Fact Checking Michael Jackson’s Christian Faith, Part 5 of 7: Exposing the Lies of the “Youth Minister” Jason Francia
Jason Francia in 2005
Now, unto the highlight of this series, and that is the testimony of Jason Francia! He is the son of Blanca Francia, a former Neverland maid who was fired in 1991, and was later paid $20k dollars by Diane Dimond and Hard Copy to give a “tell all” interview about her time at Neverland in December 1993. She said that she saw MJ showering with young boys, and as a result quit her job, when in reality she was fired for theft!
Jason Francia was interviewed by detectives on November 4th, 1993 and March 24th, 1994 because they were fishing for victims, and they were able to successfully cajole him into making an accusation that MJ tickled him under his shorts on several occasions. He was going to be used by cops to bolster their case, but as we all know MJ was never indicted. In December 1994, Blanca Francia and her lawyers threatened to sue MJ over his alleged molestation, and MJ settled out of court with them before they filed their lawsuit.
Before I start analyzing Jason’s testimony, let’s look at what William Wagener had to say about his chance meeting with Jason before the trial started, beginning at 5:48:
Here is an excerpt from Sneddon’s “PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ADMISSION OF EVIDENCE OF DEFENDANT’S PRIOR SEXUAL OFFENSES” pleading, filed on December 10th, 2004. The purpose of this pleading was to get the court’s permission to call the witnesses who would say they had either been molested by MJ, or had witnessed MJ molesting others. This is Sneddon’s summary of what Jason would eventually testify:
Jason Francia is 24 years old. His mother is Blanca Francia. They live in Santa Maria. Blanca worked as a personal maid to Michael Jackson for about five years. She was one of the few people allowed to enter Michael Jackson’s bedroom and did so regularly to clean. She was also responsible for cleaning his Havenhurst residence in the San Fernando Valley and his “hideout,” a condominium in west Los Angeles. She often brought Jason with her to Neverland. He was between the ages of seven and eleven when his mother Blanca worked for Michael Jackson.
The defendant often played with Jason, gave him gifts and on some occasions money. Jason remembers three separate incidents of sexual conduct by Michael Jackson with him. The first incident occurred at the “hide-out” in west Los Angeles. Jason said that he and Michael were in a red sleeping bag together and he recalls Jackson tickling him. During this tickling, Jackson touched and tickled him in the area of his genitals. He does not recall if there was skin-to-skin touching, but he recalls that his mother walked in on them, was very upset, and told Jason to get out of the sleeping bag.
The second incident also occurred at the Beverly Hills hide-out. Jason was sitting on Jackson’s lap, watching television, and Jackson began to tickle him. Jason remembered that he was wearing a pair of shorts. He said that Jackson’s hand went down the shorts or up the leg, and touched his testicles. Jason was squirming and laughing and found a $100 bill in his shorts later that day. Jason found this money while walking at the City Walk with his mother and he recalled his mother getting very upset about the money.
The third incident occurred in the alcove/loft of the arcade at Neverland. Jason recalled that there were video games, a pool table, and perhaps even a fireplace in this arcade. He specifically remembered a “Street-Fighter” video game in this arcade. He said he was lying on a couch in a “spooning” position with Jackson (i.e., Jason lying on his side in a curled-up position, with Jackson lying right behind him in the same position) when Jackson began to tickle him again. Jason was wearing a pair of baggy orange shorts, a sleeveless shirt and white briefs. During the tickling, Jackson put his hand up Jason’s shorts, under his briefs and tickled his testicles. Jason said this lasted for more than 10 seconds and he does not remember how or why it stopped.
Thereafter Blanca quit her job as Defendant’s maid. When Jason was 13 years old he was interviewed by detectives who were investigating allegations against defendant involving another boy. No criminal charges were filed as a result of that interview. However, Jason’s lawyers settled a claim on his behalf against Michael Jackson for what he believes to be about two million dollars. Today Jason works as a youth pastor with his church and lives in Arroyo Grande.
Here is my complete summary and analysis Jason Francia’s testimony from April 4th and 5th, 2005, starting with his direct examination by Ron Zonen. In this excerpt, Jason talks about his time as a “youth pastor”:
7 Q. Okay. Let‟s go to the mentoring program.
8 Who do you work for in the mentoring program?
9 A. Pete Taylor. It‟s through a church that I
10 belong to, but yet it‟s still its kind of own
11 identity. It‟s Foursquare Youth Programs. That‟s
12 the official title.
13 Q. And the nature of the work, by “mentoring,”
14 what do you mean?
15 A. I‟m the lead mentor. And the ultimate goal
16 is, let me see, the probation department kind of
17 says these kids need to be mentored. They needed to
18 go through three programs. Sometimes community
19 service or community service, mentoring, or some
20 sort of jobs program or something else. And I‟m one
21 of their steps to get off of probation.
22 So what we try to do is match them up with a
23 mentor, and that‟s my job, to try to match them up
24 with mentors. And I take them out the first and
25 third Saturdays of every month and we try — just
26 hang out with them and show them that there‟s
27 something more to life than crime, or than ditching,
28 or than partying, or than drugs, or than anything 4807
1 else. There‟s more to life. We show them there‟s
2 Frisbee golf. I‟ve showed the guys how to change
3 the oil and change a tire.
4 My wife is helping. And she shows them how
5 to cook, make purses with the girls and —
6 Q. You‟ve been doing this for how long?
7 A. I‟ve been doing this, this exact job, for
8 about six months. This type of work for probably
9 since I was 18.
10 Q. Okay. When you were 18, did you start some
11 kind of an internship program dealing with this?
12 A. Yeah, I have started an internship with
13 Santa Maria Foursquare Church. Was — and was
14 pretty much training to be — to work with junior
15 high, to high school, to college-aged people. And I
16 just — I — I wanted to be trained in that, because
17 I have a passion for that, so I started that. I did
18 that for about two and a half years with Santa Maria
19 Foursquare Church.
20 Q. Did you ever work as a youth pastor?
21 A. Yeah. I did that in 2003 to 2004, from my
22 understanding. I can‟t really remember right now.
23 I‟m kind of nervous, just to let you guys know.
24 Q. That‟s okay. What is a youth pastor?
25 A. Well, I was a youth pastor. That was, I
26 guess, my official title. But I worked with
27 13-year-olds to 25- or 26-year-olds. And pretty
28 much — it‟s kind of like its own little church 4808
1 within a church. And you work with junior high and
2 high schoolers. And then what I try to do is
3 address the collegers in a different format. And
4 then I‟ve had the college students help me with the
5 junior highers and high schoolers. So just talk
6 about ethics, God, morals, and doing good.
7 Q. You‟ve been doing htis consistently since
8 age 18?
9 A. Yeah, pretty much.
10 Q. Tell us which church this is again, please.
11 A. The one I was a youth pastor, I did that
12 through Oceano Foursquare. It was really known as
13 Kings Way a long time ago. But pretty much Oceano
14 Foursquare.
In this excerpt, Zonen asks Jason if he ever slept in MJ’s bedroom, and pay attention to his answer:
18 Q. Did you ever spend the night at Neverland?
19 A. Yes. With — yeah, I remember distinctly,
20 because I think I was hearing bats or something, on
21 the ranch, or something, and I couldn‟t sleep, so —
22 but I was sleeping with my mom, like in the same
23 room, in the same area with my mom, and, yeah. I
24 couldn‟t sleep.
25 Q. Were you ever in Michael Jackson‟s bedroom?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. On how many occasions?
28 A. Two, I think. Two. I‟m pretty sure. 4816
1 Once — one I know for sure, because we were
2 all laying in the bed watching T.V.
3 Q. And who is “we were all”?
4 A. Michael and a bunch of other kids.
5 Q. Okay. Do you know how many?
6 A. I don‟t. Seven. Six. But I don‟t — I
7 don‟t.
8 Q. Do you know any of the names?
9 A. I‟m really bad at names. Even to this day.
It was very typical for MJ to have people – both children and adults – in his bedroom until the wee hours of the morning, watching TV while lying in his bed. This is something that Debbie Rowe mentioned in this interview from 2002 which was part of MJ’s rebuttal to the Martin Bashir deception, starting at 2:55:
In this excerpt, Jason describes the first time that he was “molested”:
24 Was there ever an occasion that you were
25 with Michael Jackson where something happened that
26 made you feel uncomfortable?
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. Did that happen more than once? 4817
1 A. Yeah.
2 Q. Do you have a recollection of these events?
3 A. Yeah.
4 Q. Let‟s begin with the first one. What
5 happened?
6 A. Okay. Well, the first time that I felt
7 uncomfortable with him was in the hideout, which is
8 the place in Encino — not in Encino, I‟m sorry. In
9 Hollywood. And — shoot. I was seven and – I
10 don‟t know, at seven years old, I don‟t think —
11 okay. I may have not felt uncomfortable, but then
12 now I think about it, that shouldn‟t have been done.
13 But I didn‟t feel uncomfortable.
14 Q. What happened?
15 A. I was sitting on his lap, and I was young,
16 and I was small. I‟m still thin. I was even
17 thinner then. Sitting on his lap, watching T.V.,
18 which that‟s normal enough in itself. And then
19 we — I was kind of facing the T.V., and he was
20 facing the T.V. as well, so my back was to his
21 chest. And it was — there was just one chair, and
22 there wasn‟t much furniture in that hideout place.
23 And I was just sitting there watching T.V., and so
24 was he. I think we were watching cartoons. And he
25 just started tickling me, which, cool, shoot, I was
26 a tickle guy. I tickled him back, but still kind of
27 from the back, kind of reaching around.
28 And then we went to the floor, I think, but 4818
1 I can‟t completely remember right now. But we
2 somehow got on the floor, tickling still, because
3 I‟m doing what — these little kid things, you know,
4 when you shimmy back and forth.
5 And then I‟m tickling and he‟s tickling, and
6 I‟m tickling and he‟s tickling, and it eventually
7 moved down to — to — to my little private region
8 when you‟re a little kid. I don‟t know if you want
9 me to call it specifically something, but around my
10 crotch area. And I didn‟t — you know, you‟re
11 seven. I didn‟t think it was wrong. Well, I did.
12 Because he‟s tickling, but I‟m laughing, and I‟m
13 tickling him back, trying to get him to stop, but
14 then I‟m tickling too much. I‟m laughing too much.
15 And eventually it stopped. I don‟t know how.
16 Q. Did he actually make contact with your
17 genital area?
18 A. Not skin to skin, but, yeah. Yeah, he was
19 on my clothes, yeah.
20 Q. Do you know for approximately how long?
21 A. Distinctly I can‟t remember. It was a
22 while, though.
23 Q. By a little while, can you give us a sense
24 of it?
25 A. More than three minutes, less than 20. Less
26 than ten minutes, I think.
27 Q. Okay.
28 A. But a while. It was — it was tickling. It 4819
1 didn‟t end soon. It didn‟t end fast.
2 Q. But the amount of time that his hand was
3 actually in the region of your genitalia?
4 A. I cannot remember.
Here is his description of the second time he was abused:
12 Q. Was there another instance?
13 A. Yeah.
14 Q. Was that also at the hideout?
15 A. Yeah.
16 Q. Tell us what happened, please.
17 A. I was watching cartoons again, and probably
18 in the same room, because I think there was only one
19 room in that whole place.
20 And we somehow — I was somehow — there was
21 a sleeping bag involved. I don‟t know — I think I
22 was on top of it. And I was watching T.V., laying
23 down on the ground, and Michael was pretty much
24 behind me, like spooning me. I don‟t know how we
25 got there. I was like eight, eight and a half. It
26 was a little while after. And again with the
27 tickling. But this time it wasn‟t as long, and I
28 was — well, I‟m sorry. It was longer, but I wasn‟t 4821
1 laughing as much, I guess.
Listen to him describe how long the “abuse” lasted! Look at what he uses as a frame of reference to judge the length of the abuse!
5 Q. Was it — were you aware of it happening
6 while it was happening?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Okay.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And how long was his hand there?
11 A. Two cartoons‟ worth. A cartoon and a half
12 worth.
13 Q. And you were watching cartoons on television
14 at the time?
15 A. Yeah.
16 Q. How long is a cartoon? It‟s been a while
17 since I‟ve seen one.
18 A. It‟s been a while for me, too.
19 Does anybody here watch cartoons?
20 Q. Tell us the best of your recollection. We
21 can‟t let them be witnesses at the moment.
22 A. A “Woody Woodpecker” I guess would last
23 four, five minutes.
24 Q. Okay.
25 A. Five, six minutes.
26 Q. So the contact in the area of your genitalia
27 was at least four or five minutes?
28 A. Yeah. 4827
Ok, now here’s the third and last time he claims he was abused, and notice how he asks for a short break so he can compose himself and cry his crocodile tears!
8 Q. Were there ever any other occasions, whether
9 in Los Angeles or any other occasion or any other
10 location where something happened that made you feel
11 uncomfortable?
12 A. Yeah.
13 Q. And where was that?
14 A. At the ranch.
15 Q. Do you remember how old you were?
16 A. Ten and a half, ten. I was older.
17 Q. And you have a recollection of this event?
18 A. Yeah.
19 Q. There‟s water there also, if you need
20 anything.
21 A. Oh, I was wondering. I thought it was
22 coffee. I was hoping it wasn‟t.
23 Q. No, it‟s water. And feel free to take some
24 if you need some.
25 A. Okay.
26 Q. You think you were about ten or ten and a
27 half?
28 A. Yeah. 4829
1 Q. It was prior to the time that your mother
2 quit her job there?
3 A. Yeah.
4 Q. Did you ever go back to Neverland after your
5 mother quit her job there?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Do you remember where this event took place,
8 where at Neverland?
9 A. What, the event?
10 Q. That made you feel uncomfortable.
11 A. Yeah. It was in the arcade room. There was
12 a loft area.
13 Q. Describe what the arcade is.
14 A. A place where there‟s a bunch of video
15 games, and there was a pool table, and I think there
16 was a fireplace. I think that was up in the loft.
17 I think. That was a long time ago. But, yeah, it‟s
18 Street Fighter, the original one, in there, and
19 pool tables, and a couple of other video games.
20 Q. On what part of the arcade were you at the
21 time this happened?
22 A. I was in the loft.
23 Q. Upstairs?
24 A. Yeah.
25 Q. Was anybody else up there with you?
26 A. No.
27 Q. Was Mr. Jackson there?
28 A. Yeah. 4830
1 Q. By “other people,” I mean other people than
2 you and Mr. Jackson.
3 A. It was just him and I.
4 Q. Do you recall approximately what time of day
5 or evening it was?
6 A. No. Nighttime.
7 Q. Was your mother working that day?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Were there ever occasions when you were at
10 Neverland and your mother wasn‟t working?
11 A. Yeah, when we‟d have parties and stuff, but
12 I think she‟d still work, because she‟d always walk
13 around cleaning even though she wasn‟t dressed for
14 it.
15 Q. Were there ever occasions when you were at
16 Neverland and your mother was not there?
17 A. No, she was always there.
18 Q. On this occasion, was your mother in the
19 arcade?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Was she working that day?
22 A. Probably.
23 Q. Do you remember where her assignment would
24 have taken her? Did she go to specific locations?
25 A. In the ranch?
26 Q. Yes.
27 A. At the ranch area. She was cleaning
28 everything. 4831
1 Q. Okay.
2 A. She wasn‟t in the arcade.
3 Q. Okay. And what happened when you were in
4 the arcade.
5 A. In the loft?
6 Q. Yes, please.
7 A. I think I was playing Sega Genesis.
8 Q. Tell us what that is, please.
9 A. It‟s — it‟s a video game. I was just a
10 video-game-playing kid.
11 Q. Okay.
12 A. There was a video game. There was a T.V. up
13 there, I believe. It was a really big T.V., and I
14 was playing, and then he started tickling me, and I
15 think there was — there was a couch up there,
16 because we somehow managed to end up on the couch.
17 It took a lot of counseling to get over,
18 just to let you know.
19 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Move to strike;
20 nonresponsive.
21 THE WITNESS: I‟m sorry.
22 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Let‟s see if we can restrict
23 our answers just to the questions, if we can. I‟ll
24 ask you some questions about that later.
25 You were on the couch. Do you know if both
26 of you were sitting on the couch?
27 A. Hold on.
28 We were laying down on the couch. 4832
1 Q. Okay. How were you laying down? How were
2 you positioned relative to Mr. Jackson?
3 A. Probably about — no, it was in the spooning
4 position again.
5 Q. Okay. Was he behind you or in front of you?
6 A. Behind me.
7 Q. And then what happened?
8 A. We were tickling — well, he was tickling
9 and I was laughing. And — and — and we — it
10 was — he was — he was tickling me in the….
11 So much happening right now. Can we take a
12 break or something?
13 MR. ZONEN: Can we take just a moment, Your
14 Honor?
15 THE COURT: Okay. Sure.
16 MR. ZONEN: Just a break for a moment or
17 two?
In this excerpt, Jason is asked if he ever told anyone about his abuse at the hands of Michael Jackson:
11 Q. Did you tell anybody about that right
12 afterward?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Did you tell your mother, ever?
15 A. No. I don‟t even think to this day she
16 knows.
17 Q. All right. At some point in time this
18 became known to somebody; is that right?
19 A. Yeah.
20 Q. Who did you tell? Who was the first person
21 you told about it?
22 A. Probably God. But —
23 Q. Let‟s go to number two, then. Who was the
24 second person?
25 MR. MESEREAU: Move to strike that comment,
26 Your Honor. Nonresponsive.
27 THE COURT: Well, it‟s responsive.
28 Overruled. Go ahead. 4835
1 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Who else did you —
2 A. Who did I tell? I forgot their names, but
3 there was two detectives. Yeah, I told those two
4 guys.
5 Q. Before or after your mother had quit her
6 position at Neverland?
7 A. She had already quit.
Here is where he describes how the detectives picked him up from school one day and tape recorded their interview with him:
8 Q. All right. At some point in time police
9 came to you and said they wanted to talk to you; is
10 that right?
11 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; leading.
12 THE WITNESS: This is going to be hard for
13 me to get through. Sorry.
14 THE COURT: Okay. The objection is
15 overruled.
16 You may answer.
17 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Go ahead.
18 A. Yeah, they wanted to come and talk to me.
19 I was 13. I was in eighth grade, I think. Yeah.
20 I — yeah.
21 Q. Around 1993?
22 A. Yeah. It was „93, I think, yeah.
23 Q. Did you know in advance that they wanted to
24 speak with you?
25 A. No. Not until the big day that this
26 crappiness started.
27 Q. Okay. At some point in time, they showed
28 up? 4836
1 A. Yeah. They showed up probably around 4:00,
2 because I had judo practice at, like, 6:00.
3 Q. So it was about — I‟m sorry, you had judo
4 practice afterward?
5 A. Yeah, I had to go to judo practice right
6 after, and I don‟t think I went because I was
7 crying.
8 Q. So you think it was about four o‟clock in
9 the afternoon?
10 A. I think they came around four o‟clock.
11 Q. Do you remember how many people came?
12 A. I think two. But I don‟t remember.
13 Q. Was your mother present during the course of
14 that interview?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Do you know if that interview was
17 tape-recorded?
18 A. Yeah, it was tape-recorded because I
19 listened to the tapes.
20 Q. You listened to it recently?
21 A. Yeah.
22 Q. Do you know if a transcription had ever been
23 prepared of that interview?
24 A. A trans — yeah, it has been.
25 Q. And did you, in fact, review that
26 transcription as well?
27 A. Yeah. While I was reading it, yeah.
As you can see, he read the transcript of his 1993 police interview before giving his testimony. In this excerpt, he states the names of the two lawyers who represented him in 1994, the fact that he was never deposed in the Jordan Chandler investigation, and how he never filed a lawsuit against MJ because he received a settlement.
14 Q. At some point in time, did you have an
15 interview or were you represented by a private
16 lawyer?
17 A. At some point, yeah, in time I was.
18 Q. Do you remember the name of that lawyer?
19 A. Yeah, Terry — Terry Cannon. And Kris
20 Kallman.
21 Q. There were two lawyers who represented you?
22 A. Yeah.
23 Q. Do you know if — was this after this
24 interview?
25 A. Yes, it was after this interview. It was
26 like two months after this interview, I think.
27 Q. Were you ever called for a deposition?
28 A. I was never called for a deposition. 4841
1 Q. Did you ever know a young man by the name of
2 Jordan Chandler, or Jordie Chandler?
3 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; relevance.
4 THE WITNESS: Did I —
5 MR. MESEREAU: Relevance; foundation; move
6 to strike.
7 THE COURT: Overruled.
8 You may answer.
9 THE WITNESS: Did I ever meet him?
10 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Yes.
11 A. I probably did, but I — I don‟t remember
12 names. I‟m really bad with names. And I‟m not —
13 Q. Do you know if you were being prepared at
14 any time to give a deposition in a case involving
15 Mr. Chandler?
16 A. No. What — prepared by — I don‟t know
17 what you mean by “prepared.”
18 Q. Did your attorneys ever talk to you about
19 the possibility of your going in and giving a
20 deposition?
21 A. No. I don‟t think so. I don‟t remember.
22 Q. At some point in time, was there a
23 settlement of some kind of a case involving you and
24 Mr. Jackson? We‟re not going to get into the
25 specifics of the amounts, but was there a
26 settlement?
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. Do you know if a lawsuit was ever actually 4842
1 filed?
2 A. No. I don‟t think so, no. Because there
3 was a settlement, so there was no lawsuit.
Here is Jason’s description of the intense 5 years of “counseling” that he needed to overcome his “traumatic” experiences! (From age 13 to 18!)
11 Q. Okay. Was — did you go into counseling at
12 this time?
13 A. Yeah.
14 Q. And —
15 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; relevance.
16 THE WITNESS: Oh, I‟m sorry.
17 MR. ZONEN: I think it‟s relevant.
18 MR. MESEREAU: And leading.
19 THE COURT: I‟ll allow the question. The
20 question and answer was, “Yes.”
21 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: For what period of time did
22 you stay in counseling?
23 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Relevance; 352.
24 MR. ZONEN: I believe it‟s appropriate under
25 People vs. Bledsoe and Shirley.
26 THE COURT: Go ahead. I‟ll allow the
27 question.
28 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: For what period of time did 4843
1 you stay in counseling?
2 A. Shoot, like a week after the sheriffs
3 interviewing me, or police, or whoever they were.
4 And —
5 Q. That‟s when it started?
6 A. Till I was 18, yeah.
7 Q. Till you were 18?
8 A. Yeah.
That’s the end of his direct examination; now unto the cross examination by Mesereau! This is when it gets really entertaining! You’re about to see why the some of the jurors laughed at him during their break!
First, Mesereau asks Jason when did he learn that his mother Blanca was paid $20k for her Hard Copy interview, and he didn’t know about it until two days prior to testifying!
28 Q. Okay. Now, the prosecutor mentioned the 4846
1 fact that your mother, at one point many years ago,
2 went on the television show Hard Copy, right?
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. And at some point you learned about that,
5 right?
6 A. At some point I learned about what?
7 Q. Your mom going on the television show Hard
8 Copy?
9 A. At some point I learned about it, yes.
10 Q. Okay. And at some point you learned that
11 she took $20,000 to go on the T.V. show Hard Copy,
12 correct?
13 A. No.
14 Q. You don‟t know anything about that?
15 A. I do not.
16 Q. You‟ve never heard that to date?
17 A. I have heard of it today.
18 Q. When did you first learn that your mother
19 have gone on the T.V. show Hard Copy and accepted
20 $20,000?
21 A. Right now. Well, it may actually — two
22 days ago, I think.
Here’s where he is asked when he told his lawyers about being molested by MJ, and he says he doesn’t think he did!
9 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: When did you first, if you
10 remember, talk to a lawyer about anything Mr.
11 Jackson allegedly did?
12 A. What he — when did I tell somebody or tell
13 the lawyer? Repeat that.
14 Q. Yeah, when did you first meet a lawyer to
15 talk about your claim regarding Mr. Jackson‟s
16 behavior?
17 A. I don‟t remember.
18 Q. Do you know approximately when it was?
19 A. I think the only — I don‟t think I ever
20 told Terry or Kris if he molested me or not.
Here is where he has trouble remembering the two lawyers he mentioned under direct examination with Zonen, and then he magically remembers telling them of his abuse!
21 Q. Okay. Now, Terry is who?
22 A. Terry?
23 Q. Terry is the lawyer?
24 A. Terry is a lawyer.
25 Q. That‟s Terry Cannon, correct?
26 A. Correct.
27 Q. And Kris is who?
28 A. Kris — I forgot his last name. He‟s a 4850
1 lawyer.
2 Q. You mentioned him in response to the
3 prosecutor‟s questions. Didn‟t you say Kris was a
4 lawyer?
5 A. I don‟t remember the prosecutor‟s questions.
6 Q. Do you have a lawyer named Kris?
7 A. Right now? No.
8 Q. Have you ever had a lawyer named Kris?
9 A. I believe so.
10 Q. And do you know Kris‟s last name?
11 A. That‟s what I just said. I don‟t remember.
12 Q. Okay. Now, did I hear you just say you
13 never told either lawyer that you had been molested?
14 A. I don‟t — I‟m sorry?
15 Q. Did I hear you just say that you never told
16 either lawyer you‟d been molested?
17 A. I said I didn‟t know. That‟s what I said.
18 Q. You told the lawyers you didn‟t know?
19 A. No, I told you I didn‟t know.
20 Q. You told me you didn‟t know whether or not
21 you had told any lawyer you‟d been molested, right?
22 A. Not any lawyer.
23 Q. Okay. I‟m not understanding you.
24 A. I‟m not understanding you either.
25 Q. Let me rephrase the question.
26 A. Okay.
27 Q. Did you ever tell Attorney Terry Cannon
28 you‟d been molested? 4851
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And did you ever tell Attorney Kris you‟d
3 been molested?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Okay. Approximately when did you do that?
6 A. I don‟t remember. I was young.
7 Q. Do you know approximately what year it would
8 have been?
9 A. I‟d go with „94 or „93 or „95.
In this excerpt, he admits that he told his mother Blanca about being molested at age 14 or 15, while he was in “counseling”, and admits that he spoke too quickly when he denied ever telling her under Zonen’s direct examination:
23 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Are you telling the jury
24 that at some point — excuse me. Let me start
25 again.
26 As of today, you‟re telling this jury you‟ve
27 never told your mother what you claim Mr. Jackson
28 did to you, right? 4852
1 A. I believe in counseling. I never told her
2 specifics on — that I was molested, but I did in
3 counseling tell her that I was molested.
4 Q. Okay.
5 A. But it was in — shoot. It was a crying
6 time for —
7 Q. Okay. I‟m not asking you about the details.
8 Just answer my questions.
9 A. It was just hard for me to remember because
10 I was crying.
11 Q. Okay.
12 A. So — I was young, and I was 14 or 15.
13 Q. So when you told the jury earlier that you
14 never told your mother about this, that wasn‟t true,
15 right?
16 A. I‟m sorry, I probably spoke quickly.
27 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Let me rephrase it.
28 When you told the jury, in response to the 4853
1 prosecutor‟s questions, that you had never told your
2 mother you were molested, that wasn‟t true, right?
3 A. I was mistaken.
4 Q. Okay.
5 A. Yeah.
6 Q. Okay. In fact, you had told your mother
7 that you were molested, right?
8 A. Yeah, I must have misunderstood his question
9 with the — with the details of it. I never told my
10 mom that I was molested three times by Michael
11 Jackson. My mom, I don‟t even think to this day,
12 knows that I was molested three times and the
13 specifics of it. If she does, then she does, and
14 that sucks.
In this excerpt, Jason says he didn’t tell his mom about his abuse before she did Hard Copy, and when he describes how sheriffs just “came one day and surprised him” at school, the jury laughs, and is scolded by Judge Melville. (Don’t confuse this incident with the other incident of them laughing directly at Jason’s testimony during a court break.)
23 Q. Are you telling the jury that before your
24 mother went on Hard Copy, you never discussed what
25 you claim Mr. Jackson did to you with your mother?
26 A. Yeah, I‟m pretty sure that I never told my
27 mom that he molested me before Hard Copy.
28 Q. And before sheriffs came to talk to you for 4854
1 the first time, had you told anyone that you had
2 been molested by Michael Jackson?
3 A. I don‟t think so, no.
4 Q. They just kind of came one day and surprised
5 you?
6 (Laughter.)
7 A. Yeah.
8 THE COURT: Just a moment, Counsel.
9 (To the audience) I‟m not going to put up
10 with that.
11 THE WITNESS: Thanks.
12 THE COURT: If there‟s any laughing again,
13 I‟ll remove people from the courtroom.
14 Go ahead, Counsel.
Let’s stop for a moment and dwell on this important fact: Jason and Blanca Francia didn’t go to the police with their accusations; the police “just kind of came one day and surprised” Jason because they were looking for any “victims” that would bolster their case against MJ! And as you’ll see later on, they bullied Jason into making a false confession!
A few days before testifying, Jason met with prosecutors to review a transcript of his November 1993 interview with police:
18 Q. You have reviewed the tape and transcript of
19 your first interview with the sheriffs, correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And when did you review that interview?
22 A. Like when did I listen to the tapes again?
23 Is that what you‟re asking?
24 Q. Yes.
25 A. Sunday.
26 Q. And how did you get the tape?
27 A. Chris – I don‟t know his last name – gave
28 them to me. 4855
1 Q. Is that the lawyer?
2 A. No. He‟s not a lawyer, I don‟t think.
3 Q. Is he a sheriff?
4 A. It‟s a tall man.
5 Q. Is he a sheriff?
6 A. I don‟t know. I believe so.
7 Q. How did you run into him?
8 A. I met him when I met all these gentlemen.
9 Q. The prosecutors?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. Okay. So Chris was with the prosecutors
12 when you met them last, right?
13 A. I‟m sorry?
14 Q. Chris was with the prosecutors when you
15 spoke to the prosecutors, correct?
16 A. Yes.
It seems Zonen tried to prepare Jason for his testimony by having him review the transcript of his 1993 interview with Detectives Russell Birchim and Vince Neglia!
9 Q. Okay. Okay. Now, did someone tell you to
10 review that transcript before you testified?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Who told you to review that transcript
13 before you testified?
14 A. I‟m under some pressure. Mark — it‟s not
15 Mark. It‟s Russ. I‟m so bad with names.
16 Q. Is it Prosecutor Zonen, who just asked you
17 questions?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Okay. Okay. Did he tell you you‟d be asked
20 questions about that?
21 A. About —
22 Q. What you said in that interview in 1993?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Okay. Did he tell you to study it carefully
25 and make sure you knew what you said and didn‟t say,
26 right?
27 A. Actually, he didn‟t say, “Study it
28 carefully.” 4859
1 Q. Did he tell you to read it?
2 A. He told me to review it.
Here’s where it starts getting hysterical! Jason told police in 1993 that he “blacked out” during his abuse!
16 Q. In that interview, you told the police you
17 were sitting on Mr. Jackson‟s lap, correct?
18 A. In the „93 11 — is that this one that
19 you‟re reviewing right now?
20 Q. Yes.
21 A. The one you showed me? Yes.
22 Q. Yes. And you told them that at one point,
23 he started tickling you and you started tickling
24 him, right?
25 A. Yeah.
26 Q. And then you told the police, “I have this
27 blackout. I can‟t remember anything else,” right?
28 A. Yeah. I — I tried to black everything out. 4861
1 Q. I understand. But I just want to go forward
2 and ask you some questions about it.
3 A. Oh, okay.
4 Q. But on that particular date, you told the
5 police that you had blacked everything out after you
6 and Mr. Jackson started tickling, right, tickling
7 each other, correct?
8 A. Yeah.
Ok, now prepare to roll on the floor and start laughing! Jason told police that he “has to work on that” when he was asked by police to explain what happened! What on earth would he have to “work on” if he was telling the truth?
14 Q. Well, you told the police you had a blackout
15 and didn‟t remember anything after — after you and
16 Mr. Jackson were tickling each other, right?
17 A. I blocked it out. I didn‟t blank it out.
18 I just didn‟t never want to repeat that stuff again.
19 Q. Okay. Do you remember, in one of your
20 police interviews, the police telling you, “This is
21 what happened, right?” And you said, “Well, I‟ll
22 have to work on that”? Do you remember using words
23 like that?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Okay. Have you looked at the transcripts of
26 both your police interviews?
27 A. No.
28 Q. Okay. Just looked at the one in „93? 4863
1 A. I believe so.
In this excerpt, Mesereau reminds Jason of what he initially told police, which was a flat out denial of any abuse at the hands of MJ! Jason said that he said that to police because he was “fighting with everything he had”, which indicates that they were harassing him into a confession!
11 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Early in your interviews,
12 you denied being touched in your private areas,
13 didn‟t you?
14 A. Yeah. I was scared.
15 Q. They were pretty long interviews, weren‟t
16 they?
17 A. I believe so. Yeah, they were. They were
18 long in my time. To a kid, an hour‟s a long time.
19 Q. Do you remember in your first police
20 interview in 1993 telling the police, “I‟ll just say
21 this out flat. I don‟t remember him trying anything
22 with me except for the tickling”? Do you remember
23 that?
24 A. Do I remember saying that?
25 Q. Yes.
26 A. No. But I‟ve heard that on the voice.
27 Yeah, I was fighting them with everything I had.
In this excerpt, Mesereau reads to Jason his quotes from 1993 about the tickling games that he and MJ played on each other, and notice how he said they tickled each other! Jason also admits to denying any molestation early in the interview, but then admitting it after the police “twisted his arm” for it!
26 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you remember telling
27 the police in that interview, “We started tickling
28 each other and my mom just grabbed me and, „Let‟s 4867
1 go‟”?
2 A. I don‟t remember.
3 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I just
4 show you a page of it?
5 A. Probably would.
6 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?
7 THE COURT: You may.
8 MR. ZONEN: What page?
9 MR. MESEREAU: It would be page 26.
10 MR. ZONEN: Thank you.
11 THE WITNESS: Okay. I see that.
12 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
13 look at that? Does it refresh your recollection
14 about what you told the police in that interview?
15 A. No, not really.
16 Q. Well, on a number of occasions, you told
17 them, “We tickled each other and then I left,”
18 didn‟t you, words to that effect?
19 A. Yeah. Again, I was fighting with everything
20 I had.
21 Q. I‟m not asking you what you were doing. I‟m
22 just asking if that‟s true, okay? On a number of
23 occasions, you said, “We just tickled each other and
24 then I left,” right?
25 A. Okay.
26 Q. Is that correct?
27 A. Yes. And then I also told them that he
28 molested me. 4868
1 Q. On many occasions in that interview you
2 denied being molested, didn‟t you?
3 A. Yeah, at first.
4 Q. And the police kept leaning on you to admit
5 you had been molested, true?
6 A. It wasn‟t like a twisting the arm. It
7 was — I was again fighting. I didn‟t want to be
8 embarrassed at school. I didn‟t want to be
9 embarrassed anywhere. I was 13.
10 Q. So you were lying to the police?
11 A. Yeah. I was at first.
Jason also denied that MJ was “touchy-feely”:
20 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you remember in that
21 interview being asked, “Is Mr. Jackson
22 touchy-feely?” And you said, “I don‟t remember.
23 I distinctly don‟t remember”?
24 A. I don‟t remember that interview.
25 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show
26 you that page?
27 A. If you show me the page, I‟m still not going
28 to remember. 4869
1 Q. Well, you‟ve —
2 A. I could — if it says on the transcript,
3 then I‟ll say, okay, I said it when I was younger.
4 But I don‟t remember right now.
Here Jason admits that he told police it was “fun” being tickled by MJ!
24 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Remember telling the
25 police you just remember the tickling; it was fun?
26 A. It was fun to be tickled, to laugh. That‟s
27 fun.
28 Q. Okay. That‟s what you told the police in 4870
1 that interview, correct?
2 A. What I‟m telling you right now is that it‟s
3 fun to laugh. I don‟t know what I told them.
4 Q. Might it refresh your recollection if I just
5 show you a page of transcript?
6 A. I‟ll agree with it if it says it on there,
7 but I — to remember that all right now, I don‟t
8 remember.
Here is where Mesereau asks Jason about the specifics of the settlement money that he extorted out of MJ, which he never discussed with his mother!
19 Q. At some point you and your mother settled a
20 case with Mr. Jackson, correct?
21 A. I don‟t remember signing papers.
22 Q. You‟re how old today?
23 A. I‟m 24.
24 Q. And you‟re telling the jury you don‟t know
25 whether you and your mother ever reached a financial
26 settlement with Mr. Jackson?
27 A. There was a financial settlement.
28 Q. Okay. And when did you learn about that? 4872
1 A. I believe I was 17.
2 Q. Do you remember signing documents in that?
3 A. At 17, I don‟t remember.
4 Q. Okay. Do you remember looking at that
5 agreement?
6 A. At 17, I did not look at that agreement.
7 Q. And now, at 17, you knew that your mother
8 had already gone on television attacking Mr.
9 Jackson, right?
10 A. When she was on Hard Copy, is that what
11 you‟re talking about?
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. Yes. At 17, I heard she had already been on
14 Hard Copy.
15 Q. And at some point she met with Attorney
16 Larry Feldman, did she not?
17 A. I don‟t know.
18 Q. Okay. But at 17, you certainly knew that
19 your mother had hired attorneys who were threatening
20 to sue Mr. Jackson if they didn‟t get some money,
21 right?
22 A. No, I do not.
23 Q. Didn‟t know anything about that at 17?
24 A. Call me a stupid kid. I didn‟t know.
25 Q. Okay. But you certainly learned about it at
26 some point?
27 A. Yeah. I learned about it at some point.
28 Q. Which did you learn about the fact that your 4873
1 lawyers were threatening to go public and sue Mr.
2 Jackson unless you and your mother got money?
3 A. All of that stuff I don‟t know about. I
4 knew that there was a settlement. I don‟t know how
5 they fought, or what they argued about, or what they
6 talked about.
7 Q. You‟ve never discussed it with your mom?
8 A. About — I have never discussed what, the
9 settlement?
10 Q. Yes.
11 A. Yes, I have.
12 Q. Have you ever discussed how the settlement
13 came about with your mom?
14 A. No.
This is where he admits that he isn’t sure if he ever signed a settlement with MJ, and that he and his mom never talked about her settlement because of their “weird” relationship!
10 Q. At the age of 24, and as you sit here today,
11 you don‟t know if you ever signed a settlement
12 document with Mr. Jackson?
13 A. That is correct.
14 Q. As you sit here today, at the age of 24, do
15 you know if your mother ever signed a settlement
16 document with Mr. Jackson?
17 A. I think she did.
18 Q. Do you know if any money has come your way
19 through a settlement with Mr. Jackson?
20 A. Money has, yes.
21 Q. Okay. And when did you first learn about
22 that?
23 A. I answered that I thought. At 17.
24 Q. Okay. And you‟ve had many discussions with
25 your mom about that, right?
26 A. No. We — me and my mom have a weird
27 relationship. Well, not a weird relationship. We
28 just don‟t talk about much stuff. 4875
Here is where Mesereau grills Jason about the aggressive interrogation tactics of the police, and Jason once again admits he was fighting them, and he told them he wasn’t gay:
1 Q. Okay. Do you remember constantly telling
2 the people who interviewed you in 1993 that you
3 didn‟t remember Mr. Jackson doing anything improper?
4 A. I don‟t remember now, but I — in listening
5 to the tapes, I remember when I was — at first I
6 was denying everything.
7 Q. You‟ve told the police that he tickled you,
8 you tickled him, you both laughed, and then you went
9 home, right, early in the interview?
10
A. I think I told him that I blacked it out11 or — yeah.
12 Q. And you told the police at one point as they
13 tried to get you to say he had molested you, you
14 said, “If I don‟t remember, I don‟t remember,”
15 right?
16 A. Yeah.
17 Q. The police kept trying to tell you to say
18 that Mr. Jackson put his hands somewhere that was
19 improper, right?
20 A. No, they didn‟t.
21 Q. Do you remember these long paragraph
22 questions where they‟d say, essentially, “Admit to
23 us he did something improper”?
24 A. They said, “If he did something, then tell
25 us.” That‟s what I remember. You could give me
26 that, and I‟ll read it.
27 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show
28 you one of the paragraph questions they asked you? 4876
1 A. Well, this is — I‟m telling you what I
2 remember. It‟s not going to change my memory.
3 Q. It‟s not going to change your memory to look
4 at the transcript?
5 A. No. What I remember is them telling me, “If
6 he did something, then tell us.” And I was, “No,
7 I‟m not gay.” I was fighting it again.
8 Q. You repeatedly told them, “I have nothing to
9 tell you. I don‟t remember anything,” right?
10 A. I‟m sorry?
11 Q. You repeatedly told them you had nothing to
12 tell them because you didn‟t remember anything
13 improper?
14 A. In the very beginning, yeah.
At this point, Mesereau and Jason are going back and forth, and out of frustration Mesereau asks Judge Melville to instruct Jason to answer his questions!
6 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you remember anything
7 that happened after you went to the floor during the
8 first time you say you were improperly touched?
9 A. Isn‟t that the same question that you just
10 asked?
11 MR. MESEREAU: Your Honor, could the witness
12 be instructed to respond?
13 MR. ZONEN: I‟m not certain as to the —
14 THE COURT: Just a moment.
15 (To the witness) The problem we have is you
16 don‟t get to object to his questions. If the
17 District Attorney wants to object, he can. If the
18 District Attorney doesn‟t object, then you just
19 answer the question.
20 THE WITNESS: Okay.
Mesereau catches him in another lie in this exchange where he forces Jason to admit that, once again, he initially denied by abused by MJ!
9 Q. In your interview in 1993, the police asked
10 you if Mr. Jackson rubbed your penis, and you said,
11 “No,” correct?
12 A. Yeah.
13 Q. Right?
14 A. In the beginning, yeah.
15 Q. Well, pretty late in the interview, wasn‟t
16 it?
17 A. I have no clue.
18 Q. You said, “It was a tickling. He didn‟t rub
19 me there,” correct?
20 A. Oh. Okay. If we‟re going that —
21 Q. Is that right?
22 A. Yeah, he was playing with my stuff, not
23 rubbing it. In a stroking manner.
24 Q. I know the point you‟re trying to make to
25 the jury, but I‟m just asking you the facts, okay?
26 MR. ZONEN: I think that‟s argumentative.
27 THE COURT: Sustained.
28 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You told the police that, 4880
1 “He never rubbed me there. It was just a tickling,”
2 correct?
3 MR. ZONEN: Objection; asked and answered.
4 THE COURT: Overruled.
5 You may answer.
6 THE WITNESS: One more time.
7 THE COURT: I‟ll have the court reporter….
8 (Record read.)
9 THE WITNESS: I don‟t remember.
10 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Would it refresh your
11 recollection if I show you a transcript?
12 A. I don‟t remember. I‟ll say I don‟t
13 remember, but I‟ll agree with what the transcript
14 says.
15 Q. Okay. Well, I‟m not trying to put words in
16 your mouth. Would you like to look at it?
17 A. Okay.
18 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?
19 THE COURT: All right.
20 MR. ZONEN: What page, Counsel?
21 MR. MESEREAU: 45.
22 MR. ZONEN: Thank you.
23 THE WITNESS: Okay.
24 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
25 look at that transcript?
26 A. I did.
27 Q. Does it refresh your recollection about what
28 you told the police in that interview? 4881
1 A. No. But in reading it, it said, “Well,
2 yeah” in the very beginning of that sentence.
Jason claims that he was first molested at age 7, then again at age 8, and the last time he was 10, which means these tickling games took place in 1987, 88, and 90.
1 Q. Okay. So let me just, for the record, get
2 your ages each time. The first time you were around
3 seven, right?
4 A. Sounds about right. Seven, seven and a
5 half.
6 Q. The next time you were around eight?
7 A. Eight, eight and a half, or nine. Yeah.
8 Q. And the third time you‟re how old, do you
9 think?
10 A. Ten, ten and a half.
Here is where Jason admits that Sneddon was at his first counseling session!
24 Q. You said that you‟ve done some therapy,
25 right?
26 A. That I‟ve gone through counseling, yeah.
27 Q. Yes. And without going into what you said,
28 because that‟s confidential — 4887
1 A. Okay.
2 Q. — have you done anything, exercises or
3 anything, to try and refresh your memory about what
4 happened in „87 or „88?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Okay. And has any representative of the
7 police department been involved in any of your
8 counseling sessions?
9 A. No, I don‟t think so. Well, there was the
10 one time that the — that I first met Mr. Sneddon, I
11 think that‟s his name. And it wasn‟t a counseling
12 session. But Mike Craft, which was my counselor,
13 was there.
14 Q. Was there with Mr. Sneddon present?
15 A. I think he was there, but I was 13.
16 Q. Okay. And to your knowledge, was Mr.
17 Sneddon talking to your counselor?
18 A. I don‟t know.
19 Q. Okay. This is 12 years ago, approximately?
20 A. In „93.
21 Q. Okay. Okay.
22 A. Or „94.
23 Q. Okay. But you don‟t know what your
24 counselor or Mr. Sneddon said to each other, right?
25 You wouldn‟t know?
26 A. I wouldn‟t know.
27 Q. Okay. Do you know how long Mr. Sneddon and
28 your counselor met? 4888
1 MR. ZONEN: Objection; assumes facts not in
2 evidence, that they met.
3 THE COURT: Overruled.
4 You may answer.
5 THE WITNESS: I don‟t even know if they met.
6 I don‟t even — well, they had to have met because
7 they were in the same room, if they were in the same
8 room. But I don‟t know.
9 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you know where they
10 were in the same room?
11 A. Yeah, when they were in front of me.
12 Q. Do you know where that room was?
13 A. Yeah, it was in where I got my counseling.
14 It was my counselor‟s office.
15 Q. So Mr. Sneddon came to your counselor‟s
16 office, correct?
17 A. That‟s what it — I‟m telling you this,
18
because I think I remember meeting him there.19 Q. Okay. Do you know if your counselor‟s been
20 in touch with Mr. Sneddon?
21 A. I don‟t.
22 Q. Do you know if he‟s spoken to Mr. Sneddon at
23 any time other than that day?
24 A. I don‟t.
Here’s another memory lapse from Jason! He describes not remembering that he told police that he didn’t know if MJ touched him in his arcade! This is also one of the most important excerpts of his testimony, because he admits that the police were “pushy” with him, and he was trying to tell them what they wanted to hear so that he could get out of there! This excerpt concludes the first of two days of testimony.
15 Q. And in that 1993 interview, when it came to
16 talking about what happened at the arcade, you
17 didn‟t know if he‟d really touched you improperly,
18 right?
19 A. I knew.
20 Q. Well, you kept responding, “I don‟t know,”
21 and then you‟d say, “If he really did touch, it was
22 in the arcade”?
23 A. No —
24 Q. And you were asked, “Do you think he did
25 it?” And you said, “I don‟t know”?
26 A. I knew.
27 Q. But you told the police you didn‟t know,
28 correct? 4893
1 A. I don‟t remember. If you bring that thing
2 to me again, I‟m going to — yes.
3 Q. Would it refresh your recollection to look
4 at it?
5 A. Yes, bring it over.
6 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?
7 THE COURT: Yes.
8 THE WITNESS: You should just drop one off.
9 Okay.
10 MR. ZONEN: What page, Counsel?
11 MR. MESEREAU: That would be 57 and 58.
12 MR. ZONEN: Thank you.
13 THE WITNESS: Okay.
14 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
15 look at those pages?
16 A. I did.
17 Q. Does looking at those pages refresh your
18 recollection about what you have told the police —
19 A. No.
20 Q. — in „93?
21 A. I was 13. Eleven years ago.
22 Q. You weren‟t even sure you were tickled at
23 all. Remember that?
24 A. I don‟t remember that I — I knew.
25 Q. Remember telling the police, “You guys are
26 pushy”?
27 A. Yeah. I remember telling the police that.
28 Q. Okay. And after they kept pushing you, you 4894
1 finally said, “You know, I think he did tickle me,”
2 right?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Do you remember that? Do you remember at
5 first saying you didn‟t know, and then after —
6 A. Yeah, I remember saying at first, “I don‟t
7 know.”
8 Q. And after telling the police, “You guys are
9 pushy,” you eventually finally said, “Yes, he
10 tickled me,” right?
11 A. I believe that‟s how it went.
12 Q. Okay. You kind of went back and forth
13 during the interview, didn‟t you? One second you‟d
14 say, “He tickled me,” and the next second you‟d say
15 you‟re not sure, right?
16 A. I was trying to figure out how to get out of
17 there.
18 Q. I understand. And you remember exactly how
19 you felt in 1993 during the interview, right?
20 A. The feeling of, yeah, crying and crappiness.
21 Q. Okay. Do you remember the police kept
22 trying to get you to say he‟s a molester?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show
25 you what one officer said to you about that?
26 A. Bring it over.
27 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach?
28 MR. ZONEN: Perhaps the witness could 4895
1 indicate whether it would refresh his recollection.
2 THE WITNESS: It wouldn‟t.
3 THE COURT: When he said “Bring it over,”
4 that sort of means like he‟ll see if it refreshes
5 his recollection.
6 THE WITNESS: Okay.
7 THE COURT: It‟s a shortcut. Go ahead.
8 MR. MESEREAU: Thank you, Your Honor.
9 THE COURT: We‟re down to the last seconds
10 here. Run.
11 (Laughter.)
12 MR. ZONEN: What page, Counsel?
13 MR. MESEREAU: 60.
14 MR. ZONEN: What line, please? It‟s not
15 numbered. Never mind.
16 MR. MESEREAU: Towards the bottom. Towards
17 the bottom.
18 THE WITNESS: Okay.
19 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You‟re 13 years old.
20 You‟re sitting there, and one officer said to you —
21 THE COURT: Wait a minute now. Are you going
22 to ask him if it refreshes his memory?
23 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
24 look at that transcript? Does it refresh your
25 recollection that an officer looked at you said —
26 THE COURT: Just a moment, Counsel.
27 MR. MESEREAU: Okay.
28 THE COURT: He said, no, it didn‟t refresh 4896
1 his recollection.
2 All right. This is the end of the day.
3 (Laughter.)
4 See you tomorrow.
5 THE COURT: Go to bed one hour early.
6 (The proceedings adjourned at 2:30 p.m.)
As you can see from that exchange, the police were trying to coerce Jason into making a false confession, and they succeeded! This was the M.O. of the police department in 1993 as they searched for anyone that they could use to corroborate Jordan’s lies. Another example of someone who was bullied during his interrogation (but did NOT give in and make a false accusation) is actor Corey Feldman! The audiotape of his 1993 police interview was leaked during the trial, and in it you can clearly hear the police badgering Corey about his relationship with MJ. But what’s most disturbing and frightening is the fact that he Corey really was molested, and he names his abuser, but the police IGNORE HIM!
Notice that Corey mentions how MJ slept on a cot while he was in the bed, and that MJ prayed with him before going to sleep!
Here is an interview from last year where Feldman further discusses child abuse in Hollywood, and the role it played in the death of his friend, fellow child actor Corey Haim:
Here is his testimony from April 5th, 2005. Mesereau starts by asking him if he discussed his testimony with anyone, and notice the prosecutors said he did a “good job”, and that he asked his pastor to pray for him!
16 Q. Mr. Francia, we were discussing yesterday
17 your first interview with two police detectives
18 which took place on November 3rd, 1993, okay?
19 A. Okay.
20 Q. That‟s where we left off.
21 Now, did you discuss your testimony
22 yesterday with anyone after you left the courthouse?
23 A. Yeah.
24 Q. Who did you discuss it with?
25 A. My wife.
26 Q. Anyone else?
27 A. No.
28 Q. Did you discuss it with any prosecutor? 4902
1 A. No, I was kind of nervous. I said, “How‟d
2 it go?” And they smiled and they said, “It went
3 well.”
4 Q. And which prosecutor told you that?
5 A. I can‟t specifically remember, but it was
6 one of them.
7 Q. Okay. Did you discuss anything else with
8 one of them?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Did you talk with any sheriff about your
11 testimony?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Were you on the phone last night with anyone
14 about your testimony?
15 A. No. I did tell my pastor this morning that
16 I was on the stand, and if he could pray for me.
17 But other than that, that was it.
18 Q. Anyone else?
19 A. Nope.
Here Jason is asked about the true reasons why MJ gave him money! MJ would pay him money for reading books and getting A’s! Jason said he didn’t remember saying it back then, but did remember “saying it on the tape”. Talk about a contradiction, eh?
20 Q. Okay. Now, yesterday you told the jury that
21 Mr. Jackson had given you some money, correct?
22 A. Right.
23 Q. And you told them he had given you
24 hundred-dollar bills, right?
25 A. Right.
26 Q. Isn‟t it true that when you were originally
27 interviewed by the police, you told them that Mr.
28 Jackson would give you money each time you read a 4903
1 book?
2 A. Yeah, he also said that, as well. Yeah,
3 he‟d give me $20, I think it was.
4 Q. And you told the police that you remember
5 him having a room full of books, and you said every
6 time you complete a book, he‟ll pay you some money,
7 right?
8 A. I don‟t remember that, but I remember
9 listening to it on the tape.
10 Q. But that was your voice on the tape,
11 correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Okay. You also told the police that Mr.
14 Jackson told you one time that if you got A‟s in
15 school, he would also pay you every time you got an
16 A, correct?
17 A. Yes. That is correct. I remember — I
18 don‟t remember him saying that, but I remember it on
19 the tape.
20 Q. And that was your voice on the tape?
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. Telling it to the police, correct?
23 A. Yes, sir.
24 Q. Okay. When you met with the prosecutors
25 before you testified, did anyone tell you not to
26 mention that when you talked about money?
27 A. No.
28 Q. Okay. You just forgot? 4904
1 A. I‟m sorry?
2 Q. You just forgot yesterday?
3 MR. ZONEN: Objection; argumentative.
4 THE COURT: Overruled.
5 You may answer.
6 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: When you were responding
7 the prosecutor‟s questions —
8 THE COURT: Wait. He has a question pending.
9 MR. MESEREAU: Oh, I‟m sorry.
10 THE COURT: I overruled the objection.
11 THE WITNESS: Can you repeat the question?
12 THE COURT: The question was, “You just
13 forgot yesterday?”
14 THE WITNESS: I have no idea what you‟re
15 referring to. I just forgot about what?
16 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: About Mr. Jackson paying
17 you money for, one, reading a book —
18 A. No —
19 Q. — and, two, getting A‟s.
20 A. I didn‟t remember that, but I remember
21 saying that on the tape.
Jason is once again questioned by Mesereau about the bullying tactics of the police, and for him to want to hit the police in the head is indicative of his level of frustration with them!
20 Q. Do you remember stating in that interview,
21 “They made me come out with a lot more stuff I
22 didn‟t want to say. They kept pushing. I wanted to
23 get up and hit them in the head”? Do you remember
24 that?
25 A. No.
26 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show
27 you the transcript of that?
28 A. Probably not. But you can show it to me 4908
1 anyway.
2 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?
3 THE COURT: Yes.
4 MR. ZONEN: What page, Counsel?
5 MR. MESEREAU: 30.
6 THE WITNESS: Okay.
7 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
8 look at that page of the transcript?
9 A. I have.
10 Q. Does it refresh your recollection about what
11 you‟ve said?
12 A. No, it does not.
13 Q. Do you remember anything you said in that
14 interview at the moment?
15 A. Not really.
In December 2004, Jason met with his lawyer and prosecutors, and ironically he requested that the interview not be recorded! But it was recorded anyway.
11 Q. Do you remember when that interview began,
12 you requested that your interview not be
13 tape-recorded?
14 A. I don‟t remember that.
15 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show
16 you a report on that interview?
17 A. Okay. Sure.
18 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?
19 THE COURT: Yes.
20 THE WITNESS: Okay.
21 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
22 look at that report?
23 A. I read the first paragraph.
24 Q. And does it refresh your recollection that
25 you requested that your interview not be
26 tape-recorded?
27 A. It does not, but I probably said that.
28 Q. Okay. You don‟t know for sure, though? 4912
1 A. No.
Jason goes on to say that he made that request because tape recording is “weird”! But pay attention to this exchange, because Mesereau points out some bombshell exculpatory evidence! Each and every instance of “molestation” was preceded by a tickling contest! This is indicative of the playful relationship MJ had with Jason!
24 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Why didn‟t you want your
25 interview in December of 2004 with the prosecutors
26 tape-recorded?
27 A. I don‟t know.
28 Q. You don‟t have any idea why you made that 4917
1 request?
2 A. Tape-recording is weird. I don‟t know. No,
3 I don‟t.
4 Q. Okay. Do you remember telling Prosecutor
5 Zonen in the December 2004 interview regarding the
6 first incident you described – okay? – that you and
7 Mr. Jackson were in a tickle contest? Do you
8 remember that?
9 A. I do not. I don‟t know whether it was the
10 first interview or the second interview that we
11 talked about Michael molesting me.
12 Q. Well, actually, in the December interview,
13 you told Prosecutor Zonen that, in all three
14 instances that you described where you claim you
15 were inappropriately touched, every incident was
16 preceded by a tickling contest between you and Mr.
17 Jackson, right?
18 A. I don‟t know.
19 Q. Would it refresh your recollection just to
20 show you the report?
21 A. You can show it to me, but I don‟t know
22 whether it was the first or the second.
23 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?
24 THE COURT: Yes.
25 THE WITNESS: Okay.
26 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
27 review that page of the report?
28 A. I didn‟t read the whole page. I read that 4918
1 paragraph.
2 Q. Does it refresh your recollection about what
3 you told Prosecutor Zonen in that December 6th,
4 2004, interview?
5 A. It doesn‟t — I don‟t — it doesn‟t help
6 remembering, but —
7 Q. Well, you told him that all three events
8 that you described were preceded by a tickling
9 contest, correct?
10 A. I don‟t remember.
11 Q. You and Mr. Jackson were in a contest as to
12 who could tickle the most, correct?
13 A. I just said I don‟t remember that. I don‟t
14 mean to sound like I‟m wasting your time, but this
15 is kind of hard being up here, and —
16 Q. No, please don‟t. Just respond to my
17 questions, if you would, please.
18 A. Okay. Sorry.
Jason then admits that he asked that his mother’s November 19th, 2004 interview not be recorded as well! He didn’t know at first that his mom was interviewed in November 2004, but then suddenly remembered he was at that meeting, and requested that he not be tape recorded.
19 Q. Now, on November 19th, 2004, Prosecutor
20 Zonen and Auchincloss interviewed your mother at the
21 District Attorney‟s Office, right?
22 A. I don‟t know. Me and my mother don‟t talk
23 about that stuff much.
24 Q. Well, you were present, weren‟t you?
25 A. Now I remember, yes.
26 Q. Now you remember?
27 A. Yeah. I was present there.
28 Q. You not only were present, but you also 4919
1 requested that that not be tape-recorded, correct?
2 A. Probably.
3 Q. You don‟t know?
4 A. I don‟t know.
5 Q. Would it refresh your recollection to look
6 at that report?
7 A. No. But bring it on up.
8 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?
9 THE COURT: No, he said it wouldn‟t.
10 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You‟re not willing to look
11 at it?
12 A. It‟s not about me willing. I‟m willing to
13 look at it, but it‟s not going to help.
14 Q. Well, that was last November you had that
15 interview with your mom and these prosecutors,
16 correct?
17 A. Again, this is all difficult.
18 Q. I know it‟s difficult, but you‟re saying you
19 don‟t remember that interview?
20 A. You just said I met with my mom and I was
21 there, and I didn‟t remember until you said that,
22 and then I remembered.
23 Q. Do you remember you and your mom both
24 requested that the interview not be tape-recorded?
25 A. I do not.
26 Q. Would it refresh your recollection to see
27 what it says in the report about that?
28 A. Bring it over. It — yeah. Bring it over. 4920
1 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?
2 THE COURT: Yes.
3 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
4 look at the page of that report?
5 A. Yeah, I read the first paragraph.
6 Q. Does it refresh your recollection about you
7 and your mother both requesting no tape-recording?
8 A. No, it does not.
9 Q. Okay. You don‟t remember one way or the
10 other about that?
11 A. Right.
Memory lapse alert! Memory lapse alert! Here Jason admits that he doesn’t remember his interviews from October, November, or December 2004!!
12 Q. Okay. Okay. Now, on that particular day,
13 and I‟m referring to November 19th, 2004, you were
14 interviewed as well, correct?
15 A. Was this when my mother was present?
16 Q. Yes.
17 A. Okay.
18 Q. Do you remember you were interviewed on that
19 day?
20 A. I think I was just there for my mom.
21 Q. Well, actually, they interviewed your mom
22 first and then they interviewed you second, correct?
23 A. I don‟t remember that.
24 Q. Okay. They interviewed you for about an
25 hour, didn‟t they?
26 A. They may have.
27 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show
28 you the report about that? 4921
1 A. No.
2 Q. You‟re not willing to look at it?
3 A. I‟ll look at it. I‟ll look at it, but no,
4 it probably won‟t.
5 Q. You don‟t remember an hour interview on
6 November 19th, 2004?
7 A. Again, the issue is it‟s all kind of
8 blending in together.
9 Q. You do remember the December interview with
10 Prosecutor Zonen, right?
11 A. You asked me that —
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. Go ahead, ask it again. Do I remember the
14 December interview?
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. I remember it taking place. I don‟t
17 remember what specific was asked.
18 Q. Actually, let me clarify the date.
19 A. Okay.
20 Q. Okay. I‟m talking about the report. You
21 were interviewed on October 18th, 2004, by
22 prosecutors, right?
23 A. I‟m sorry?
24 Q. You were interviewed on October 18th by
25 prosecutors, correct?
26 A. Of 2004?
27 Q. Yes.
28 A. I believe that was the first time that I met 4922
1 these guys, but I don‟t know.
2 Q. And then you were interviewed approximately
3 a month later on November 19th, right?
4 A. You got a bunch of hands raised behind you.
5 THE BAILIFF: Mr. Mesereau, could you check
6 if it‟s on? I guess they can‟t hear you back there.
7 THE WITNESS: Sorry, that‟s what was kind of
8 distracting me.
9 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: I had mentioned a December
10 date. Actually, you were interviewed in October and
11 November of 2004, right?
12 A. October, November, December. I don‟t know.
Here’s another example of how the police bullied him in 1993!
2 Q. Okay. All right. Now, you admitted that at
3 the beginning of your first interview with sheriffs
4 in „93, you said that Mr. Jackson had not touched
5 your genital area, right?
6 A. I said that at the very beginning.
7 MR. ZONEN: Objection; asked and answered.
8 THE COURT: Sustained.
9 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: It was only after you were
10 pushed real hard by the sheriffs that you began to
11 say anything like that, true?
12 MR. ZONEN: Objection; asked and answered.
13 THE COURT: Sustained.
14 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: And at one point a sheriff
15 actually used a curse word to get you to say
16 something, correct?
17 A. I don‟t remember that, but you could show me
18 the thing.
19 Q. Okay. But as you sit here today, you don‟t
20 remember, right?
21 A. I don‟t remember the four-letter word.
22 Everybody in junior high cussed.
23 Q. How about the word “bullshit”?
24 A. What about it?
25 Q. Do you remember a sheriff telling you that?
26 A. I don‟t, but I think I remember listening to
27 it on the tape.
28 Q. Do you remember in that interview one 4927
1 sheriff telling you, “Mr. Jackson is a molester,”
2 and the other saying, “He makes great music, he‟s a
3 great guy, bullshit”? Do you remember that?
4 A. I don‟t remember that specifically, but I
5 think I remember hearing it on the tape, which was
6 my voice, or his voice.
7 Q. You do remember a sheriff‟s voice saying
8 that, right?
9 A. I don‟t remember right now of „93, but I
10 remember listening to the tape.
11 Q. Okay. And a sheriff said that to you,
12 correct?
13 A. I believe so.
14 Q. And the sheriffs complained that, “Mr.
15 Jackson has a lot of money” in that interview,
16 right?
17 A. I believe he did say that, but can I look at
18 the paper?
19 Q. Sure.
20 May I approach, Your Honor?
21 THE COURT: Yes.
22 THE WITNESS: Okay.
23 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
24 look at the transcript?
25 A. I did.
26 Q. Does it refresh your recollection about what
27 the sheriffs said to you about Mr. Jackson in the
28 interview? 4928
1 A. I don‟t remember that specifically, but
2 reading it in the transcript, I remember reading
3 that in the transcript when I read it on Sunday,
4 when I reviewed the tape.
5 Q. And even after sheriffs said to you, “He‟s a
6 molester, he‟s a great guy, makes great music,
7 bullshit, he has lots of money,” you still said he
8 had never touched your genital area, right?
9 A. I believe so. Probably towards the
10 beginning again.
In this excerpt, Mesereau traps Jason with yet another one of his initial denials of abuse by MJ, and a frustrated Mesereau is chastised by Judge Melville for being too vague as to which interview he is referring to! He also asks Jason how he could remember crying during an interview he if doesn’t even remember the interview!
26 Q. Okay. You were asked to describe what Mr.
27 Jackson did with his hands, and your response was,
28 “He tickled me,” true? 4932
1 A. I don‟t know. I was probably crying then.
2 Q. Would you like to review the transcript, see
3 if it refreshes your recollection?
4 A. Sure.
5 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. May I approach, Your
6 Honor?
7 THE COURT: Yes.
8 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: By the way, if you don‟t
9 remember the interview, how do you know you were
10 crying?
11 A. Because I usually cry when we‟re talking
12 about the molestation.
13 Q. Okay. Okay. Again, do you remember saying
14 to the police officers in response to their
15 question, “What did he do with your penis?” You
16 said, “He tickled me”?
17 A. I thought you were going to bring me that
18 thing.
19 Q. Would you like to see it?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. Okay.
23 Q. Do you remember describing what Mr. Jackson
24 did as tickling?
25 A. Do I remember describing what Michael
26 Jackson did as tickling?
27 Q. Yes.
28 A. Like tickling my penis or — 4933
1 Q. Yes.
2 A. Are we talking the first or second or third
3 incident?
4 Q. I don‟t know.
5 MR. ZONEN: Well, I‟m going to object as
6 vague.
7 THE COURT: The objection is sustained.
8 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you remember telling
9 the interviewers in that second interview in 1994,
10 when they asked you what Mr. Jackson did with your
11 penis, you said, “He didn‟t really touch it, he was
12 above my shorts”? Do you remember that?
13 A. Are we talking first or second or third?
14 Q. I believe you were just answering their
15 questions.
16 MR. ZONEN: Objection; vague.
17 THE COURT: Sustained.
18 Counsel, you‟re going to have to direct —
19 if you‟re going to question in this manner, you‟re
20 going to have to direct it to specific times. There
21 were three interviews.
22 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. I‟m sorry, Your Honor.
23 THE COURT: And you‟re being unfair to the
24 witness in my opinion.
In this excerpt, Jason is asked about yet another one of his denials, and when he tries to give a long and convoluted answer, he s chastised by Judge Melville:
20 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. I‟m going to try
21 and direct my questions to a particular interview,
22 one of the four that you had, and direct them to one
23 of the three events that you have described when you
24 claim Mr. Jackson improperly touched you, okay?
25 Now, directing your attention to the second
26 interview, which is in 1994 – okay? – and directing
27 your attention to the first event that you have
28 described where you claim Mr. Jackson improperly 4935
1 touched you – okay? – do you remember — excuse me.
2 Isn‟t it true that, when asked about the first event
3 in that second interview, you said Mr. Jackson
4 didn‟t really touch your penis?
5 A. I don‟t —
6 MR. ZONEN: What page?
7 MR. MESEREAU: 60.
8 THE WITNESS: No, I don‟t remember.
9 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Would it refresh your
10 recollection if I show you a page of that
11 transcript?
12 A. Bring it over.
13 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach?
14 THE COURT: Yes.
15 THE WITNESS: Okay.
16 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
17 look at that page?
18 A. I have. Well, not the tape. I‟ve read
19 those two little sentences there.
20 Q. Does it refresh your recollection of what
21 you told the people who were interviewing you about
22 that first event during the interview in 1994?
23 A. It does not refresh my memory. But in
24 reading it —
25 THE COURT: Wait. That‟s the end of your
26 answer.
27 THE WITNESS: Okay. Sorry.
28 THE COURT: Listen to the question and just 4936
1 answer the question asked.
Mesereau pins Jason down again and forces him to account for what he told police in 1994 when he said that he’s “working on that” in response to a question of whether he remembered what he said in the first interview.
19 Q. Okay. Do you remember telling the
20 interviewers, when you were asked do you remember
21 anything that he said, you said, “No, I‟m working on
22 that”?
23 A. No.
24 MR. ZONEN: I‟ll object as to which
25 interview; vague.
26 MR. MESEREAU: In the second interview, I‟m
27 sorry.
28 Q. In the second interview — let me rephrase 4941
1 the question. I‟ll withdraw it.
2 In the second interview in 1994 – okay? —
3 A. Okay.
4 Q. — that was recorded – all right? – when
5 asked if Mr. Jackson said anything to you about
6 whether you should discuss what happened, do you
7 remember telling the interviewers, “No, but I‟m
8 working on that”?
9 A. I do not remember that.
10 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show
11 you the transcript?
12 A. No. But — you could bring it over.
13 Q. Well, I can‟t unless you‟re willing to see
14 if it refreshes your recollection.
15 A. Okay. Bring it over. I‟ll give it a shot.
16 I‟ll read it just to see if it refreshes my memory.
17 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach?
18 THE COURT: Yes.
19 MR. ZONEN: Page, Counsel?
20 MR. MESEREAU: Yes. Pages 105, 106.
21 THE WITNESS: Okay.
22 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
23 review those pages —
24 A. I have.
25 Q. — of your transcript?
26 Do they refresh your recollection about what
27 you said on that subject?
28 A. No, it does not. 4942
1 Q. It doesn‟t.
2 A. Sorry.
Here’s something that will make you laugh out loud! Jason admits that he first learned that MJ was sued for money at age 16 when money “became an issue for him”!
25 Q. Looking back, when is the first time you
26 recall you knew someone else had sued Mr. Jackson
27 looking for money?
28 A. Probably 16. 4943
1 Q. Excuse me?
2 A. I was probably 16. Because that‟s when
3 money started being an issue for me.
That excerpt ends Mesereau’s cross examination. Zonen asked a few more questions under re-direct examination, and three things that stand out are that 1) he never told his wife about his “molestation”, 2) he did tell his pastor about it, and 3) he told his mother about it only after he started getting counseling, but didn’t tell her any details. You would think she would demand to know the details, right?
Mesereau declined to re-cross examine Jason, and after reading my summary of his testimony, it’s easy to see why! Interestingly, Jason said that MJ “needs to move away” as he left the witness stand. As we all know, those words were prophetic, as MJ moved to Bahrain after his acquittal. (Although I’m sure Jason didn’t imply that MJ should move away to avoid the press!)
5 Q. Mr. Mesereau asked you yesterday questions
6 about whether you talked to your mother about what
7 had happened, and if so, to what extent.
8 Did you ever have a conversation with your
9 mother where you told her that you were molested?
10 A. I think I told her that I was molested in
11 counseling, because then she shared that she was
12 molested as well.
13 Q. Okay. Did you ever tell her the details of
14 the molestation?
15 A. No.
16 Q. What had happened, how it happened, how
17 often it happened, any of those types of details?
18 A. I don‟t think so.
19 Q. To this day, have you ever?
20 A. To this day. My wife found out on the
21 stand.
22 Q. The details you had not yet told your wife?
23 A. Right.
24 Q. Have you ever told anybody the details other
25 than your therapist?
26 A. My pastor.
27 Q. Your pastor?
28 A. And I don‟t think I told him the details. 4948
1 MR. ZONEN: Thank you. I have no further
2 questions.
3 THE COURT: Recross?
4 MR. MESEREAU: No further questions, Your
5 Honor.
6 THE COURT: All right. You may step down.
7 He needs to move away.
8 MR. SNEDDON: Don‟t forget your jacket.
Now, after reading that summary of Jason’s ENTIRE testimony, it’s pretty easy to see why the jury didn’t take his claims seriously, right? It’s too bad the general public wasn’t informed about the facts of his testimony! Let’s look at what the Santa Maria Times had to say about Jason’s testimony!
Former Jackson victim finishes testifying
A 24-year-old Santa Maria man who said Michael Jackson molested him on three occasions as a child wrapped up his testimony this morning.
During cross examination, Jackson attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. quizzed the man on four interviews he had with law enforcement between 1993 and 2004. Mesereau was unable to reveal any inconsistencies in the story.
At times Mesereau was vague about which specific interview and incident of molestation he was referring to, prompting Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville to briefly interrupt questioning.
“You/re being unfair to the witness, in my opinion,” Melville said.
The man, whose mother was a housekeeper for the singer, also spoke of how his perception of Michael Jackson changed during his childhood.
“In fifth grade I told my friends that I knew Michael Jackson and they thought it was cool …. In junior high it/s no longer cool to know someone who has issues with kids,” the man said.
The man, who testified Monday about how tickling contests with Jackson escalated into fondling, said today that after two of the incidents Jackson put a ,100 bill in his shorts.
Mesereau referred to previous interviews the man gave in which he said Jackson also offered him money to read books and get good grades. The man said he never received any money for either of those deeds.
“Throughout my whole life, grades were a problem,” the man said, provoking some chuckling in the courtroom.
The Santa Maria Times, following its established policy, is not identifying those who allege they were abused by Jackson, even though they are being named in court.
* Staff writer Quintin Cushner can be reached at (805) 739-2217 or by e-mail atqcushner@pulitzer.net.
April 6,2005
Can you believe that? Mesereau was “unable to reveal any inconsistencies in the story”? Are you freaking kidding me? Maybe we should contact Quintin Cushner and ask him if he even bothered to read Jason’s testimony! There were so many inconsistencies that the jurors LAUGHED at his testimony during a court break after he was done testifying!
Here is a compilation of the media’s coverage of Francia’s testimony! Notice how the reporter asked Sheriff Jim Thomas why the police decided to interview Jason despite the fact that he never filed a complaint, and he said it’s because a Neverland employee told them to!
Conservative commentator Matt Drudge summed up the reason why so many people thought MJ was guilty oh so succinctly when he said the following on his radio show on 2005 (which can be heard in this post):
Matt Drudge: I think if you did a pulse poll, of people listening to these local talk shows, they would say 95% that Michael Jackson did all this. They would say that, because it’s based on the coverage! It’s based on the coverage!
Here’s yet another example of the slezy media coddling MJ’s accusers! Maureen Orth’s “C.S.I. Neverland” article, which was published in June 2005 (before the acquittal), said the following about Francia’s testimony (notice how she relies on the fallacy of telling half-truths, how she tries to emphasize Francia’s religious convictions in order to win symphathy for him, and that she confirms that the jurors laughed at his testimony during their break!):
Jason Francia, the handsome son of a former personal maid at Neverland, was the only young man to come forward and tell the jury that Michael Jackson had molested him, beginning when he was seven. After five years of therapy, the devout evangelical Christian said, he now works as a mentor to troubled young people and as a salesman of auto parts. He was 17, he said, when he learned that his mother, Blanca Francia, had agreed to a $2.4 million settlement with Jackson over three allegations of fondling him, and he had found out only two days prior to taking the stand that she had sold her story to tabloid TV for $20,000.
Francia testified that twice at Jackson’s “hideout” apartment in Los Angeles the pop star had engaged him in tickling games during which he would move his hands over the boy’s genitalia on the outside of his shorts. “Pretty much at every tickle thing there was money,” he said, adding that both times Jackson gave him a hundred-dollar bill. As he described a third time, at Neverland when he was about 10 and Jackson’s hands were inside his pants, his eyes welled up with tears, and he had to stop. When detectives questioned him in 1993, during the investigation into the Chandler case, he was 13 and at first denied that anything untoward had happened to him. A short time later, however, he disclosed details to the police.
During a break the judge took for a conference at the bench in the middle of Francia’s testimony, I was alarmed by the indifference of the jurors. The young man sitting in the witness-box before them had just gone through one of the most humiliating ordeals of his life, but they did not exhibit the slightest sign of empathy. They ignored him as they laughed and talked together. I suddenly wondered if we have not all watched so much Dr. Phil and Oprah that we can no longer distinguish between real pain and entertainment.
Here are the complete questions asked by the police that Mesereau used as examples of their bullying methods on Jason, taken from the SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DISTRIC ATTORNEY’S MTION FOR ADMISSION OF ALLEGED PRIOR OFFENSES pleading . After telling cops that he doesn’t remember being inappropriately touched by MJ, Det. Neglia responds with the following:
Detective Neglia: Okay, but what I am getting at is that maybe I am not being obvious enough. What I am saying is maybe he put his hands someplace on you where he shouldn’t have. Maybe he put his hands on you someplace that made you feel uncomfortable. And that’s why you are not remembering. It’s like there is a little bit of “Oh. I can’t remember that guy’s name and I don’t remember his last name, and I just don’t remember that. No I don’t want to remember that, no I can’t remember.” It’s a little of bit of a different kind of not remembering, one is because you are choosing not to, and one is that you just can’t call back the uh, the event. And I think of what you doing is tickling and all this stuff, is trying forcing yourself not to remember. And you also kind of got to the one where you’re saying that fourth time at the party you said something like, “That was the time.” What time was it?
Jason: What was the time?
Later in the interview, the detecives tell Jason Francia that MJ is currently molesting Macaulay Culkin:
Det. Neglia: I realize how hard this is. I realize how painful it is to think of these things you tried so hard not to think about but you are doing fine. And you are also helping the kid that he is bothering now.
Jason Francia: What do you mean he’s bothering?
Det. Birchim: He’s doing the same thing.
Jason Francia: Macauly Culkin.
Det. Neglia: Only he’s getting a lot more into it. Like your mother pulled you out of there. Macaulay’s mother is not going to pull him out of there. They are feeding him.
Det. Birchim: He’s doing worse stuff.
Det. Neglia: It’s much worse with him.
The police go on to implicate Corey Feldman as another victim, and suggest that Jason can help them pull Eddie and Frank Cascio away from MJ while he’s on tour! (Although none of them are mentioned by name, it’s easy to know who they’re referring to.)
Det. Neglia: He’s a junkie now. he gets arrested, he doesn’t act or anything, he gets high. He packs his nose with cocaine and he’s going to die by the time he is 22 years old.
Jason Francia: How old is he?
Det.Neglia: About 21. But that’s the kind of life he is living, and it’s got to do with being exposed to people like this, and having nobody to protect them and to take them out.
Det. Birchim: Like you had your mom.
Det. Neglia: Like your mom pulled you out and you’re, you’re candid, and you’re honesty with us is going to help us. To pull the next kid out. it might even, be too late for Macauly already. But these kids that he’s traveling with are on tour right now. Maybe we can pull them out of it…
Here is an article from February 1994 that refers to Blanca Francia’s concern over having Jason talking to police without her being present:
Officials Desperate To Nail Michael Jackson
Newsday
February 07, 1994
The child sex abuse case against Michael Jackson has taken a new – and ugly – turn.
Prosecutors in Los Angeles and Santa Barbara counties are scrambling to salvage what’s left of their criminal investigations into sex abuse allegations against the pop music star.
Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti urged state legislators last week to amend a law that now prohibits forcing people who say they have been sexually assaulted to testify in criminal proceedings.
If passed, the change would take effect immediately and allow Garcetti to compel the 14-year-old boy with whom Jackson reached an out-of-court settlement last month to testify in any criminal trials growing out of his widely reported charge that the superstar sexually abused him.
That would be a real act of legal brinksmanship.
If the lawmakers give Garcetti the power he seeks and the boy – whose doctors say he needs to put this matter behind him – refuses to testify, what would he do? Send the boy to jail?
Law enforcement officials in Santa Barbara County have taken a different – if no less desperate – approach in their pursuit of criminal charges against Jackson.
Investigators from the county sheriff’s office recently arranged for the 13-year-old son of Jackson’s former maid to see a therapist. The boy was first interviewed by police after his mother told them he had spent time alone with Jackson. According to his mother, the child has repeatedly denied being abused in any way by the pop music star. The offer of a therapist was made after the woman, an immigrant from Central America, complained about meetings and phone conversations sheriff’s deputies had with the boy while she was not present.
It made her “feel uncomfortable,” she said in a deposition, that she didn’t know what the deputies were talking about with the young boy.
When she asked them “who should I talk to” about her concerns, they arranged for the woman and her son to see separate therapists at the county’s expense, she said in the sworn statement. Not surprisingly, a senior official of the Santa Barbara sheriff’s department told People magazine last week that the boy who brought the original sex abuse charge against Jackson “is not the only victim out there.”
This week, a grand jury will be convened in Santa Barbara County to hear testimony concerning the Jackson case, and the bill Garcetti is pushing will be introduced in the state assembly.
And the line between justice and injustice is getting harder and harder to find.
When you look at the way that Francia and Feldman (and others) were interviewed by police, it’s clear that the police were seeking a conviction, and not justice! In fact, on October 28th, 1993, MJ’s defense attorney Bert Fields wrote a letter to Police Chief Willie Williams about the bullying tactics that the LAPD officers were using during their interviews of children, including telling the children that they had nude photos of them!
Here are nine warning signs that an alleged victim may have been pressured into making a false accusation (taken from the article The Fallibility of Forensic Interviewing), and you’ll see that many of them apply to Jason Francia and Corey Feldman:
The Analysis of Child Interviews
The New Jersey Supreme Court found nine factors sufficient to justify a
pretrial taint hearing:
(a) Absence of spontaneous recall;
(b) Interviewer bias against defendant – a preconceived idea of what the child should be
disclosing;
(c) Repeated leading questions;
(d) Multiple interviews;
(e) Incessant questioning;
(f) Vilification of defendant;
(g) Ongoing contact with peers and references to their statements;
(h) Use of threats, bribes and cajoling; and
(i) Failure to videotape or otherwise document the initial interview sessions.
The above factors were to be considered, if a hearing is held, in determining whether a
child’s testimony is tainted and should be suppressed. Other indicators of faulty interviewing not only exist, but they can be quantified – allowing for an objective analysis.
It’s a good thing that MJ was able to hire Mesereau, but if he had not been available, I know of someone who would have been a perfect fit to defend MJ! Who is this person, you ask?
It’s Ed Chernoff! Yes, THE Ed Chernoff who defended Conrad Murray!
Did you know that his law office (Stradley, Chernoff, & Alford) defends people who have been falsely accused of child abuse? Pay attention to what Chernoff’s law firm says about police investigations!
Sex Crimes Against Children
Standing as the Voice of Reason to Protect and Defend the Accused
If you’ve been accused of a sex crime involving a child — whether child says they were molested, or you’re charged with possession of Internet child pornography — you’ve entered the realm of nightmares. Even if you are completely innocent, you are facing an uphill battle against state police and Child Protective Services, and possibly federal child sex crimes authorities.
When you are in a fight for your reputation and your freedom, you want heavy hitters on your side. Contact the Houston sex crimes defense attorneys at the Harris County law office of Stradley, Chernoff & Alford, Call 713-489-2358 for a thoughtful, realistic free consultation.
Defense for Felony or Misdemeanor Sex Charges
At Stradley, Chernoff & Alford, we defend people facing any child sex crime charge, including:
- predatory sexual assault
- child solicitation
- possession of child pornography
- sexual abuse of children or child molestation
- statutory rape
- indecent exposure or lewd conduct
- fondling or sexual battery
- sexual assault
- indecency with a child
- aggravated sexual assault of a child
Former Prosecutors Fighting for Your Defense
When you work with the defense lawyers at Stradley, Chernoff & Alford, you are no longer alone with the emotional burden of a sex crime charge. Our team of former prosecutors and former DA’s are all board-certified specialists in criminal law, certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. We fight to protect our clients at every stage of their criminal case.
Police Investigations and Polygraph Tests
The inclination of a person falsely accused of this crime is to cooperate unconditionally with the accusing government. The impulse is to shout his innocence from the rooftops and rationalize with the investigating officials with the hope of stopping the insanity. Unfortunately, innocence alone will not stop this train.
Children tend to be believed when sexual accusations are made. Well meaning adults, especially those with care taking responsibilities, have an overriding interest in protecting the child at all costs. This bias drives the sex crime investigation and it will likely persist throughout, despite the many protestations of innocence from the accused.
The good news is, the madness can be stopped, and if you are reading this before you have been formally charged with a crime, you have a much better chance than most of avoiding prosecution. Information can be provided to the police that will enable them to close their investigation without recommending charges. Each case varies, but a lawyer who has superior experience in handling Sexual Assault of a Child cases will know how to get this case specific information to the officer in the right way
Not all police officers are reasonable, however our experience has been that most officers are willing to work with us when they are made to understand that we are not interested in impeding their investigation. In fact, we are trying to help them make the right charging determination. No officer is interested in being grilled on the stand for arresting an innocent man.
If you are already charged with this horrendous crime, don’t lose hope. All the way down the prosecutorial time-line, there are ways to get your case dismissed. On many occasions we have convinced the Grand Jury that there was insufficient evidence to indict. Even after indictment, months of court appearances, discovery and trial settings, we have had many cases dismissed. If the case makes it to trial, a conviction is not a foregone conclusion. If you are well represented by a lawyer who is supremely experienced in these types of cases, you can be acquitted. In fact, the majority of sex crime cases we have tried have resulted in acquittals
In some child sex crime cases it can be effective to talk to the police early in the process. But you should never talk to the police without your lawyer present.They are not on your side — we are.
Child accusers and witnesses can be easily misled or confused, and legal intervention early on can sometimes lead to charges being dropped or reduced. Defense lawyers with years of years of experience in Texas criminal courts, we know when to step forward to help a police investigation.
Did the police suggest a polygraph test to prove your innocence? People facing serious criminal charges — especially innocent people — are often quick to take a lie detector test to “prove” their innocence. Unfortunately, polygraph tests are unreliable. That’s why the results aren’t allowed in court.
Worse yet, a false positive on a lie detector test can give the impression that you are guilty. So before you take that test, cooperate with the police, or talk to Child Protective Services, talk with a lawyer.
As soon as you suspect you will be, or have been, accused of a child sex crime, contact the Houston law office of Stradley, Chernoff & Alford. When the stakes are high, put our experienced criminal defense team on your side.
You can talk to one of our lawyers for free: Call 713-489-2358
Se Habla Español
Here are bullet points that you should use when discussing Jason Francia’s testimony with skeptics or haters:
- Jason Francia was the son of Blanca Francia, a former Neverland employee who was fired for theft, and sold lies about MJ to Diane Dimond for $20k dollars.
- After the Chandler allegations became public, the police were in search of corroborating victims in order to bolster their case, and they sought Jason; he and Blanca did not seek police!
- In two interviews that took place in November 1993 and March 1994, Jason initially denied being molested, but police bullied him into a confession by saying “This is what happened, right?”, “Admit to us he did something proper!”, “He’s a great guy, bullshit!”, and they lied and told Jason that other children had been molested by MJ. Jason told police “I’ll have to work on that” when asked about his story.
- Jason denied any abuse by saying “I’ll just say this out flat, I don’t remember him trying anything with me except for the tickling!”, “You guys are pushy!”, and “They made me come out with a lot more stuff I didn’t want to say. They kept pushing. I wanted to get up and hit them in the head!”
- He said he “blacked out” during his interrogations with police. He eventually claimed he was touched on his genitals three times by MJ while being tickled in 1987, 1988, and 1990 by saying “You know, I think he did tickle me”.
- Each of the tickling sessions were playful, innocent horseplay, which Jason readily consented to and enjoyed! MJ also paid Jason money for completing books and getting A’s in school.
- After the police “convinced” Jason that he was molested, he attended counseling for 5 years, and Sneddon attended the first session.
- Blanca and Jason hired lawyers and threatened MJ with a civil lawsuit in late 1994/early 1995, and MJ was advise to settle out of court before the lawsuit was filed in order to avoid irreparable damage to his career. The settlement was for $2.4 million dollars, and did not preclude the Francia from cooperating in a criminal trial. (Hence they’re participation in the 2005 trial!)
- He didn’t know his mother Blanca was paid $20k by Hard Copy until two days before testifying, and he didn’t know about Blanca’s settlement with MJ!
- Jason participated in three police interviews in October, November, and December 2004, but couldn’t remember important details from those interviews, despite claiming to remember details from his 1993 and 1994 interviews!
- Mesereau was able to effectively show the inconsistencies in Jason’s testimony, and the jurors laughed at his testimony during a break!
- Here is another summary of Jason’s testimony from the Michael Jackson: And Justice For Some blog. For more information on how Jason and his mother were able to extort $2.4 million dollars from MJ, read this post.
So there you have it. I have used this post to show you how Michael’s enemies have put their “faith” into action, and how even a former youth pastor could get swept up in “Michael-mania” (and I’m not talking about buying his albums! I’m talking about lying in court!)
This was one of the longest and most detailed posts that I have ever written, and it’s a sneak preview of what’s to come later this year as I summarize and analyze EVERYONE’S testimony from the 2005 trial.
After all that tedious work and research, let’s end this post on a hilarious note! I want to inject some laughter and entertainment here, so let’s enjoy the Christian hate group known as the Westboro Baptist Church as they cover some of MJ’s greatest hits!
Read it!
God’s Mad!
God Hates The World!
In the final part of this series, I will highlight Christians who have DEFENDED Michael Jackson!
* * *
Updated by vindicatemj on February 2, 2012:
David, thank you for the detailed post. It enabled me to also make some conclusions which I would like to share.
1. Why do the prosecution, defense and the judge are somewhat battling about which number interview it was? Isn’t it the same whether it was the first (Nov.1993) or second (March 1994) interview?
No, it is absolutely not the same.
In his 2005 testimony Jason says again and again that back in 1993 he was initially shy, ashamed, didn’t want to disclose the truth, etc. but towards the end of the interview he finally blurted it out.
This is an example of what he says in reply to ghastly, horrendous, totally unacceptable leading questions of the police which should have never been asked:
5 Q. And even after sheriffs said to you, “He‟s a
6 molester, he‟s a great guy, makes great music,
7 bullshit, he has lots of money,” you still said he
8 had never touched your genital area, right?
9 A. I believe so. Probably towards the
10 beginning again.
So now Jason tries to convey the idea that he denied “touches” only in his initial statements, but opened up towards the end of the 1993 interview, right? To see whether he is telling the truth now let us look at the SECOND interview he gave four months later, in March 1994:
8 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you remember telling
9 the interviewers in that second interview in 1994,
10 when they asked you what Mr. Jackson did with your
11 penis, you said, “He didn‟t really touch it, he was
12 above my shorts”? Do you remember that?
13 A. JASON: Are we talking first or second or third?
This is when the judge interferes because it is top important to know which number interview it was:
18 THE COURT: Counsel, you‟re going to have to direct –
19 if you‟re going to question in this manner, you‟re
20 going to have to direct it to specific times. There
21 were three interviews.
22 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. I‟m sorry, Your Honor.
…
Q. BY MR. MESEREAU:
25 Now, directing your attention to the second
26 interview, which is in 1994 – okay? – and directing
27 your attention to the first event that you have
28 described where you claim Mr. Jackson improperly 4935
1 touched you – okay? –
2 Isn‟t it true that, when asked about the first event
3 in that second interview, you said Mr. Jackson
4 didnt really touch your penis?
5 A. I don‟t –
6 MR. ZONEN: What page?
7 MR. MESEREAU: 60.
8 THE WITNESS: No, I don‟t remember.
9 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Would it refresh your
10 recollection if I show you a page of that
11 transcript?
12 A. Bring it over.
It doesn’t matter what Jason “doesn’t remember” now – what does matter is that in 2005 he says he disclosed the truth by the end of the first interview but the transcripts from 1993 and 1994 prove the opposite – not only didn’t he say so in the FIRST interview, but even in the SECOND interview with the police he was still saying that all MJ did was simple tickling and there were no sensitive touches!
The same is proven by this episode from the trial where Thomas Mesereau and Jason Francia discuss the first interview – even at the end of it he was still saying that it was nothing but tickling:
9 Q. In your interview in 1993, the police asked
10 you if Mr. Jackson rubbed your penis, and you said,
11 “No,” correct?
12 A. Yeah.
13 Q. Right?
14 A. In the beginning, yeah.
15 Q. Well, pretty late in the interview, wasn‟t
16 it?
17 A. I have no clue.
18 Q. You said, “It was a tickling. He didn‟t rub
19 me there,” correct?
20 A. Oh. Okay. If we‟re going that –
The only episode where he more or less thinks that it could probably involve touching was the third one – which allegedly took place in the arcade – when he was three years older. The 1993 transcript says the following about it:
15 Q. And in that 1993 interview, when it came to
16 talking about what happened at the arcade, you
17 didn‟t know if he‟d really touched you improperly,
18 right?
19 A. I knew.
20 Q. Well, you kept responding, “I don‟t know,”
21 and then you‟d say, “If he really did touch, it was
22 in the arcade”?
23 A. No –
24 Q. And you were asked, “Do you think he did
25 it?” And you said, “I don‟t know”.
26 A. I knew.
27 Q. But you told the police you didn‟t know,
28 correct? 4893
1 A. I don‟t remember. If you bring that thing
2 to me again, I‟m going to — yes.
Never mind again what he says in 2005 – what is important is what he said then, and he said “he didn’t touch” about the first two episodes, and repeatedly said “I don’t know” about the third one.
Actually in his 1993 interview Jason said it pointblank that he didn’t remember “anything with him except for the tickling”! He even said “trying” anything with him – so there was not even an attempt! And it was only towards the end of Jason’s second interview with the police that something changed his story…
19 Q. Do you remember in your first police
20 interview in 1993 telling the police, “I‟ll just say
21 this out flat. I don‟t remember him trying anything
22 with me except for the tickling”? Do you remember
23 that?
24 A. Do I remember saying that?
25 Q. Yes.
26 A. No. But I‟ve heard that on the voice. [on the tape]
So throughout the first interview in 1993 and at the beginning of the second 1994 interview he consistently said that it was nothing but tickling. Whatever change took place it was only by the end of the 1994 interview when Jason finally agreed to say something which was expected of him by the police. The reason for that was most probably the enormous pressure they exerted on him.
Let us remember it.
2. Another thing I wanted to mention is the first episode of tickling – when Jason was 7 – the way it is described by Jason in 1993 and 2005 and by his mother Blanca in 2005.
The comparison will tell us the TRUTH about that scene:
The transcript of 1993 says:
26 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you remember telling
27 the police in that interview, “We started tickling
28 each other and my mom just grabbed me and, „Let‟s go‟”?
… 16 Q. Well, on a number of occasions, you told
17 them, “We tickled each other and then I left,”
18 didn‟t you, words to that effect?
19 A. Yeah. Again, I was fighting with everything
20 I had.
21 Q. I‟m not asking you what you were doing. I‟m
22 just asking if that‟s true, okay? On a number of
23 occasions, you said, “We just tickled each other and
24 then I left,” right?
25 A. Okay.
In his testimony at the 2005 trial Jason’s story about the “first time” dramatically changes (as if now he remembers it better!):
14 Q. What happened?
15 A. I was sitting on his lap, and I was young,
16 and I was small. I‟m still thin. I was even
17 thinner then. Sitting on his lap, watching T.V.,
18 which that‟s normal enough in itself. And then
19 we — I was kind of facing the T.V., and he was
20 facing the T.V. as well, so my back was to his
21 chest. And it was — there was just one chair, and
22 there wasn‟t much furniture in that hideout place.
23 And I was just sitting there watching T.V., and so
24 was he. I think we were watching cartoons. And he
25 just started tickling me, which, cool, shoot, I was
26 a tickle guy. I tickled him back, but still kind of
27 from the back, kind of reaching around.
28 And then we went to the floor, I think, but 4818
1 I can‟t completely remember right now. But we
2 somehow got on the floor, tickling still, because
3 I‟m doing what — these little kid things, you know,
4 when you shimmy back and forth.
5 And then I‟m tickling and he‟s tickling, and
6 I‟m tickling and he‟s tickling, and it eventually
7 moved down to — to — to my little private region
8 when you‟re a little kid. I don‟t know if you want
9 me to call it specifically something, but around my
10 crotch area. And I didn‟t — you know, you‟re
11 seven. I didn‟t think it was wrong. Well, I did.
12 Because he‟s tickling, but I‟m laughing, and I‟m
13 tickling him back, trying to get him to stop, but
14 then I‟m tickling too much. I‟m laughing too much.
15 And eventually it stopped. I don‟t know how.
16 Q. Did he actually make contact with your
17 genital area?
18 A. Not skin to skin, but, yeah. Yeah, he was
19 on my clothes, yeah.
20 Q. Do you know for approximately how long?
21 A. Distinctly I can‟t remember. It was a
22 while, though.
23 Q. By a little while, can you give us a sense
24 of it?
25 A. More than three minutes, less than 20. Less
26 than ten minutes, I think.
27 Q. Okay.
And this is what his mother Blanca Francia says in 2005 about the same “first” episode – the picture is totally different (and not only because they think it was in different places). It is different from Jason’s 2005 story but is fully consistent with what Jason said about it in 1993!
17 A. The first time, it was — I think it was in
18 Encino.
19 Q. Okay.
20 A. That I remember that I walked in, because I
21 had the key to that room, too.
15 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Just tell us what you saw
16 with Jason.
17 A. Well, he was sitting on his lap.
18 Q. Okay. And what concerned you?
19 A. And I walked in, and he was sitting on his
20 lap, and Mr. Jackson was just reclining, reclining
21 to the back.
22 Q. Reclining?
23 A. Reclining to the back.
24 Q. Okay.
25 A. And having my son in his lap.
26 Q. And where was Jason positioned on his lap?
27 A. His legs.
28 Q. Okay. And what did you do? 5013
1 A. I just told my son to get out. And he
2 was — I remember he say, “No, I’m fine.”
8 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: You told your son to get out?
9 A. Yeah.
10 Q. Did he do so?
11 A. No.
12 Q. What did you do then?
13 A. I think I push him, and — oh, he was –
14 some kind of — reading a book or coloring. And Mr.
15 Jackson say, “I want him to read,” or “I’m reading a story”,
16 something like that.
17 Q. Did you take your son off of his lap?
18 A. Yeah. Yes.
So both Jason in 1993 and Blanca in 2005 are essentially telling us one story:
– the boy wasn’t watching TV. He was reading a book.
– he was positioned on Michael’s legs and not in the crotch area
– the boy was sitting on his legs because there was only one chair in the room
– Michael was not pressing himself on the boy as he was reclining to the back of the chair
– now Jason says he “doesn’t remember” how it ended
– but his mother does. She just took him off Michael’s lap and they left
– so there was no “floor” scene AT ALL.
So what Jason Francia said about that episode in 2005 is a FLAT LIE.
3. The third thing worth mentioning is the fact that Jason started talking of “crappiness” only when the police arrived to ask questions (and not when the alleged “molestation” took place).
He says it not just once, but twice. He calls the day the crappiness started a big day and he cried so much after that visit that he didn’t go to judo practice:
23 Q. Did you know in advance that they wanted to
24 speak with you?
25 A. No. Not until the big day that this
26 crappiness started
The next time he mentions crappiness in connection with his interview at the police station. He cried again and changed his words trying to figure out what was the best way to “get out of there”:
12 Q. Okay. You kind of went back and forth
13 during the interview, didn‟t you? One second you‟d
14 say, “He tickled me,” and the next second you‟d say
15 you‟re not sure, right?
16 A. I was trying to figure out how to get out of
17 there.
18 Q. I understand. And you remember exactly how
19 you felt in 1993 during the interview, right?
20 A. The feeling of, yeah, crying and crappiness.
Considering that two months after the police entered the picture the Francias approached lawyers and Jason did not tell them a word about the alleged molestation (as he says in his 2005 testimony), I wondered at what other pretext they could threaten to file a suit if the lawyers did not even know that “molestation” was an issue?
I think the only other possible pretext was the damage done to the family by Michael involuntarily involving them in all this “crappiness”.
The boy cried a lot, gave interviews under enormous pressure, was terribly uncomfortable wanting to hit them on the head and had to go into therapy after that. What’s interesting is that he didn’t have to go into therapy during the 3 years of alleged “molestation” – no, he had to do therapy only after those infamous interviews.
From the way Jason describes it all this trauma was most probably the result of him being emotionally abused by the police, and not MJ. The lawyers could very well approach Michael for compensation for the damage the whole situation caused to the boy. By the way the damage was indeed there – only it wasn’t Michael’s fault – and this is probably why Michael agreed to give him money.
He probably just felt sorry for him.
Trackbacks
- Michael Jackson’s Enemies Are LITERALLY One Big Happy Family! | Michael Jackson Vindication 2.0
- February 28th – March 1st, 2005 Trial Analysis: Summary of Sneddon and Mesereau’s Opening Statements | Michael Jackson Vindication 2.0
- February 28th – March 1st, 2005 Trial Analysis: Summary of Sneddon and Mesereau’s Opening Statements « Vindicating Michael
- It’s Not Up To Michael Jackson’s Fans To Prove That He Was Innocent; It’s Up To Michael Jackson’s HATERS To Prove That He Was GUILTY! « Vindicating Michael
- Michael Jackson’s Enemies Are LITERALLY One Big Happy Family! « Vindicating Michael
- Fact Checking Michael Jackson’s Christian Faith, Part 7 of 7: Judging Michael « Vindicating Michael
- Summary and Analysis of the Lies of Michael Jackson’s Former Maid Blanca Francia « Vindicating Michael
Vindicating Michael 
I don’t have that proof because I never looked in that direction. But to me settlements don’t mean much. I remember that Janet Arvizo’s son Gavin stole clothes from J.C.Penney department store and it is the store which had to pay them over $150,000 and not the other way about.
Apparently some people are so big shit that it is better not to have anything to do with them. I hear that there is a Croatian proverb: “The more you touch the shit, the more it smells”.
As to the sums paid to various people why does everyone think the worst? To that German family who recently spoke about Michael’s complete innocence, Michael offered to pay for the education of their children, but they refused. Michael was so generous that any of those sums could be turned against him.
LikeLike
I can’t stress enough how I would have wanted him to fight the Francias. That goddamn woman stole from Neverland in the first place. He won it from her when it comes to the stolen property and lies about seeing him with children, so why not take her to court again for this stuff too? It’s a shame. I’m sure he’d easily have won.
LikeLike
Hi there. I wanted to ask something about this.
“Blanca and Jason hired lawyers and threatened MJ with a civil lawsuit in late 1994/early 1995, and MJ was advise to settle out of court before the lawsuit was filed in order to avoid irreparable damage to his career. The settlement was for $2.4 million dollars, and did not preclude the Francia from cooperating in a criminal trial. (Hence they’re participation in the 2005 trial!)”
Do we have proof, something concrete that shows that MJ was advised to settle out of court? I ask this because I am dealing with a woman on Twitter now that gave me these two pictures
https://twitter.com/alphafemale777/status/1110015811127832576?s=09
One is about Francia and the other about Martinez. I linked her to the articles that debunk Martinez and also about Francia. And her reply is:
“Na ive already read every thing on that pro jackson website which has been put together by a Michael Jackson fan – biased much? the fact that you still think its OK that MJ paid these boys off AT ALL shows how idiotic you are.”
I didn’t say anything about how it was OK to pay anyone off, those were her words. We know Martinez in Mexico is BS, but Francia is true. I wish Michael had fought it but… yeah. She tries to win her argument with me now with this. Do we have proof that Michael got the advice to settle out of court?
LikeLike
@dan420
Nevermind that many inconsistencies and the outright absurdity of his claim
that MJ, who supposedly was so careful not to get caught that he installed that alarm in the hallway just to keep everyone out, didn’t mind molesting Jason while his mother was in the same apartment and in the arcade where anyone could have walked in at any time!
Yeah that makes sense.
Have you even wonder if Blanca Francia was indeed concerned why the heck did he keep working for him even after he left Encino?
If you take what Sneddon said that she left in disgust in 1991 why didn’t she left in disgust right after she witnessed what she later said made her concerned?
And how about those two tickling sessions where she was in the same apartment? Didn’t she notice anything strange that would have made her call the police or at least l
And it’s also very interesting that Jason’s story is in no way similar to Chander’s story.
Chandler claimed that he was systematically groomed for months and subjected to gradual sexual acts starting with hugging then kissing then mastrubation then oral sex.
Chandler never said that MJ gave him money to keep quite, instead he talked about some non-sensical argument about levitation and secret box and juvenile hall.
Compared that to Jason! No grooming at all, no phone calls, no shopping trips, no gifts.
No threats of juveline hall, secret box or levitation. No instead he just got money, which of course in his previous version was money for reading a book and getting good grades.
And of course there is no tickling at all in Chandler’s story, we are supposed to believe that that MO was applied on Jason Francia and only him!
Pedohiles do not change tactics going from victim to victim! They basically do the same thing over and over again.
But if you believe Chandler and Francia (at least one version of their ever changing stories)
you must believe that MJ was the most patternless pedophile ever.
Face it: these things were not committed by the same person. They were invented by different people. That’s why the Arvizo story again was radically different from the Chandler and Francia stories: No alchohol no porn in either of those and the character described by Chandler (constantly crying, telling him he would never hurt him) is totally different from the character described by Gavin, who portrayed MJ as this “cool” totally unconcerned buy freely talking about sex, simulating sex on a mannequin , showing them porn, drinking and never trying to do anything to cover it up, no money for Gavin’s pockets no threats no “it’s our secret” talk.
And of course you have to ask: why Jason Francia?
Why not Ryan folsey or Brett Barnes or Brandon Adams or Sean Lennon or Mac Culkin or
Alfonso Riberio or the countless other boys who were with him in the arcade, in his bedroom, who watched TV with him, who sat on his lap?
Don’t you think the whole thing is way too random for a pedophile who are obsessed with sex and constantly look for new victims? Sandusky was accused by 26!
Now compare that to Mj
Hundreds of kids visited Neverland and only three accused him and all three had crooked parents with a clear financial agenda!
Coincidence?
Oh there is one thing that made Francia “special”: she had a tabloid whore illegal alien mother who thought she could cash in by using the opportunity created by the Chandler bullshit!
And surprisingly, her mother was friends with pedo propagandist Victor Gutierez — as it’s usually the
There is a reason why Francia was laughed at. The Jury foreman compared his performance to Janet Arvizo and she was completely certifiable.
Francia came across as a bad actor who tried very hard to play the role of an abuse victim but only managed to contradict himself left and right.
And you are worshiping this fucking liar??
LikeLike
Whatever dude.
LikeLike
What a joke! This entry proves nothing except that Michael Jackson was a pedophile. Francia was indeed molested no matter how you will twist it.
* * *
VMJ: How very interesting that each time I touch upon the haters’ blogs they immediately make their presence here. Don’t worry, Dan, Francia is still waiting to be handled.
LikeLike
i was looking at a video that was supposed to have been taken when mj was going home to neverland on april 4 and he looked pretty happy and relaxed so i looked up who was testifying that day and i believe it was jason francia …..
http://mj-upbeat.com/TrialMJJSource.htm#DAY25MJTRIAL
at the end he is having a conversation with a french fan and he seems like he was having a good day.
If this is true and francia had testified that day , it just confirms all the more that his testimony was proven to be ridiculous or mj would be looking alot more stressed to me..
LikeLike
That quote is interesting too
“26 Q. What were the issues that you were dealing
27 with at that time about that?
28 A. In fifth grade, I told my friends that I 4945
1 knew Michael Jackson, and I thought it was cool. My
2 friends thought it was cool. They didn’t believe
3 me. But they thought it was cool.
4 In junior high, it’s no longer cool to know
5 somebody that had issues with kids, because then
6 they’re going to make fun of you.
7 And even at the church, they made fun of me.
8 At the church, worse than school, they made fun of
9 me.
10 Q. And you were actually teased?
11 A. Yeah.”
LikeLike
That part is interesting.
“Q. During the events that you’ve described at
26 the hideout —
27 A. Okay.
28 Q. — where you say you were improperly 4937
1 tickled – okay? —
2 A. Okay.
3 Q. — were you always on top of the sleeping
4 bag?
5 A. No. The first time I was on a chair.”
“BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you know approximately
3 when you spoke to a representative of the media?
4 A. I don’t. I know I was late to class, but I
5 don’t. I was in — probably ‘92 or ‘93.”
LikeLike
I just wonder something
“Q. Let me go back to the second event. In the
5 second event we’re talking about, you were in a
6 sleeping bag?
7 A. Yes.”
If Blanca didn’t know that, how did it end up in Victor Gutierrez book?
LikeLike
I added a video compilation of the media’s coverage of Jason Francia’s testimony to the post, near the bottom!
LikeLike
if the books where inappropriate Sneddon would charged MJ in 93. it’s as simple as that! 1+1 ain’t always two but 3+1 is 4. what i’m trying to say is if one look at things logically any fool can figure out that IF MJ in ANY shape or form had ANYTHING illegal Sneddon would not hesitate to charge him. so why these book were issue i don’t get
LikeLike
Already back in 2005 legal analysts pointed out that the fact the prosecution is running around with these two art books from the 1993 raid (along with Diane Dimond, who was showing them on TV – so was she distributing “child porn” then?) as if it would be the holy grail of their “case”, shows desperation on their part and that they don’t really have a case if this is the best they can come up with. I see the same pattern with haters. They dangle around these books over and over again because they don’t really have a case and they know it.
LikeLike
You have probably already seen this from another site but they had an article about those books also …
http://site2.mjeol.com/mjeol-bullet/art-books-turned-into-%C2%91child-porn%C2%92-by-desperate-prosecution-%C2%96-mb-262.html
Just if anyone is interested:
Evidently the lord of the flies book was in the library of congress:
from that site :
Oh, but it gets worse for the prosecution. As just mentioned above, the other book called “The Boy: A Photographic Essay” includes pictures of the actors taken on the set of the classic movie Lord of the Flies. Dealing yet another slap to the prosecution, defense attorney Robert Sanger pointed out that the book wasnt purchased by Jackson and was a gift to him by a fan named “Rhonda”. Ouch. That book, too, is inscribed by the fan named Rhonda in 1983 with the following words: “To Michael Jackson, from your fan Rhonda xoxoxo”. This alleged erotic book either is or was also in the Library of Congress. Its Congress Catalog Number is 65-7 according to an image scan of the book found on Lordoftheflies.org. Ouch, ouch. I guess those pedophilic Congressmen needed it in the Library of Congress at one point too,
LikeLike
I also want to comment on the “self proclaimed” king Of Pop title. We know that is was Elizabeth Taylor that dubbed Michael that when she introduced him at an awards show. But the truth is she introduced him as the King of Pop, Rock and Soul” Let’s see shall we?
Here is the Pop;
Here is the Rock;
Here is the Soul;
LikeLike
Helena I guess maybe we weren’t as wrong about that agenda as they would like the world to believe we are.
LikeLike
David isn’t that great information about Chernoff. You know throughout that trial I had respect for Chernoff, not for Flanagan. I suspected something at the time and when I watched Murray’s follow me around and watch me make a fool of myself on television it suddenly struck me. Chernoff once upon a time might have believed Murray but close to the end he knew what he had been told was not the truth. He was and is a good lawyer and like good lawyers he continued to defend his client. That was his job.
When you watch the Conrad Murray dog and pony show and they are sitting at Flanagan’s house, Flanagan and his wife are starting to talk about the “freak factor”. I noticed that Chernoff got visibly uncomfortable and said “I think the media made him out to be more of a freak than he was” and left the room. That was the night that he left the Flanagan home and went to a hotel.
I guess we know which one of Conrad Murray team used all that against Michael in the press at the time. It was Mr. Flanazepam.
LikeLike
ll videos om this post,and they were many, have been blocked out, something must have hit a nerve.
LikeLike
“There is a prevalent p******** group in England that was rather put out with Michael Jackson fans when we all called for the banning of the book “Michael Jackson’s Dangerous Liaisons”.
I’ve recently come across a so-called TMZ forum. The stories its members tell each other and their readers about MJ are indescribable. Their fantazy is so sick that they routinely call MJ a “rapist” though MJ’s accusers never said anything like that! NEVER! (with the exception of totally crazy Kapon, Bartucci, etc. who never met MJ at all).
Here is a sample of what the TMZ haters are saying – this makes me wonder who these people are (sorry for the language but I have to keep it here the way it is):
http://www.tmz.com/member/michael-jackson-can-you-handle-the-truth/?view_page=2
LikeLike
I really thought that the people constantly posting negative trash regarding MJ and criminal acts were getting paid to do it becasue I cannot imagine why any one would constantly contradict what was in court transcripts and completely ignore logical thought.I just figured that were trying to get more hits on website or something..
But I see now that if you are inclined to be a pedophile , it might make you want to put a lot of time and effort into trying to associate someone as successful and beloved as MJ into that group, , to give them a human face , kinda like marketing it using MJ…. ..that could very well be…
LikeLike
This comment is going to be a little bit longer. I looked up the IP address that was given for the commenter Free Speech. S/He was the one that gave us the link to the photos from the book “The Boy A Photographic Essay. The one that is from still shots of the 1963 version of the movie adaptation of William Golding’s book “The Lord Of The Flies”, published in 1954.
This book was once required reading in advanced placement Modern English Literature in High Schools across this and many other countries. I know because I had to read it. I suggest that you at least read the Wikipedia links related to the book and the movie to get a better grasp of what the content was of that Book and that Movie. The allegory that is in the film is that there is a primitive in each of us and how that affects society. It is interesting that it is this book with the stills of this movie that they link when someone wants to “debate” us on Michael Jackson.
Now back to the person that used the screen name Free Speech. I searched their IP address and it was a Known Proxy server that linked to Sheffield England. There is a prevalent p******** group in England that was rather put out with Michael Jackson fans when we all called for the banning of the book “Michael Jackson’s Dangerous Liaisons”.
In recent months after one of the administrators here wrote a piece on how to recognize and refute the opposition we have been regularly called names on another Michael Jackson forum. They over there have declared that it is WE that are pedophilia sympathizers because we defend and Vindicate Michael Jackson and everyone with “half a brain” knows he was one because THEY say so. That is their argument. We are what we once called them because we based it on their own statements made to us in private emails and comments on a blog. They say that WE must now accept what THEY have determined is true. Horse pucky I say! Like Marie Barnes said “don’t get down in the mud” with these people.
The truth of the matter is that that particular name calling is the soup du jour on every forum on that site. Everyone calls everyone else that on that site, we are no different than thousands of others that are slandered throughout that site daily. It is one of the favorite things to call someone it seems.
They also continuously call us internet stalkers because of a post made here by an administrator that showed the continued allegiance of the main characters in the 2005 trial. The people that were in that article are public figures including the Arvizo family because they gave that up when they appeared in the Bashir current affairs production.
The person that is linking that page of that book wants a debate to end up like this: How can you not say he was what WE have declared him to be? Look at this photo and see for yourselves what it is. Well there is one problem with that: The last time that photo was in Michael Jackson’s possession it did not have his face placed on it and it did not carry your watermark. YOU are now the proud owner of what YOU have declared to be child pornography.
No one else has done that to you, you did it to yourself. Would you like me to defend and vindicate you as well because YOU know that it is not what YOU say it is and yet YOU are the one that says it is what YOU want it to say. Who needs defending more you or Michael Jackson?
Here is a link to The National Center For Missing and Exploited Children’s description of child pornography.
http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=1504
LikeLike
“The photo that a link was left for was from The Boy a Photographic Essay” and is a series of still shots from the 1996 movie version of the book Lord Of The Flies. The book The Boy a Photographic Essay is the one that carried the inscription “To Michael Jackson from you fan Rhonda”. This is not even about the books persay. It is about Topix and the peple that post there.”
Lynande, of course it is about Topix! It surprises me that they are so terribly preoccupied with us. But I was thinking about a different thing – no matter in which book it was and whether it was in any of MJ’s books at all and presented by fans or bought by him – I asked myself a question: “Can any of us have similar types of photos in the books we have at home?”
After that I made a sort of an inventory in my mind and finally recalled that we have a book about Africa written by two Czech or Polish writers about the area of Tanganyika. It also dates back to the 60s and is impossible to find in the web, but to give you the idea what kind of photos it contained here is a similar picture I’ve taken from the Yahoo public collection:
I just imagined “mad dog” Tom Sneddon finding this picture in Michael Jackson’s home – what would he have said???
LikeLike
Shelly no it is from the book The Boy a Photographic Essay.They have turned them around, which I believe is deliberate, if you look up Lord Of The Flies you will eventually see that it is a photo of one of the young men from that movie.They did that because they wanted to have the inscriptions associated with those books transfersed.
LikeLike
The picture is from Boys will be boys. It’s not the book with pictures from Lord of the flies.
LikeLike
If that picture was considered pornographic, the photographer and publisher/ distributor would have been arrested.
If that book was considered child porn < michael would have been sent away for it..
You notice they stacked all kinds of charges against MJ but not anything to do with child porn because there was none..
they could only come up with a decade of hustler etc..
and they tried to say he had it to show little boys ?how stupid..
you dont have a decade of hustler unless you are interested in woman..
you would have thousands of pictures of child porn if you were a sick person..
they just arrested two separate people in my state , one a teacher and one a librarian. they both had thousand of pictures of kiddie porn in their house and computer.
LikeLike
Actually Shelly they just had him page through the whole book. I just read his testimony yesterday.
LikeLike
Actually Helena that was the other book that was found in a locked file cabinet 3rd drawer down in the second closet in his bedroom. The photo that a link was left for was from The Boy a Photographic Essay” and is a series of still shots from the 1996 movie version of the book Lord Of The Flies. The book The Boy a Photographic Essay is the one that carried the inscription “To Michael Jackson from you fan Rhonda”. That one has a different coverand I believe that it is in one of your posts about the books.
This is not even about the books persay. It is about Topix and the peple that post there.They have their version of events which is of course something entirely different than the truth.
LikeLike
About Freespeech “Okay now this creative Commons license thing has been cleared up. We are at VMJ are free to post the link of censored boy with his legs spread apart.
I think it’s important for people to know just how graphic some of these images were in “Boys Will Be Boys” the personally inscribed book that Michael Jackson owned.
Also here’s a picture of a grown man recreating the scene from the above image.
Do we at VMJ consider this to be art?”
____________First off, Thank you for removing that disgusting photo collage. The person who conceived of it and then created it has much more to worry about than just Michael Jackson. Libraries don’t carry child pornography and they don’t traffic child pornography but pedophiles do. Putting up an “original creation”, a picture that a person describes as child porn would be the intent to traffic illegal material. Somebody better cut it out.
LikeLike
They used that picture to cross examine Robson.
LikeLike
Never forget that it was in the late 90s when Gary Glitter was found to be the owner of thousands and thousands of child pornographic images all found because he’d taken his computer to a shop to be fixed.
But a book a fan sent him in 1983 is this big reveal over MJ?
Pathetic.
LikeLike
Wasn’t this the book the fan sent in?
LikeLike
@Free speech
So from a book that contained probably thousand of pictures with kids you picked the most “shocking” one in order to prove that MJ was a whatever you claim he was? Are so desperate? Lol, i feel sorry for you.
By the way, if the police made a raid in your hose like they did in Mike’s house more that 80 times and found nothing, i’m sure they would find things that would make them shiver and probably lock you in a jail for some time because i’m sure that you are more sick and twisted than you claim Michael Jackson to be. Only the fact that you wish he had molested kids just to justify the hate you have for him,proves it.
LikeLike
“Do we at VMJ consider this to be art?”
@Free speech, I allowed the disgusting comment of yours for educational purposes only.
Firstly, your photo of a naked boy with MJ’s picture plastered to it is not even a photo but a mocking collage meant to humiliate Michael Jackson. No one should be insulted in such a manner, so for this reason alone this photo should be censored. However I will leave it for some time for people to see what dirty tricks MJ haters are capable of, until my readers demand that it should be erased.
Secondly, we do not even know whether this photo is from that book at all. We also do not know how the book found its way into Michael’s home and whether he thoroughly studied all its pictures or leafed through it.
Thirdly, even if the photo comes from this book, it contains hundreds of totally innocent photos. Readers say about it:
Its cover page is tale-telling:
But the most tale-telling point is that the book was published in 1966, when the rules for publishers were much stricter than now.
If they in their innocent 1966 allowed it, this alone is a proof and guarantee that it does not contain anything bad.
So we at VMJ together with readers of the book, its publishers, and numerous people including the jury who saw the book during the 2005 trial do consider this book ART.
We at VMJ also consider that the photo of an adult you have posted is NOT art. It is obscene and unacceptable for general public viewing.
And we at VMJ are sure that the collage you’ve provided is rude and totally unacceptable either.
And I personally think that if MJ had wanted something dirty, the 90s and the 2000s could have offered him something much more explicit than this innocent 1966 book.
LikeLike
Okay now this creative Commons license thing has been cleared up. We are at VMJ are free to post the link of censored boy with his legs spread apart.
I think it’s important for people to know just how graphic some of these images were in “Boys Will Be Boys” the personally inscribed book that Michael Jackson owned.
Also here’s a picture of a grown man recreating the scene from the above image.
Do we at VMJ consider this to be art?
LikeLike
“Then what people don’t know is that there is a long black bank of speakers for the movie screen that is attached to the banister so yuo can’t really see through there.”
Do you have a link?
LikeLike
Guys, I added some new info to the post. In the beginning of the post, I added Sneddon’s summary of what Jason would testify about (from a December 2004 court pleading), I added a video of Corey Feldman discussing child abusers in Hollywood, and Helena added a comparison of Jason and Blanca Francia’s testimony at the end.
LikeLike
Clarification: It is not a true, copyright in the sense of restricting use. It’s a license TO use. In other words, she lied to you. Wouldn’t be the first time.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
LikeLike
@ Creative Commons license allows you to post a link to a photo or any article written as long as you site the source and post a link to the original — there is no other restriction other than that.
Creative Commons is not a copyright.
LikeLike
@sanemjfan Great job of investigative reporting and the comments have only added to it.
@vindicatemj It’s not surprising that five years of counselling were needed after Francia was subjected to the interrogation tactics used on him. I believe Francia suffered, not at the hands of Michael Jackson, but by the ongoing bullying and totally biased, dishonest approach adopted by his interrogators. “They made me come out with a lot more stuff I didn’t want to say. They kept pushing. I wanted to get up and hit them in the head!” That sums up the torment Francia felt at the time. What he ‘remembered’ most is the torment of those interviews and the fact that they (the interrogators) made him cry. They forced him to feel like a victim. That’s when all the ‘crappiness’ really began. Did any of these kids interviewed this way ever try and sue their interrogators?
Wonder how many jaws dropped in the courtroom when an older version of Francia said he must have met Sneddon because he was in ‘the room’ right in front of him. I also thought it was a bit odd when he said he was “sleeping with his mom” and then went on to define that with, “like in the same room, in the same area.” Had he learnt by 2005 that it was necessary to define his remarks so they wouldn’t be misconstrued, at least as far as his mom was concerned?
It’s always a very damning indictment of the press coverage to see the actual evidence of the biased media reporting compared side-by-side with what was actually said in the courtroom, as was pointed out above in relation to The Santa Barbara Times and its staff writer Quintin Cushner. That name rings a bell too for some reason.
LikeLike
lynande51
My most humble apologies for posting that link, I had no idea it wasn’t permitted, whether it fell under the terms of a license or who would be upset if I posted a link!! Looks like I need to get up to speed in regards to Internet law so I don’t get in trouble again!!
Now that you have seen the photo from Boys will be Boys wouldn’t you agree that somebody would have to sick and perverted to think it is anything but art!! It would be twisted. All I saw was a perfectly formed beautiful boy who is proud of what the Lord gave him.
Once again my most humble apologies!!
LikeLike
Shelly I have always thought that too. I first got it from Brian Barrons Grand Jury testimony. He said he could just see over the banister about half way up the stairs and he was 6 feet 4 inches tall. Then what people don’t know is that there is a long black bank of speakers for the movie screen that is attached to the banister so yuo can’t really see through there. Then when he was testifying Star said that on the one time the screen was up and on the other time the screen was down. What Star has is not only a miraculous cloak of invisibility but also x ray vision. I guess that he must have gotten his Neverland wish for super powers great fantastic!.That is the only way I can explain it but I’m not sure that it is reasonable what do you guys think?
I also question whether or not Star was 5 feet 4 inches tall. In the Bashir video he was obviously shorter than Gavin and Gavin says that he is 5 feet four.
LikeLike
I have to make a short comment so there will be no misunderstanding. We had a new commenter on our blog a few minutes ago that left a link to one of the photos in “The Boy a Photographic Essay that we were speaking about earlier. The photo was clearly watermarked with the watermark of the blog Desiree Speaks So Listen. We here on VMJ had a disagreement with the owner of that blog due to a photo that she had watermarked and we had posted some time ago that was from the book MJWML. We then removed it at her request as she was the one that claimed the copyrights ownership of that photo through her Creative Commons License. In light of that it would not be prudent of us to upset her by having that link to what is obviously her photo on our blog, after all we don’t want to go through that again so we will just have to be more respectful of her wishes about posting information that belongs to her as the owner of that blog.
LikeLike
lynande51
thanks for including even more info regarding where the books were actually found..It is true what you said about Mr Sanger..I was surprised that he had a sense of humor becasue I had the impression he was kinda dull and taking up space, which was not the case at all..
Just another spin from the press..
I thought it odd in that link about how they were doing this surprise attack on Neverland , that no one should use radios to talk in in order to keep this on the Q.T. and yet Diane Dimond manages to be front and center for the event….unbelievable..
.my personal opinion from watching the Icon documentary …just the way Sneddon is so taken with her ,during the press conference about MJ, he seems to have some kind of crush on her….like he is trying to impress her in some way..strange behavior for a grown man having a press conference..
It really is incredible the efforts that were put into this case to bury poor MJ,
And on top of it , Mr Mesereau and Ms Yu were not being paid all the time.You might think that the people standing between MJ and a Jail term would have been the main priority to get paid but Mesereau said in the defending the king book that he would literally be told ” the check is in the mail”..and of course , it wasnt..”((
I have so much respect for them, becasue somebody else might have asked to to beexcused from the case or not worked as diligently as these two did, but they always gave 100 percent..
Regarding the underwear..are these the supposed underwear MJ kept as a souvenir or ,since there were so many outrageous accusations , have I just imagined that sick scenario ?? LOL
I tell you , if I could , I would love to put Sneddon on a couch with a psychiatrist to find out what makes him tick….
It is half way funny , that people on shopping sprees can say they are held captive and had escaped several times..and these investigators ate it up??
The more you learn the more ridiculous this stuff is.
I am hoping that since there is such a renewed interest in MJ, there will eventually be a book laying all this B.S.out for the general public to understand.. maybe you all should put some of this in book form and self publish..You all certainly worked hard enough on all this ., you certainly deserve the credit for getting this stuff out to more and more people..
LikeLike
Another hole in their story
GUTHRIE: Well one of the boy points the defense attorney jury brought up, he said, Well, how tall are you? [The officer] said 510. [The attorney said] Ok and you shot with [a camera] over you shoulder? [He said], Yes. [The attorney said] So youre your vantage point and youre that tall. Clearly, the implication being that this might be your birds eye view, but the accusers younger brother is quite a bit shorter and would not have been able to see it. (see Court TV: Guthrie talks about police cross-examination March 2 2005)
Taibbi also brought this point out during one of his live reports about what happened under cross-examination of this officer. He reported March 3 2005:
TAIBBI: Also making the point for the defense was that the view from the banister of the top level of Michael Jacksons bed would not have afforded a young and shorter boy, the accusers younger brother, a line of sight to the bed where he claims to have seen what he said he saw. (see MSNBC : Taibbi talks about cross-examination of Criminologist March 3 2005)
http://site2.mjeol.com/mjeol-bullet/vantage-point-the-issue-under-police-cross-examination--minibullet-9.html
LikeLike
Nan Yes I thought that was particularly funny, like I said poor Maria what she must have thought about that deputy asking her “where are the secret rooms behind the wall”?Maria: “secret rooms”? There is also additional information that I have found in the police testimony about some of the books that they were trying to use as evidence against Michael. It seems that just because the scribe jotted down a brief description and location it did not give a clear picture of where some of this was found just like the underwear situation. For instance all of those books that they say were in Michael’s bedroom were actually found in numerous stacks of boxes in his bedroom. The person that found them did not say if they were in the same box or not, but probably not if you ever see a before and after shot of that bedroom.
The books that everyone likes to say that Michael had in 1993 were actually found in the second closet in a locked file cabinet 3 drawers down. You know the ones with the inscriptions on them. The one Boys will be Boys had the inscription ” Look at the true spirit of joys in these boys faces, this is the spirit of boyhood ,A life I never had and will always dream of for my children” and of course we know that the other book “The Boy a Photographic Essay” which was a series of still shots from the 1966 movie “Lord Of The Flies, said “To Michael Jackson from your fan Rhonda xxxooo” so that was probably sent to him. In court Bob Sanger said to the judge that he had noted that none of the courts rulings were signed that way Judge Melville said He couldn’t top that one. Judge Melville and Bob used to joke around a little bit during the trial which drew some pretty good laughs from time to time. I wonder why Diane Dimond and Catherine Crier wanted people to believe he was boring and called him “The Human Ambiien”. Probably I think because they didn’t want people to find out what he was proving with his questioning would be my guess. He was the one that found out that Sneddon had showed the porn to the kids during the Grand Jury testimony. Anyway if Michael had the books from 1993 under lock and key it would be more reasonable to think that it was because he thought they weren’t appropriate to be showing children or having out to show children.
It was just like that pair of underwear that they said were boys underwear when they were actually mens size 30 and 32. Not to mention that Gavin, Star, Janet and Davelin got about $700 dollars worth of underwear during the hostage crisis shopping trip. Gavin and Star got about 7 pairs of boxers not briefs and one of the ladies got a tankini for her Brazil trip??? No wonder she needed a full body wax:) There were bras and panties and luggage galore that whole hostage crisis cost Marc Shaffel and Paul Hugo about $37K. No kidding. And food!!! Boy that family could eat when someone else was paying for it! So much for the bread and water seclusion in the Elizabeth Taylor Suite at Neverland?When they get extorted, abducted and held against their will they really now how to get the most out of it that’s for sure!. I hope somebody holds me against my will like that someday. OutBack Steak House about everyday to the tune of $115 + each time and that did not include snacks, drink and cigs for someone in the family. Though I do have to add that the figure might include a suite at the Calabasas Inn and Suites for a 5 night stay. Poor Vinnie to have to cart those guys around and Frank back at Neverland relaxing and getting away from it all ( Janet said that Frank and Vinnie never let them out of their site). I wonder what Frank told him his job would be if he went out there with him. I bet that wasn’t it otherwise he would have stayed at home in New Jersey he should have listened in on that surreptitiously taped phone call between Frank and Janet that he had while he was on the phone from New Jersey. Vinnie would have gotten a better idea what he was in for and politely declined helping him out with that one.
LikeLike
Dr. Wayne Dyer, renowned author, speaks of Michael as the most spiritual person he has ever met.
LikeLike
lynande51
Thank you for that link to their plans to infiltrate” Michael Jacksons Neverland”…It would be almost funny if it hadnt done so much damage to MJ..
The secret rooms they mention ??…the possible guard dogs paroling his property, added guards if MJ is on property, ambulance waiting in case there is a confrontation with his security???
These people are primed to believe anything they hear about MJ..
I think it is interesting that everyone else is referred to by their actual name and Mr Jackson starts getting referred to as MJ..It is almost like they are fans themselves,such a familiar tone, but in a negative way…
Looking at the statements ….there are so many imo inconsistencies such as the boys saying they slept in his bed every night and then changing it to Gavin being molested the 5 times starr didnt sleep there.
I also noticed that the initial statement says MJ ALLOWED the boys to stay in his bed..that sounds like they asked to, …
and starr was originally drinking on the plane trip also..
and just the fact that it made an impression on these people that MJ gave them a bronco and computer that had problems and they never got them back?? are the police saying mj stole this stuff back or are they inferring he used this stuff as some kind of bait??
none of these inconsistencies raised a flag for these people..
the notation from the doctor saying that alcohol would not have had an effect on Gavins health??..I am sure if the doctor told them that , he must have explained his diagnosis..
If he was a dying child, i would say alcohol would have had a detrimental effect..
I think you are right about the tumor you described..
How they talked themselves into going forward with this is just beyond stupid..
Feldman is so sly using that old fool Sneddon to do his dirty work..:((
I had always thought that they raided neverland and then found out that there was a rebuttal tape after they went to the videographer house and that is why they had to throw in conspiracy charges ,say they had been forced to say those things,….. to explain the video , and that is why they changed the time line of molestation…but i guess that is not the case….Instead they went forward with this whole event knowing these people were on tape saying how wonderful and a Godsend Michael was, and these inconsistencies ???????????..I will have to reread that stuff…it is confusing to me..
Thank you so much for that link..
LikeLike
And this prophecy from TB Joshua is even more impressive.
He started speaking about Michael Jackson on January 4th, 2009 (which was the eve of his signing the so-called “contract” with AEG) and asked his congregation to pray for “the great star known to the whole world”.
What impressed me so much is that he asked for Psalm 91 to be read, lines 7-8-9, in a prayer for Michael Jackson.
Psalm 91 is awesome:
1 He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High
will abide in the shadow of the Almighty.
2 I will say to the LORD, “My refuge and my fortress,
my God, in whom I trust.”
3 For he will deliver you from the snare of the fowler
and from the deadly pestilence.
4 He will cover you with his pinions,
and under his wings you will find refuge;
his faithfulness is a shield and buckler.
5 You will not fear the terror of the night,
nor the arrow that flies by day,
6 nor the pestilence that stalks in darkness,
nor the destruction that wastes at noonday.
7 A thousand may fall at your side,
ten thousand at your right hand,
but it will not come near you.
8 You will only look with your eyes
and see the recompense of the wicked.
9 Because you have made the LORD your dwelling place—
the Most High, who is my refuge —
10 no evil shall be allowed to befall you,
no plague come near your tent.
11 For he will command his angels concerning you
to guard you in all your ways.
12 On their hands they will bear you up,
lest you strike your foot against a stone.
13 You will tread on the lion and the adder;
the young lion and the serpent you will trample underfoot.
14 “Because he holds fast to me in love, I will deliver him;
I will protect him, because he knows my name.
15 When he calls to me, I will answer him;
I will be with him in trouble;
I will rescue him and honor him.
16 With long life I will satisfy him
and show him my salvation.”
The second time TB Joshua spoke about Michael Jackson was February 22, 2009. He said, “something happened. He is too young to leave your midst”. On June 12, 2009 he asked a friend of the Jacksons’ family to contact Michael and warn them that Michael was between life and death…
So God was speaking about Michael Jackson to many and God did care…
This program is called “God is still saying something”. Please watch 0:45-3:10 of this video for TB Joshua’s prophecies about Michael Jackson.:
And here is one more part of this program. They mention the personal message from TB Joshua to the Jacksons at around 5:10:
LikeLike
David, here is a contribution from me for your future post (sorry if you already have it). It is about those pastors who suddenly started speaking about Michael Jackson in a totally different way several days before his passing – as if in a prophecy of his reunion with our Father:
Many people felt it was not just a coincidence and left the following comment:
LikeLike
honestly Gavins testimony is easier to believe then this and that says a lot. and i think he believe he was molested for real. but the problem is that a 7 year old would not hide it if it troubled him that much. and why the hell would MJ wait a year to touch him again. just make zero sense.
LikeLike
Thank you for doing this analysis..
The thing he said at the end about MJ ” he needs to move away”
I always thought he meant in a physical sense , when he was leaving the stand , like he was in too close proximity to MJ..
But then , now that I think of it, Mesereau probably would have asked that to be stricken from the record if he meant it that way..
So if he did mean it like he needs to move out of town,he is essentially saying that he needs to get away from this situation with the cops etc..
If he was molested , he would say he needs help , he needs to be in jail..
not he needs to move away as though he is being harassed..
Isnt he essentially saying he cant live in THIS town?
LikeLike
I added an excerpt from Maureen Orth’s “C.S.I. Neverland” article, where she tries to make readers feel sympathetic towards Jason’s testimony, and relies on half-truths to make him look believeable!
I added it after the article fromt the Santa Maria Times that said that Mesereau “didn’t reveal any inconsistencies” in Jason’s testimony. What a crock!
LikeLike
Thanks guys! I know this post was very long and tedious to read, but in order to fully convey everything that happened during his testimony, I had to go over EVERYTHING that he said while on the witness stand, and this is what I’ll do once I start summarizing the trial in a few months. I’ve been asked NUMEROUS times if I’m going to write a book on MJ, which is the ultimate compliment considering that prior to his MJ’s death I didn’t have a clue about these allegations! Obviously I’m not a journalist, and this is only a hobby of mine, so there’s no way I could get a book deal, and to be honest I don’t even want one because I want to have 100% control over what I write, and I couldn’t possibly be this detailed in book! Plus, with writing a blog, I can embed videos and include links to other posts and articles, something that obviously couldn’t be done in a book.
I decided to kill two birds with one stone and include this analysis of Francia’s testimony in this series because he was a former youth minister, and it fit in nicely with my theme of Christians who have lied against MJ! Once I’m done with this series, and a few others that I’ve had on the backburner for a while, I will analyze the testimony of the “major players” of the trial, including the Arvizos, Blanca Francia, the Neverland 5, Stacy Brown, Bob Jones, and June Chandler, and once they’re out of the way I’ll analyze everyone else in chronological order, beginning with Anne Kite (who was the prosecution’s second witness; I’ve already analyzed Martin Bashir’s testimony in another post). My summaries will be similar to the AP summaries found on the MJ Upbeat site (which have been a great help to me, especially while “MJ Conspiracy” was sold out for over a year after MJ’s death): http://mj-upbeat.com/TrialMJJSource.htm
I wish I would have done this a lot sooner, but when I first started by writing, I focused on fact checking and rebutting as many MJ haters as possible, but now since I’m running out of things to fact check, this is the right time to get focused on the trial.
LikeLike
The third thing worth mentioning is the one Suzy wrote about. I also paid attention to the fact that Jason spoke of “crappiness” only when the police arrived to ask questions (and not when the alleged “molestation” took place). He speaks twice about it.
First he calls it a BIG day when ‘this crappiness’ started after which he cried so much that he didn’t go to judo practice:
And then again he cried because of all that crappiness at the police, during which he was thinking only of how to get out of there:
12 Q. Okay. You kind of went back and forth
13 during the interview, didn‟t you? One second you‟d
14 say, “He tickled me,” and the next second you‟d say
15 you‟re not sure, right?
16 A. I was trying to figure out how to get out of
17 there.
18 Q. I understand. And you remember exactly how
19 you felt in 1993 during the interview, right?
20 A. The feeling of, yeah, crying and crappiness.
Another thing I wanted to mention is the first episode of tickling the way it is described by Jason in 1993 and 2005 and by his mother Blanca in 2005. The comparison will tell us the real truth:
The transcript of 1993 says about Jason:
In his testimony at the 2005 trial Jason’s story about the “first time” dramatically changes:
And this is what his mother Blanca Francia says in 2005 about the same “first” episode – the picture is totally different (and not only because they think it was in different places):
LET US SUM UP.
– Jason’s mother could come into the room at any time as she had a key to it
– the boy wasn’t watching TV. He was reading (or was read) a book sitting on Michael’s legs
– he was sitting on Michael’s legs because there was only one chair in the room
– Michael was not pressing himself on the boy as he was reclining to the back of the chair
– they did not slide to the floor and there was no scene of further tickling there simply because his mother simply took him off Michael’s lap and they left
– now Jason says he “doesn’t remember” how it ended (but nevertheless remembers the floor scene which was never there)
So Jason Francia flatly lied about it in the year 2005.
LikeLike
From Jim Hammer about Francia
“Jim Hammer: He’s cross examining [Jason Francia] repeatedly not just about interviews 12 years ago, but about interviews late last year. And about those, the kid continually claims he doesn’t remember things. It’s gonna be hard for the jury to put much weight into his testimony if they think he’s selectively remembering even 5 months ago.”
http://www.themjifc.com/forum/innocent/189-even-francia-testimony-problematic-prosecution-minibullet-17-a.html
LikeLike
Thank you, David.
I read about that 1993 Corey Feldman interview, of course, but it’s the first time I read (and hear) extracts of it. It’s disgusting how Linden tries to pressure him into saying something, anything negative about Michael. They did that with all the kids and eventually they found one who broke under the pressure and leading questioning of the police. “I was trying to figure out how to get out of there” says it all.
It’s also interesting that when he says:
23 Q. Did you know in advance that they wanted to
24 speak with you?
25 A. No. Not until the big day that this
26 crappiness started.
It’s very telling that he says “this crappiness” started when the police started to make interviews with him! So it didn’t start when MJ allegedly molested him, but with the police interviews. “This crappiness” was initiated by the police!
I don’t know if the police and his “therapist” eventually managed to make him believe he was really “molested” (there are whole libraries about such quack therapists and such quack therapy), whether they managed to make him believe that MJ really put his hand on his crotch or in his pants while tickling (even though Jason didn’t remember anything like that), or he knows he’s lying.
LikeLike
David, thank you for the thorough post. It was long and I managed to read it only now. There are a couple of things I need to add. Here is the first one.
Why do the prosecution, the judge and defense are somewhat battling about which number interview it was? Wasn’t it the same whether it was first (Nov.1993) or second (March 1994)?
No, it is absolutely not the same. In his 2005 testimony Jason says again and again that back in 1993 he was initially shy, ashamed, didn’t want to disclose the truth, etc. but towards the end of the interview finally blurted it out.
This is an example of what he says in reply to ghastly, horrendous, totally unacceptable leading questions of the police which should have never been asked:
So Jason tried to convey the idea that he denied “touches” only in his initial statements, but told the truth later, right? And now let us look at the SECOND interview he gave four months later, in March 1994:
This is when the judge interferes because it is top important to know which number interview it was:
It doesn’t matter what Jason “doesn’t remember” now – what does matter is that in 2005 he claims MJ touched his genitalia when he was 7 but the transcripts from 1993 and 1994 prove the opposite – even in the SECOND interview with the police he was still saying that all MJ did was simple tickling and there were no sensitive touches!
So those claims did not depend on whether he was shy at the beginning and then “opened up” – even when they interviewed him four months later he was still saying it was just tickling!
The same is proven by this episode – at the end of the 1993 interview he still denied the police allegations, though now Jason says he doesn’t remember:
The only episode where he more or less thinks that it could probably involve touching was the last one – in the arcade – about which the 1993 transcript says the following;
Never mind again what he says in 2005 – what is important is what he said then, and he said “he didn’t touch” in the first two episodes, and repeatedly said “I don’t know” about the third one.
Jason actually summed it up himself as follows:
So the first interview in 1993 as well as the second in 1994, where he repeated what he said in the first one, DID NOT HAVE anything which could explain his sudden change of heart in 2005.
Let us remember it.
LikeLike
What is most interesting is that he had no problems relating the accusations that he made against Michael in the morning when he was questioned by Zonen but when it came to the afternoon and the next morning he couldn’t remember saying anything, getting money or meeting with the DA. That is what is know as selective memory. He chose only to speak to the jury when the prosecution was asking questions.When you chose not to answer a specific question it is a lie by omission because the facts don’t coincide with the rest of the story. Didn’t the prosecutors tell this guy he wouldbe cross examined and the court would make him answer?
LikeLike
That’s interesting information about Chernoff’s law firm. Kris is right: It’s big business nowadays accusing people of sex crimes. It became a lucrative weapon against enemies and also a source of income for lawyers.
I’m waiting for the final part of your series, David, to feel some relief from all these “Christian” liers.
LikeLike
When I first read the transcripts of his testimony a while ago, my first impression was that he still needed therapy at that tine. The jury foreman is correct about his testimony being like janet arvizo’s, incoherent and complete nonsense. Lies that did not even seem thought out, just made up as needed. The cops surly persuaded him to lie by having him think that by lying he was ‘saving’ other boys from such ‘ordeals’. He says he knows little about the money from the tabloid hard copy, and the settlement. He knows he lied back then, and is lying now. Funny how all these ‘victims’ and witnesses have the worst memories of any event at all in court, but sure can remember vividly when they are being paid to do so. Oh well, they succeeded in showing themselves for who they are, liars, thieves, parasites who are willing to whatever it takes to get money. He’s marked for life.
LikeLike
Those last three videos boggle the mind. Here’s where misguided youths are misled by misguided adults who teach them how to morph into religious monsters.
Thanks for another great post, oh sane one. After reading the bit about Chernoff’s law practice I wonder why he didn’t remember any of his own advice during the Murray case.
The bit also illustrates something I didn’t really think of before–accusing and defending people re. pedophilia and other sex-crimes is a huge multimillion dollar business in this country. What about the falsely accused poor who cannot afford an expensive attorney? Their lives are essentially over. Did you ever add up how much money Michael had to pay out throughout his career for legal defense against various unfounded accusations? Just the 2005 case alone was mind-bogglingly expensive. Because Michael lost his earning power even though he was acquitted, some millions of dollars of those fees actually had to be paid off by the Estate after his death.
LikeLike