Session Fifty-One - Defense arguments by Michael’s employees in his favor

The witnesses who appeared in court today said that while the complainant’s mother was allegedly imprisoned in Norlend, she had once gone to a beauty salon for full body hair removal and once also took her children to a dentist’s office for orthodontics.

These witnesses denied any actions by the complainant’s family that would indicate they were being monitored. They also said they had not seen any sign of the team that the complainant’s mother claimed was watching them everywhere, forcing her family in an interview to make positive statements about Michael, and even following them on trips.

Carol McCoy testified that she had performed full body hair removal on the complainant’s mother on February 11, 2003.

She said that a woman brought the complainant’s mother there and then left. She continued that during the hair removal, no one was with the complainant’s mother, and she could leave the place whenever she wanted.

Defense attorney Robert Sanger asked her:

“Did she say or do anything that would seem like she didn’t have freedom of action?”

McCoy answered: “No.”

Earlier, the complainant’s mother had testified that the hair removal had been done only on her legs, not on her entire body.

Another witness today was Jean Lorraine Seamount, an orthodontics specialist.

She said that on February 24, 2003, the complainant came to her office with his mother, sister, and brother.

The complainant’s mother had claimed that their purpose in going to the dental office was actually to find an opportunity to escape from Michael and his employees, who were allegedly following them everywhere.

But the doctor testified that she had noticed no signs that the complainant’s family was being monitored. She added that they came to the office alone and no one accompanied them.

She and her assistant, Haynes, criticized the complainant’s behavior, who was 13 years old that year. Haynes described the complainant as “rude,” and Seamount said he behaved very badly—rushing toward the drawers and forcing her to open the sterilized instruments that were in their packaging.

Seamount said that the complainant’s mother had asked her to remove her children’s dental plates so she could mail them to the previous doctor. She continued that she had advised the complainant’s mother not to remove the children’s dental plates, but the mother insisted that she send the plates to the previous doctor because she was not satisfied with the way the doctor worked.

“She claimed that when the dentist found out who she was, he had asked her for more money.”

Seamount also said that during the family’s time at the dental office, they did not attempt to escape and did not even use the phone to ask for help.

Shane Meredith, a security officer in Norlend, also testified that he had once seen the complainant and his brother—who were then 13 and 12 years old—at the liquor storage area. According to him, the complainant’s brother was holding a bottle of alcohol.

He said they had entered the storage area through a hidden door in the Norlend passage. He said that when he realized the door was open, he went down the stairs and surprised the boys.

“I saw those two boys laughing with a bottle of alcohol, and I told them they had to get out immediately. They were almost shocked and scared.”

Meredith noted that the bottle was half full.

One of the servants also testified that he had found several obscene magazines in the complainant’s brother’s backpack.

Maria Gomez, who had worked in Norlend for 10 years, also testified that the complainant’s mother had asked her children to call Michael (“Dad”).

Gomez said that she was present in Norlend during the months of February and March 2003—at the same time it was alleged that Michael had sexually abused her young complainant. During that period, the complainant’s mother praised Michael.

The complainant’s mother had claimed that at that same time she had been imprisoned in Norlend along with her children.

Gomez continued that during a conversation with the complainant’s mother, she had said:

“Mr. Jackson is like a father to my children.”

She also described Michael as a blessing for her family and said she wanted her children to call Michael “Dad.”

She continued that a week after this conversation, the complainant’s mother began complaining and saying that she had been kept in Norlend by force by three of Michael’s employees, and she had asked other Norlend staff to help her leave.

Gomez said that the complainant’s mother claimed that these three people interfered with her relationship with Michael.

The defense attorneys said that even if there had been a conspiracy to keep the complainant’s family in Norlend, Michael would have been completely unaware of it.

She also said that while arranging the room where the complainant’s brother and sister were staying in Norlend, she found a backpack full of obscene magazines and assumed that this bag belonged to the complainant’s brother. The complainant’s brother had previously claimed that before Michael showed him those magazines, he had never read such magazines.

Angel Vivanco, a former assistant to Norlend’s head chef, also testified that once the complainant’s brother had asked him to serve him alcohol and had threatened him that if he didn’t do what he wanted, he would make sure he was fired.

Vivanco described the complainant and his brother’s behavior as “bad” and said that the complainant’s brother had asked him to pour alcohol into a milkshake for him.

“He said that if I didn’t do it, he would tell Michael and I would be fired.”

He continued that once the complainant’s brother had also held a kitchen knife near his neck, and when someone else warned the complainant’s brother about it, he realized what was happening and it worried him greatly.

He also said that once, while the complainant was waiting for his food to be served, he began swearing and said:

“Give me that damn Cheetos.”

Vivanco also said that he usually talked with the complainant’s sister, and she had never said that she was unhappy to be in Norlend and that she was being kept there against her will.

The defense attorney called these witnesses to the stand in order to refute the prosecution’s claim that Michael had fed alcohol to the complainant and his brother and had shown them obscene magazines. All of these witnesses said that the two brothers had themselves gained access to the bottles of alcohol and the magazines.

Kate Bernard, an administrative employee at Norlend, and another witness today, also testified that once the complainant’s mother had asked her to take her to a hydrotherapy center.

She said she had taken the complainant’s mother there in her own car and after an hour had gone to pick her up again, and during that time the complainant’s mother had not tried to escape.

She added that the cost of the hydrotherapy was paid by Michael.

Bernard said that during the round trip, the complainant’s mother had praised Michael. She said the complainant’s mother had spoken to her about Michael’s “kindness toward her and how much he helped her, as well as the fatherly role he played for his children.”

She continued that she had interviewed the complainant’s mother, sister, and brother separately as well, and all of them had praised Michael. She said that even the complainant’s mother had attributed the improvement of her son’s cancer to Michael.

Overall, these witnesses described the complainant and his family as impolite, dishonest, greedy, and disorderly. Many of them said that the complainant’s mother had become disappointed by establishing close relationships with Michael and was proud of her position as a guest in Norlend.

Judge Melville, in today’s session, ordered that the defense attorneys could not use Vivanco’s testimony about the complainant’s sister’s statements unless they proved it was related to this case.

Vivanco had said that the complainant’s sister had called her mother “crazy” and said that “her brain doesn’t work properly.” Vivanco also admitted that during the family’s stay in Norlend, he had had a sexual relationship with the complainant’s sister, and that their relationship continued for some time even after the complainant’s family left Norlend.

The defense attorneys said they do not intend to ask Vivanco anything about his relationship with the complainant’s sister.

After the conclusion of the 51st day of proceedings in this case, Raymon, Michael Jackson’s spokesperson, told reporters outside the courtroom that the defense attorneys intended to summon CNN’s television host Larry King to the witness stand on Thursday.

They will ask Larry King whether it is true that Larry Feldman, the attorney for the complainant’s family, had told him in an interview that the complainant’s family’s claims were entirely false.

Feldman himself denied this claim.

Feldman is the same attorney who meets with the complainant’s family after they leave Norlend and takes the complainant to a psychiatrist who later reports the complainant’s sexual abuse to investigators.

Source: Santa Maria News / Los Angeles Times / National News / Yahoo News / Reuters / Associated Press