Former Jackson lawyer was "gravely concerned"
Jackson was a target for a shakedown by
the accuser's family
I L L U S T R A T I O N S B Y B I L L R O B L E S
Friday the 13th at Michael Jackson’s trial and everything seemed wrong-side-around. Mark Geragos sounded more like a defense attorney summing up on Jackson’s behalf than a witness who’d been called to testify.
Geragos, who represented Jackson for 16 months until Jackson decided he would be better off if Geragos took on the Scott Peterson murder case full time, hacked away at the conspiracy charges, saying he was responsible for the surveillance on the accuser’s family at the time they said they were being held against their will.
Geragos had told investigator Brad Miller, “tell me who they’re meeting with, if they’re trying to sell their story to a tabloid, if they’re talking to a lawyer.” Geragos believed it was a problem “in which somebody could easily take advantage of Michael Jackson.”
Geragos said he was “gravely concerned” that Jackson could have been a victim of a shakedown by the accuser’s family, especially after reviewing the mother’s lawsuit against J.C. Penney — adding that surveillance is something defense attorneys, prosecutors and police do all the time.
There was talk of Miller’s recent interview with MSNBC’s Dan Abrams in which Miller said the surveillance was “a real loose watch on who they were meeting with and what they were doing.”
“I wanted a tape-recorded statement. It would be more difficult to make up something later,” Geragos said, explaining why he wanted Miller to get the accuser’s family on Memorex — one of the occasions in which the family praised Jackson to the max.
About the gaps in that tape? Geragos couldn’t explain the three starts and stops, but said he pointedly asked Miller whether he’d intentionally stopped the tape just as Miller was asking whether the accuser had slept with Jackson.
Geragos appeared to be pinning the blame for any overzealous or selective monitoring of the family on Miller who’s not testified here so far.
Geragos also pinned responsibility for the daily operations of Jackson’s enterprises squarely on unindicted co-conspirator Ronald Konitzer, putting distance between conspiracy and pop star. 
As for the purloined belongings of the accuser’s family, Geragos started to say that the accuser’s mom wanted it done since she was moving in with her new boyfriend... but Deputy D.A. Ron Zonen cut Geragos off in mid-sentence.
Geragos said he was frustrated with Bill Dickerman, attorney to the accuser’s family, over negotiations for the release of the belongings which had been placed in a storage unit.
“At one point I directed it would just be dumped in Bill Dickerman’s law office — just to be rid of it!” he said. Geragos said he told Miller to videotape the move so that no one could say later than anything had been stolen. (The accuser’s mom said Jackson’s photos, letters to her son, and a toy rabbit the pop star had given the boy were never returned.)
Geragos: Jackson's love for children
was "childlike" and "unconditional"
Geragos challenged prosecutor Ron Zonen’s cross-exam questions about Jackson “sleeping with boys,” saying the liberally-used phrase suggested something sexual when Geragos saw in his former client “a childlike love for children.”
Geragos saying, “So he’s sleeping with someone. The jump is that there’s something awful going on.” He described the sleep-overs as “an act of unconditional love... There was nothing sexual, nothing untoward.”
Had Geragos anything to do with the alleged plot to spirit the family to Brazil? Geragos said no, adding that he learned of it only after Jackson had been arrested. He admitted that he had come into possession of the family’s passports and had turned them over to the court. (The accuser’s mom cried on the witness stand when she saw the passports at long last.)
Much of Geragos’ testimony centered on February 9, 2003, when Bashir panic was coming into full bloom. It was Geragos’ first meeting with Jackson. Ed Bradley and a CBS 60 Minutes crew were at Neverland Ranch and Geragos drove up to pull the plug on the interview after he could not “weasel out” what the show’s take on Jackson would be.
Deputy D.A. Zonen pursued a tough cross exam, though the only major point he’s really scored so far is to question why Geragos didn’t advise his client that “sleeping with boys” was not an advisable thing to do, if for no other reason than to avoid further accusations.
“Is there a reason why you didn’t call Michael Jackson and tell him to send the family home?” asked Zonen. Geragos said Jackson was travelling, out of state. Huh?
Wasn’t Geragos aware that the accuser was being taunted at school because of his appearance on the Bashir show? “I don’t want to sound heartless,” said Geragos, “but I was worried about Michael’s legal problems... I had a jaded view of the family.”
Lots of legal gun-slinging. Rapid fire questions, objections, interruptions and answers — all at warp speed with lots of attitude.
At one point, the judge called a time out, ordering both sides to “lower your temperatures by a couple of degrees.” Judge Melville saying, “I ride horses, we wait for the head to go down.” Melville demanded both defense and prosecution do some serious chilling. Silence in the courtroom. When Zonen couldn’t help himself and auto-started up again, the judge ordered him to hush.
Legal analysts here agree that Geragos is likable, comfortable and confident on the stand, and very credible with the jurors. He’s being very humble, too. When asked about his qualifications, Geragos said simply, “I went to college, I went to law school, I took the bar exam.”
After Geragos had been sworn in, Tom Mesereau greeted the attorney with a cheery, “Hello, Mark.” Geragos replied, “Hello, Tom.” Chums, on a first-name basis. Geragos knows what to say, Mesereau knows how to prompt the right answers. It is all very slick — L.A. Law taking on the boonies — and irking Zonen to frustration.
Former Santa Barbara County Prosecutor Craig Smith told us you couldn’t ask for a better witness than Geragos. I still can’t get Debbie Rowe’s assessment of Geragos out of my head. “He either folds, or loses,” Rowe said of Geragos from the witness stand.
Tom Mesereau charged by judge with
misrepresenting Geragos testimony deal
Gerago’s testimony was overshadowed by a charge that defense attorney Tom Mesereau had misrepresented the client-attorney waiver Jackson struck with Geragos. To everyone’s surprise, it allows Geragos to discuss only events that took place up to the date of Jackson’s arrest.
Neither the prosecution nor the judge had been given a copy of the document in advance. They’d taken Mesereau at his word that the testimony agreement was legit, and Mesereau hadn’t told them it was conditional. They’d let him have until the end of the day to hand over a copy. Was Mesreau being sneaky? Sloppy?
Judge Melville was clearly angry, telling Mesereau he couldn’t have it both ways — calling a witness but allowing only selective testimony. The judge sent the jury out of the courtroom to discuss the issue, and sent them home early after Geragos refused to answer several questions dealing with events after Jackson’s surrender to sheriff’s deputies.
Melville will hear arguments, points and authorities on all this come Monday. It’s a very serious charge against Mesereau and Zonen or DA Tom Sneddon will surely pounce on the opportunity to humilitate their courtroom foe — big time. Geragos’ testimony could possibly be tossed out, though Judge Melville doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who’d damage a defendant’s defense just to punish a lawyer. Mesereau apologized with a certain degree of contriteness.
Still, sanctions against Mesereau include possible fines and jail time says legal analyst Anne Bremner. The judge will probably impose a less-damaging penalty, though Mesereau is clearly on Judge Melville’s list now.
Geragos is in the midst of a long fraud trial in Santa Ana, California with nine jurors waiting for him to return on Monday, though he’s far from finished here. The judge asked Geragos to come back for more testimony next Friday which had been set as a dark day for court. Reporters expecting a three-day weekend are bummed. Boo-hoo.
Raymone Baine dodges the
drinking question yet again
It began on Wednesday when a reporter asked the Jackson spokeswoman whether Michael drank alcohol — or, not — after hearing Jackson tell Martin Bashir he did not imbibe.
Baine promised to ask Michael and come back with an answer. I followed up on Thursday. Baine said she had forgotten to ask MJ, but would. Today, she told me she’s under lawyers’ orders not to comment, but that all will come out in court. We’ll see.
Comments