An interview with Jackson's accuser
will be screened by jurors. Will the
boy appear as a more credible witness?
Jurors will get a second chance to get personal with Michael Jackson’s accuser, but they won’t be seeing photos of the pop star’s penis up close.
Photos of Jackson’s genitalia would have been flashed on the courtroom’s big-screen projector if the D.A. had gotten his way — along with drawings of the pop star’s private parts made for policeby his 1993 accuser.
The jury has been spared from an anatomical compare and contrast session, and Jackson is spared the another round of the humiliation he endured when deputies told him to strip, turn left, turn right — and lift. Prosecutors wanted the jury to see “unique features of Michael Jackson’s anatomy.”
The defense called it an “unfair surprise,” and “dramatic evidence late in the trial.” They argued that the prosecution’s claim the images rebutted statements that Jackson was shy and modest were groundless, and Judge Rodney Melville agreed.
“I will deny the request to bring in evidence of the blemished penis,” he said.
But Melville did allow videotape of a police interview with Jackson’s current accuser to be shown, perhaps tomorrow.
Accuser said to appear shy, vulnerable
telling deputies of being molested
“It’s a very significant victory for the prosecution,” said former prosecutor Susan Filan, “because the accuser’s credibility has been undermined and attacked both through cross-exam and through defense witnesses. This is going to refocus us back on track and put Michael Jackson back on trial.”
After weeks of witnesses, the clear villain in the defense case has been the accuser’s mother (her booking photo from the J.C. Penney incident at left) who has been easy to pick apart for a wealth of reasons — from her unpredictable mood swings and body wax claims to her fairly clear-cut case of welfare fraud. Her son wasn’t that great a witness, either.
“Oddly enough, even though he survived cancer, he wasn’t overly sympathetic,” says Inside Edition legal analyst Jim Moret. “He didn’t break down on the stand. Presumably, he showed more emotion in this interview and I think that’s why the prosecution wants to bring it in.”
The tape was in post-production right today. The judge called it “awfully long” at an hour in length, and said that he’d like to see it cut in length by half. So a deputy D.A. and a representative of the defense team have been working on trimming down the tape. The defense isn’t at all happy.
They can’t cross-examine videotape — and the last thing they want is sympathy for the accuser — especially after Chris Tucker wrapped up their case yesterday by portraying the kid as a “schemer.” So the defense said that if the D.A. shows this tape, they plan to recall the boy, his mother, his psychologist and his lawyer.
“This certainly would extend the case if they do recall the four witnesses they intend to call: the accuser, the accuser’s mother, Dr. Katz and attorney Feldman. However, this may be bluff and posturing.”
Does the defense really want to risk a better live performance by the accuser than he made back in mid-March? If he is recalled, defense attorney Tom Mesereau will have to destroy the boy on the stand, and that risks alienating the jury. Certainly it would be different, putting the boy’s mother on the stand. She would be all too easy to undo.
“But attacking the mom doesn’t necessarily mean the boy is lying, and that’s really what the prosecution wants the jury to remember. Yes, the mom may be crazy, that doesn’t mean he wasn’t molested. That’s the question for the jury.”
Meantime, it’s a hearts-and-minds battle for defense attorneys and prosecutors, each of whom want to leave one last image burned into the jurors brains.
i love michael jackson. i'm supporting you my love
Posted by: kimberly lane | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 06:57 PM