Witness Accounts, A Ruling in Favor of Bashir and A Brand New Accusation

Superior Court judge Rodney Melville wanted the April 2004 grand jury transcripts sealed until a trial grand jury is convened in order to protect tainting the jury pool. Ironically though the now leaked indictment, before the prospective jurors have been chosen reads testimonies from Jackson’s accuser, accuser’s family members, ex-employees of Jackson, a Guadalupe police officer and even a flight attendant. The accuser gives accounts of the singer molesting him a number of times while the accuser’s younger brother states that he witnessed Jackson fondling his brother on two occasions while his brother was either sleeping or passed out. All these testimonies stand to corroborate the prosecution’s charges against Jackson to be orchestrating an elaborate conspiracy to hold the boy and his family against their will while trying to hoax the family into recording a video lauding the pop star. The grand jury however, was under the sole discretion of the prosecution and the defense was not present to cross examine the witnesses. Despite the fact that British journalist Martin Bashir is being called as a witness in the current case, and is under a strict gag order, Judge Melville ruled in favor of and did not think the journalist should be held in contempt of court for two television programs he did on the case for ABC. Defense attorney Robert Sanger argued that Bashir violated the gag order imposed by the judge while interviewing another witness, actor Corey Feldman and by also doing another two-hour special aired titled, ‘Michael Jackson’s Secret World’. Judge Melville however stated that Bashir can report on the case like any other reporter. In a strange twist, the prosecutors now accuse Jackson for the first time of having financial motives in his actions towards the accuser and his family. Prosecutors in their motion wanted to subpoena the entertainer’s financial reports in order to prove that his actions were provoked in trying to minimize the effects of a documentary titled "Living with Michael Jackson" and to "preserve both his fortune and his reputation” Michael Jackson’s defense argued that this information is irrelevant and stand to breach the defendant’s privacy. The defense went on to elaborate that Jackson "is an international recording artist and a man who has varied and complex business relationships with numerous individuals and entities. The very nature of these types of business relationships is that the parties honor a commitment to their respective privacy” and that this subpoena will harm the singer from doing business in the entertainment industry. Source: News Press/ Reuters/ AP/ MJJForum/ eMJey