ラリー・キング、マイケル・ジャクソンの上級弁護士トーマス・メゼロウとのインタビュー

ラリー・キング: マイケル・ジャクソンの無罪判決には驚かなかったと言いましたね。つまり勝利を確信していたということですね。しかし、ほとんどの弁護士は、陪審の評決を予測することはできず、確信することもできないと考えています。説明してください。

トーマス・メゼロー: 確信していました。私は、非常に効果的な方法で証人尋問の過程で彼らの事件の信用を傷つけたと信じていました。そして、私たちは非常に説得力のある証人も呼んだと信じていました。

ラリー・キング: マイケルとはどんなクライアントでしたか？

トーマス・メゼロー: 彼は素晴らしいクライアントです。これまでのクライアントの中で、彼とはとても仕事がしやすかったです。彼はとても親切です。とても礼儀正しく礼儀正しく、とても協力的です。彼は非常に尊敬されており、誠実な人です。そして私は彼の代理をするのが本当に楽しかったし、彼を友人だと思っていました。

ラリー・キング: マイケル・ジャクソンを証言台に呼び出すことについて誰かが話したことはありますか?

トーマス・メゼロー: はい。当初、私は彼を証言台に呼ぶつもりでしたが、彼は喜んで証言してくれました。しかし、訴訟が進むと、マイケルが証言台に来る必要がないことが完全に明らかになりました。

ラリー・キング: 検察官がずっとマイケル・ジャクソンのことを考えていたと信じる人もいた。あなたもその考えを共有しますか？

トーマス・メゼロー: はい。私もそれに完全に同意します。彼らは事実よりも、この事件と証人についての自分の信念や意見に焦点を当てていたと思います。彼らは、証明しようとしていた証明不可能な理論についても同様でした。彼らの理論が間違っていたからです。そして、マイケルに対する彼らの執着が彼らを本当に傷つけたと思います。

Larry King: Do you think this fixation goes back to the settlement regarding the case from years ago?

Thomas Mesereau: Larry, I don’t know where it started. It seems it began back then and developed during the current case. They never seriously questioned the accuser and his family, and even before they identified who they were, they believed their stories. In reality, it was us who uncovered all these objections about the witnesses, their records, and their background. The prosecutor’s team really had their eyes closed to the facts. And I even think that in the middle of this case, they tried to deny the truth, and that caused them trouble.

Larry King: How effective was Macaulay Culkin?

Thomas Mesereau: He was very effective. He was an extraordinary witness for マイケル・ジャクソン, and I always have a great deal of respect for Macaulay Culkin. He didn’t have to get involved in this matter, but he did it for his friend. He always said, “I want to be there. I want to help Michael. I want to tell the truth.” He was a very influential factor and has a very strong character.

Larry King: We invited one of the jury members to this program last night. He said he believes Michael has a sexual deviation regarding children, and that it was the prosecutor who couldn’t prove his allegations. What’s your reaction to such a statement?

Thomas Mesereau: Well, I think he’s wrong. マイケル・ジャクソン doesn’t have a sexual deviation with children. He’s never had one. For years, the prosecutor tried to put together a story about this and prove it in court, but they couldn’t prove it. マイケル・ジャクソン is not a sexual deviant. He has never sexually abused a child, and he’s never even imagined doing such a thing.

Larry King: The surprising point is that, when you have a client who’s different from everyone else—a man who sleeps in his bed with children—here you have to make your jury members put themselves in your client’s place. If they do that, you win. How can someone put themselves in マイケル・ジャクソン’s shoes?

Thomas Mesereau: Well, first of all, Larry, the idea that Michael sleeps with children was created by the prosecutor’s mind. What Michael has clearly said is that he allows families to stay in his room. His room is two stories. The mothers sleep in that room, the fathers sleep there, the sisters and brothers sleep there. The prosecutor only mentioned the boys, because he thought it could influence the jury—and ultimately it failed.

But yes, we had to explain to the jury who マイケル・ジャクソン really is. That he has a creative spirit and a kind heart; that he’s an outstanding musician and choreographer; and that he’s a very sensitive person who has many concerns about the world and its problems. And he has a childlike inner self and spirit that attracts children from all over the world.

We had to explain to them who he truly is, and we never tried to portray him as anything other than what he is. He never wanted to wear anything other than the court’s formal attire. The goal of all of us is to show who Michael is, and to be proud of him, and to believe in him.