK, let´s see who dressed him today...



BTW I love the relationship that Mike and his parents seem to have these days! I love the way MJ is always such a gentleman. A lot of today´s celebrities have a lot to learn from him.

Look what I found guys.




LOS ANGELES TIMES

Splendor in the court

Two designers work long hours creating the clothes Michael Jackson wears at his trial.

By Booth Moore
Times Staff Writer

May 24, 2005

They are the men behind the Man in the Mirror. For nearly 20 years, L.A.-based costume designers Michael Bush and Dennis Tompkins have quietly designed most of Michael Jackson's personal and concert tour wardrobes, tens of thousands of pieces.

They created the war-torn black shirt and pants he wore in the "Man in the Mirror" video and the rhinestone-encrusted American flag jacket he wore during a Washington, D.C., concert to support the victims of Sept. 11. And, since February, they have been outfitting Jackson for what could be his most important performance yet — in a Santa Maria courtroom.

Each day, Bush wakes at 3 a.m. to drive the day's outfit — typically a colorful print vest and a suit with military details — from his home studio in Los Feliz up the 101 Freeway to Neverland Ranch. There, between 6 and 7 a.m., he dresses Jackson, who always says "Thank you" and gives him a hug, Bush says. The designer returns by midafternoon, in time to help Tompkins put the finishing touches on the next day's look. Tompkins makes most of Jackson's costumes with a single fitting. The pair create his courtroom wardrobe using the "Michael mannequin," built to the singer's exact dimensions.

Perhaps what they are most proud of is that Jackson has never worn the same thing twice.

"We have two or three tailors around town making jackets because we can't make them fast enough," Bush says, sitting in his workroom next to a pair of Jackson's crystal-covered ankle boots.

They try to get to sleep by 9 p.m., but sometimes they're up till 11. "And we photograph everything. That, we learned out of fear because we would make something for Michael and he would call us later to ask for a double. Maybe an outfit goes to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland or Madame Tussaud's in London, and he wants one to keep for himself."

Jackson, who is facing charges of child molestation, has been criticized in this paper and elsewhere for his flamboyant courtroom attire — reactions the designers say are unfair. "If anybody else wore it, there wouldn't be any comment," says the silver-haired Tompkins.

"The other day on TV, Bruce Willis had on a bright orange suit. Robin Williams wears suits with threads hanging off them and red ties. But nobody comments because of who they are. If Michael Jackson showed up at court in a funeral suit, an Armani, people would wonder what he is hiding."

And the pajamas? "He was in the hospital that day. And what does everyone wear in the hospital? Pajamas," says Bush. "I understand the judicial pinstripe mentality," he goes on. "But that is a part of life Michael has never experienced. So we had to figure out how he could still be Michael Jackson and fit into that mold."

They began this latest wardrobe project as they had the others — with research. "We buy every magazine in the world — men's, women's, children's, interior design, anything with visual images," Bush says. "Then we all sit spread-eagle on the floor looking for ideas. Dennis gets out his sketchpad and pencil and starts sketching. It's collaborative. [Jackson] is very open to suggestions."

The pop star's directive is always a demanding one: "This is what the world's wearing; top it."

"We started with the white suit, and everyone went crazy," Bush says, referring to the outfit Jackson wore on the first day of his trial. "So we went to dark suits, the navy blues, the blacks, the gray pinstripes, then we put the red double-breasted blazer on him — well, the world stopped. The red coat got half a page in all the papers."

The vests that have become conversation pieces during the trial are made from silk from India, jacquards from Europe and faux reptile fabric from … downtown L.A. Some have rhinestones down the front, others brass buttons.

Jackson loves military details, Bush says. "Uniforms demand attention. They have clean lines, and they fit almost like dance clothes. They are like a second skin."

Jackson is a frequent customer of British Collectibles Ltd., a shop in Santa Monica. "With all the fine enamel work, British medals are almost like jewelry," says Tompkins. So over the years, the designers too have amassed a large collection of uniforms, helmets and books on military regalia — all in the name of research.

Rather than a political statement, the armbands made from gold wire ribbon and sewn onto the right sleeves of Jackson's jackets are meant to act as a visual pull, Bush says.

"Showtime" is a word that the designing duo uses often. "When we get together with Michael, it's showtime," Bush says, with a glint in his eyes. Apparently some of their ideas are too over the top, even for Jackson. "He's pulling back and saying 'No, no, no,' and we're going, 'Yes, yes, yes.' And then I get to Carpinteria in the morning and wonder if it's too much. We are used to making dance clothes," Bush says with a grin.

Tompkins points to a baby blue brocade vest that's in the running for a courtroom outfit. "Sometimes I look at things we do and I think that I would wear them," he says. "But we can't afford our clothes." Rather than keeping the designers on retainer, Jackson pays for items individually. And Bush and Tompkins do have other clients.

A former ice dancer, Tompkins started his career in Hollywood as a cutter and fitter working in the costume department at ABC on shows such as "General Hospital." During the summer of 1985, while on hiatus from the network, he got a call to work on "Captain EO," the science fiction short directed by Francis Ford Coppola and produced by George Lucas. "I didn't want to do it, but Michael [Bush] said it was a great opportunity."

John Napier was the designer on the project, but Tompkins was the mechanic who turned his sketches into three-dimensional garments. During the filming at Laird International Studio in Culver City, Jackson took note of Tompkins' talent, especially for making pants cut for dancers. "When he tried them, he said, 'I can dance in these; I can move in these!' " Tompkins remembers. It was the beginning of a long relationship.

Bush, who grew up in Ohio and worked in Las Vegas as a bartender and blackjack dealer before moving to L.A. in the 1980s, joined the "Captain EO" production soon after Tompkins. "When I first told my mom I got the job, she asked me who Michael Jackson was."

After "Captain EO" wrapped, the pair began building costumes for Jackson's music videos. "It turned into a weekly job, a daily job and an hourly job. Then there were about five or 10 years when we exclusively touched Michael. We lost all our other clients," Bush says.



The chrome robot outfit Jackson wore during the 1996 HIStory World Tour was a challenge. "We made a cast for the chest that breaks away onstage to reveal his dance clothes underneath," Tompkins said. For the 1992 Dangerous World Tour, they crafted 18-karat gold leg pieces.

Though Jackson's clothes appear extravagant, price is an issue, Bush says. "He's a businessman. A lot of people assume money means nothing to him, but that's not true." Over the years, the designers have used wool, silk, canvas, ripstop nylon, silver, gold, British regalia, police badges, even car parts from the Pomona Swap Meet. They made a jacket with closures crafted from V-8 hood ornaments and another festooned with badges from European race car clubs. "He kept us so busy that every time we touched something, we wondered if we needed it, if it could be turned into something," Bush says.

Jackson once called in the middle of the night with a question: "What's the one thing that every man, woman and child in the world knows?" Bush says he asked. Mickey Mouse was the first thing that came to Bush's mind. But eating utensils were what Jackson was thinking. "He said, 'How are you going to make that into clothing for me?' "

The result was a jacket with knives, forks and spoons hanging from the front like fringe. "Michael calls it his dinner jacket," Bush says. "That's the humor, the human side that no one knows."

As the pair bring out Jackson's tour books for show-and-tell, ticking off his likes (corduroy) and dislikes (being touched too much), they lament being known only for working with the music legend.

"We will go into a job interview and they'll say, 'We don't need military clothes,' " Bush says. "But we can do so much more."

They have designed costumes for Britney Spears, including the red jumpsuit with a sprayed-on look that she donned in the "Oops I Did It Again" video. ("She had to use a whole can of baby powder to get into it," Tompkins recalls.) They created the leather evening gown that Denzel Washington's wife, Pauletta, wore to the Golden Globes in 2001. They also made a coat out of fish skin for Elizabeth Taylor to wear to her 60th birthday party at Disneyland.

And in the corner of their studio is a crystal-covered gown that debuted on a model at a charity fashion show earlier this month. "It's about 17 pounds. We sewed each crystal on one by one with fishing line," Bush says. "That's [also] the kind of detail Michael demands."

Even as the designers ponder a future that may not include the King of Pop (they have launched a line of vests similar to Jackson's under the name Vested Interest), they can't stop talking about him.

"Nowadays there's not much of a demand for costumes because things in movies and TV are store-bought," Bush says. "That's why we have been so gifted with Michael. Because it is always showtime."

http://www.calendarlive.c...6368.story

AP

Jackson Accuser's Mom Accused of Fraud

By LINDA DEUTSCH

SANTA MARIA, Calif. - The defense in Michael Jackson's child molestation trial Monday painted the mother of his accuser as a welfare cheat who exploited her son's cancer for money, and lived lavishly at Jackson's expense at a time she claims she was being held captive.

The defense called witnesses to show a history of money schemes and her angry rejection of anyone who sought to help her with anything but cash.

The mother's former sister-in-law said her efforts to hold blood drives when the accuser was ill with cancer were dismissed by the mother, who called her and used profanity to denounce her.

"She told me that she didn't need my (expletive) blood, that she needed money," said the former sister-in-law, bursting into tears.

The defense, seeking to show Jackson was another target of such schemes, called a flurry of witnesses as it neared the end of its case. Jackson's attorneys were expected to call comedian Jay Leno on Tuesday, with the possibility they would rest by the end of the day.

Jackson, 46, is accused of molesting a 13-year-old boy in February or March 2003, plying him with alcohol and conspiring to hold the family captive to get them to rebut an embarrassing documentary.

The boy appeared in the documentary with Jackson, who said he let children sleep in his bed, but that it was non-sexual.

The defense also called a welfare worker who said the mother did not disclose on a welfare application that her family just 10 days earlier had received funds from a $152,000 lawsuit settlement.

Also, an accountant showed the family racked up $7,000 in shopping, dining and other expenses paid by Jackson during a week of their alleged captivity.

Mercy Manriquez, an employee of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services, testified she handled the mother's Nov. 15, 2001, application for assistance. The application, signed by the accuser's mother, said the woman had no other sources of income and no assets.

Manriquez testified a person who willfully excludes sources of income from the forms is committing fraud.

Before the mother testified in the trial, she invoked Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination on the welfare issue and was not required to talk about it. However, Judge Rodney S. Melville allowed the defense to present records and testimony about it to jurors.

The jury was shown checks for $769 each in monthly payments that were deposited in the bank account of the woman's then-boyfriend, who is now her husband.

The accountant, Mike Radakovich, said he was hired by the defense to analyze records regarding the settlement of a lawsuit against J.C. Penney. The accuser's family had sued the department store chain, complaining they were beaten by security guards.

Radakovich said the total amount of the settlement was $152,000, of which portions went to the woman's three children, to her former husband and toward attorneys' fees.

The mother's share was $32,307, which was deposited into an account for the benefit of one of her sons, who then had cancer, Radakovich testified. That boy would later become Jackson's accuser.

Within days, however, Radakovich said, most of the money had been withdrawn and was used to buy a cashier's check for $29,000 written to a Ford dealership.

The mother testified previously in the trial she considered buying a car with the money but never did. There was no evidence the check was ever cashed.

The defense also called a community newspaper editor who testified she ran a story about the accuser's medical plight and discovered later she had been "duped."

"It was a story I didn't want to do but (the mother) played on some sympathies in the office so I assigned it," said Connie Keenan, editor of the Mid Valley News. After the story ran, the mother wanted another one, the editor said.

"The mother wanted an additional story because she didn't make enough money from the original story _ those are her words, not mine," Keenan testified.

http://www.news-tribune.n...97btg5.txt

dag said:

The man who showed up for his criminal trial in pajama pants needs to use even more discretion as to how he dresses in court from here on out.

dag said:[quote]


what you talking about willis? a lot of celebrities dont have to go to court for a child molestation trial....

and i dont see how mj comes off as a gentleman..i see a mother who is looks sad and a father who looks frustrated and a son who is ignorant to the fact that his stupid actions have forced his parents to show up to court. every single day. because if they dont (which has happened a couple times) all the media gets excited and starts claiming that the family isnt supporting mj. and the jury would start to think the same thing. THIS IS PART OF THE SHOW FOLKS!! has nothing to do with mj's relationship is...(strong or weak)...

this isnt anything special or something we should be happy about...this is a damn shame...and mj is the only one to blame for whats going on.

PERIOD!!

that is a way to look at it. I don´t agree, but I won´t argue with you. I am going to bed. good night!

Kimmel Does Leno Doing Jackson
by Joal Ryan
May 24, 2005, 1:15 PM PT
back to story

Jay Leno. Chris Tucker. Jimmy Kimmel.

For a trial rife with unfunny accusations, the Michael Jackson child-molestation case took a detour into the comedy clubs Tuesday.

Leno took the stand. Tucker took the stand. And Kimmel took to the TV set to play Leno on E!'s nightly reenactment of the Jackson trial. (E! Online is a division of E! Networks.)

Amid all this was the expectation that the defense team could rest its case by the afternoon. But with Tucker taking the stand late in the day, the comic had only begun his testimony when the proceedings wrapped. He's now due back in the Santa Maria, California, courthouse Wednesday.

First things first: Leno testified about his own dealings with Jackson's young accuser.

The Tonight Show host talked of receiving phone messages from the boy when the child was ailing with cancer about five years ago, reports said.

Leno said he became suspicious because the child sounded too mature--almost scripted.

But, in a boost to the prosecution, Leno said the boy never asked for money or assistance.

In his opening argument, defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. explicitly said the boy and his mother "tried to get money" from the late-night host.

Tucker also had contact with the accuser during the child's cancer ordeal. But unlike Leno, Tucker befriended the child, and became intertwined in the boy's family for years. His testimony is expected to be key in helping the defense establish its version of what went down during the time of Jackson's alleged crimes.

Kimmel, meanwhile, is booked for a guest-starring role as Leno in Tuesday's edition of E!'s The Michael Jackson Trial (7:30 p.m. ET/PT).

Jackson, 46, is accused of molesting the boy, then 13, in 2003. He's also charged with plying the child with alcohol, and conspiring to hold the minor and his family hostage. The entertainer has pleaded innocent to all charges.

sosgemini said:[quote]

dag said:

yep, gavin and his mum have no fault in this whatsoever

sosgemini said:[quote]

dag said:

Dam, u been Like SCRAPING for critcism, Bottom line, is that dude looks like the flyest and his innocence is up there highlighted in red ink. And the best u can come up with is how badly he's accessorising, the patterns on his waistcoats and speculation about his folks. Them, along with his bros (big up Randy) are there cause they wanna be, bottom line.
[Edited 5/25/05 6:26am]

hellomoto said:

no, they should be faulted for seeing an oppurtunity and running with it.....but lets not kid ourselves, MJ made a bad and wrong decision to sleep with lil kids.....and now he is dealing with the consequences....

and stop rolling your damn eyes at me....

threat said:

scraping? do you know how much money michael jackson is loosing because of this situation he created it? his looney world is crumbling.....and all you can say is, "he looks fly and big ups to his bro and parents for being there for him"?

his crazy looney fans who defend his looney ass ways need to stop treating MJ like Peter Pan and more like an adult man..maybe then he will realize he needs mental help AND GET IT!!!!

i think mj is innocent of molestation...but he is guilty of being one dumb ass muthafucker.....come on you mj fans...realize you are purpetuating a pattern of stupidity...ya all should be supporting him by demanding he get better....

not by supporting his loonesy....

Yeah, and mothers who give there children acting lessons so they know how to lie in depostions isn't at all to blame is it. The Arvizos aint played ANY part in this what so ever, there not to blame at all. Its all TOTALY MJ's fault... bullshit. I'm sorry but plainly calling him 'looney', and that being all there is to it is pathetic, added to the fact that he's a dumb ass muther fucher for helping a kid with cancer.
[Edited 5/25/05 7:36am]

threat said:

because you seem to have selective responces please let me repost one of my statements:

sosgemini said:

Well my view is that really, doing nothing more that falling asleep in a bed is not a crime, however what MJ's done is understanbly culturaly indefencable. But the whole thing is a result of him helping a dying child, and he does feel strongly about children. That aint no cause to brand dude a looney dumb ass muther fucker.
[Edited 5/25/05 7:50am]

threat said:

the dude dangled his baby from a balcony.....the dude puts scarfs over his blond blue-eyed children..

if mj had a circle of people around him that slapped some sense into him he wouldnt be in the mess he is in..but he is surrounded by yes men..and he fans blindly dismiss any odd behavior which just allowed the mans mental condition to deteriate.....

im a fan....but i wence and moan everytime i see fans up in this place dismiss the guys behavior.....it only encourages him.

sosgemini said:

yeah, whatever.

threat said:

threat.

threat.

you know better than to write something like that. that flies in the face of the facts. MJ knowingly shared his bed with young boys over the course of at least a decade and a half. He's admitted to doing so. You don't just "fall asleep" in the same bed in a large mansion with young boys on countless occasions.

Say he didn't molest the kids he slept with. but don't even try to say he didn't mean to sleep with them.
[Edited 5/25/05 9:04am]

namepeace said:

Dude, I didnt say he didnt mean to fall asleep with them. I meant as in taking part in the act of falling asleep.

threat said:

but "falling asleep" with a child in one's bed and "sleeping with" a child in one's bed are 2 different things. the latter is an unintentional act which sounds innocent. the latter is an intentional act which could be innocent but has the appearance of impropriety if not illegality.

i notice that many of MJ's fans are now using this "falling asleep" language now, as if to reframe what he actually admitted he did. not saying you are intentionally did so, but the way you frame MJ's conduct is important.

if he merely fell asleep next to his accuser, i'd be horrified at him being prosecuted. but since he admitted sleeping with his accuser, i'm frustrated that he would invite such scrutiny on himself.

namepeace said:

Fine then, 'sleeping with'. This language is avoided because it sounds directly sexual/suggestive, or can sound that way, so thats why i avoid saying it.

threat said:

I don't blame you, but what you said also means what?

That MJ shouldn't have been doing it in the first damn place.

Just saying it should show people that he was inviting an indictment.

We can't run from the truth.

dag said:

I remember this dress vividly. I called it a Matrix gown.

sosgemini said:

He was great.
Had the Leno lisp, the Leno head shake, the Leno voice modulations.
He should get an Emmy nomination.