Posted on 04/15/2005 9:14:34 PM PDT by Former Military Chick
SANTA MARIA, Calif. — The woman who claims she and her son were victimized by Michael Jackson and his aides admitted Friday that she lied under oath in a past civil case in which she claimed department store security guards victimized her and her son.
She vehemently denied, however, that she had any designs on the pop star's fortune.
"We will never file a claim against Michael Jackson," the witness said defiantly. "I want justice here."
Friday marked a third day of testimony from the woman who alleges that she and her three children were falsely imprisoned at Neverland Ranch by Jackson and his aides, that they were forced to make videotaped statements praising Jackson, and that the singer tempted her 13-year-old son away from her to sexually molest him.
Her effusive remarks about Jackson and her self-serving behavior during the time she was allegedly held captive, however, may have marred her credibility on the stand.
Defense attorney Thomas Mesereau successfully pointed out that she delivered a giddy, effusive testimonial of Jackson in videotaped interviews; she was driven at least twice to pricey salons while under alleged false imprisonment; and she agreed to return to Neverland twice after two alleged "escapes."
In the video, played for the fourth time for jurors, the accuser calls Jackson "Daddy Michael" and the mother giggles as she recounts the singer's generosity, calling him "the answered prayer to my children and me."
"I was acting," she testified on Friday.
She insisted that she was simply reciting memorized lines scripted for her by Jackson aides.
The interview was supposed to be part of a rebuttal video Jackson made in answer to the broadcast of a damaging documentary, "Living with Michael Jackson," which showed him in a loving embrace with the accuser.
The witness and her children appear happy and natural as they talk freely about their impressions of Jackson and his impact on their life.
Courtroom observers commented on the striking difference in the mother's appearance. In the video, her long hair is wet and crimped. In court, she wore a bob cut befitting a soccer mom. In the video, she has glossy, red-bowed lips, perfectly shaped eyebrows and bore a slight resemblance to actress Marisa Tomei.
In court, she was wan, wore eyeglasses and no makeup, and she claimed to be a poor judge of character.
She testified that she took part in the video because she feared for her life, that she was duped into following orders.
"But now?" she said, as she threw out an upturned palm and a 'bring it on' gesture toward Jackson. "Have another rebuttal, I'll speak freely!"
The witness also said she was tricked and manipulated by "those Germans"— unindicted co-conspirators Ronald Konitzer and Dieter Wiesner — into trusting Jackson with her son.
"I fell for it. Yes I did — their little choreography," she said. "Now I know different. Now I know Neverland is all about booze, pornography and having sex with boys."
Jackson, 46, faces up to 20 years prison if convicted of plying the boy with alcohol and sexually molesting him in 2003.
Questions on captivity
The witness was seemingly inexhaustible on the stand Friday. She continually dodged and weaved around simple yes-or-no questions, instead turning to the jurors and offering observations such as, "He's inaccurate," or "He's mixing up the facts, purposely."
She laughed at Mesereau at one point.
"You ... you are," she began to mumble. "I have a lot of thoughts in my heart about you."
Another time she shot at him, "Are you missing the point?"
She seemed particularly peeved about the question of whether she was treated to a full body wax while under alleged captivity.
"Would it refresh your recollection to look at the receipt?" Mesereau asked, offering to show her the Feb. 11, 2003, receipt from a nearby Los Olivos salon, which indicates that $140 was spent on a leg, brow, lip, face and bikini wax.
The mother refused to look at it.
"I'm telling you, it was only a leg wax. He has the ability to choreograph everything," she said, pointing a finger at the defendant.
"And how about you?" Mesereau responded glibly.
The judge admonished the witness and Mesereau to refrain from cat-and-mouse banter.
She was also questioned about a settlement she received from J.C. Penney and Tower Records, after she claimed the store's security guards assaulted her, her husband and her two sons in a parking lot in 1998.
In that case, she said the guards beat her up with closed fists and handcuffs, did belly flops on her body as she lay on the ground, repeatedly squeezed her nipples and reached toward her groin, and that she thought she was going to die.
She said she was left bruised and battered. However, she conceded on the stand Friday that she did not reveal that her now-ex-husband had also been physically abusive to her and her kids, often leaving her bruised and battered.
The settlement was approximately $152,000, but the mother said she personally received only $32,000, and that she was unaware of how much money had been set aside for her two boys.
Mesereau insinuated that she denied the physical abuse in her deposition, because she knew it could affect her settlement. The mother countered that she hid the abuse and praised her husband in the deposition, because she was under his control.
She insisted that when she finally left him, she was "liberated," and she urged her attorneys to remedy the lies she told under oath. Her attorneys never fulfilled her request.
Cross-examination of the mother will continue on Monday.
Stake out
Earlier Friday, jurors watched a series of creepy surveillance videotapes allegedly taken by Jackson aides.
The tapes were confiscated from a Jackson aide during a search warrant and they appeared to corroborate the mother's claim that she and her family were under surveillance. The defense claims they were protecting the family from the press.
Much of the footage appeared to be shot from inside a car, on a shaky handheld camera, trained on the home of the accuser's grandparents. At one point, the mother is seen on the street talking to a child protective services worker, as one of Jackson's aides looks on.
Another tape shows movers cleaning out the family's dingy one-bedroom, $425-a-month apartment. The tape corroborated the mother's testimony that Jackson's camp convinced her to vacate her apartment, and then put her possessions in storage while she was away.
Another video, time-stamped March 17, indicating the period after the family's alleged escape from Neverland, depicted the accuser's sister walking home from school. She looks briefly in the direction of the camera before hurrying away.
"Yes, this is my daughter," the mother said with emotion as she identified her child. "And she looks frightened."
I had heard Diane Dimond (Court TV) spring this on the host of Court TV and I thought well this might be the quote we might hear quite a bit.
Perhaps I am not a good judge of quote's. Better yet, everyone already knows that this is what Neverland is all about, sadly the mother of the victim just figured it out.
They say the victims mother may not be making any head way with the jury, I frankly do not know. But, I do wonder why the prosecution put her on. This is about molesting of the son, I know the conspiracy theory is why but with her baggage I would have found another way.
What I find most sad as I reflect on this trial, the 3 boys who have been molested (that Jackson has paid off) the idea that he could do this, get away with it, parents allow it, and they did, and now in this trial, the poor young boy is yet again lost in the process.
I do hope if this little boy was molested that Jackson is found guilty and the sentence is harsh. He will not be a first time offender. I fear, and I may be the only one, that this jury will not convict him, they will be lost in the side stories and as I said I have to make an effort to recall the young man lost, who should always be at the center of the case.
Anyone up for just throwing everyone in prison and calling it a day?
MJ is just a freak and has been for many, many years. There is a gulf of difference between eccentric and freakshow and MJ crossed that Rubicon a long time ago.
Who knew Michael Jackson was qualified to be a Catholic priest or a Congressman?
Her story may or may not be true, but it's coming across like Kelloggs corn flakes.
The sentence for that child molester Jackson should be the same for the sychophatic parents that let their children be the sexual toys of this rat bas**rd. Neverland was a sewer.
Agreed. What parent would send their kid to that place after the first allegations made the headlines? A resonable parent would, I hope, err on the side of caution and not allow their spawn to spend time alone with that whackjob.
From another planet.
What would any reasonable person do?
Brilliant!
I am 100% convinced that Jackson is a sick pervert. However, I think the prosecutor went "victim shopping", convinced that if he spoke to enough of the young boys who had spent the night at Jackson's that he would find a victim -- and this is prosecutorial misconduct, his job is to prosecute crimes, not look for evidence that may or may not lead to a crime (this is basically the same battle that Rush Limbaugh is having with the Palm Beach State's attorney). But the most ridiculous thing about this is that the "victim" that they found comes from a family of habitual scam artists. I truly think that when this case finally ends, the jury will determine that something illegal probably did happen, but that the victim and his family are so unbelievable and have told so many conflicting stories that it is impossible to convict beyond a reasonable doubt.
I agree. Part of the problem is that to have this type of situation happen (turning your child over to another adult...not simply molestation) the family HAS to be screwy. MJ couldn't have manipulated well adjusted, upright people the way he has (allegedly) this family.
No child (or adult for that matter) EVER deserves to be abused by anybody in anyway. But, by the same token, from everything I've seen, this boy's mother doesn't have the capacity to care for a goldfish, let alone a child. She is a pathological liar, a criminal and an extortionist. I believe that when this whole thing started, she assumed that she could reach a quick multi-million dollar settlement with Jackson, then she found out that the prosecutor was going forward with criminal charges no matter what. At that point, Jackson no longer had any motivation to settle anything; moreover, I have a feeling that the prosecution is basically forcing this family to continue with the case or they will face charges themselves.
Neverland is also about pimping your kids so you can coattail on the celebrity and money of somebody with no morals who is worshipped and adored by shallow, idiotic sheeple.
It would save us all a lot of time and a big headache, that's for sure...
Drama in Jackson trial as accuser's mother takes the stand and the Fifth
"The mother of Michael Jackson's child sex accuser took the stand in his trial, but in a dramatic twist, refused to testify about aspects of her shady past."
"The woman, who Jackson's lawyers have described as a money-seeking opportunist out to extort celebrities, took the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution, refusing to talk about claims that she engaged in welfare fraud."
"The US Constitution allows witnesses to invoke the Fifth Amendment to avoid incriminating themselves during testimony, but the move is seen as a blow to the prosecution."
" "It's a major set-back for the prosecution," said legal analyst Jim Moret. They need the accuser's mother for their conspiracy case. But the defense has said all along that she's a grifter, a liar. Now she's invoked the Fifth Amendment which could say to the jury that there may be some credibility to that."
"Jackson's attorneys have promised to discredit her account of events by showing that she lied under oath and coached her children to do the same."
"Judge Rodney Melville denied a request by Jackson's lawyers to prevent the woman -- who took the Fifth out of the jury's earshot -- from testifying altogether, as well as another request to declare a mistrial. "You cannot allow a witness what he is going to be examined on," Jackson lawyer Robert Sanger argued after the judge dismissed the jurors who could jail Jackson for up to 20 years if convicted. "Michael Jackson, who has been accused by this witness, has a right under counsel to vigorously cross examine this witness to show that she has committed acts of perjury and acts of fraud and that she is not credible," he said."
"The judge ruled that the woman can testify, but that jurors will be informed that she has taken the Fifth over accusations of possible welfare fraud when she allegedly accepted state benefit payouts that she was not entitled to."
"The woman's testimony came a day after her husband, a major in the US Army reserves, told jurors that she had called him in distress while she and her children were allegedly being held captive at the singer's Neverland ranch."
"During cross examination, Jackson's lead lawyer Thomas Mesereau on Wednesday got the man to concede that the woman had unfettered asses (access) to a phone to call for help and that she had returned to Neverland three times after claiming she was being held against her will."
December 10, 2003
by Dean Tong
"Published yesterday at the smokinggun.com website is a document dated November 26 from the Department of Children and Family Services out of Los Angeles. Their nine month investigation of Jackson’s alleged abuse of a young boy stricken with cancer culminated in the finding of “unfounded both by the LAPD-Wilshire Division and the Department.” In other words, there was no merit to the allegations."
" On November 20, Michael Jackson was arrested and booked in Santa Barbara, California for probable cause that he violated California Penal Code 288(a) and committed lewd and lascivious acts upon his now 14 year-old complainant. But, how could the authorities have reasonable suspicions Jackson committed a crime when child protective services claims nothing happened? Why did social services take nine months to release their unfounded finding and did so after the police arrested Jackson? There’s more."
"Ostensibly, the accusing child’s younger brother recanted an accusation that Jackson abused his brother and the complainant’s older sister denied abuse on the part of Jackson. While Jackson is no doubt an odd bird who is guilty of poor judgment, allowing minors over for slumber parties after being accused of similar acts upon a child in 1993, the most important player in this chess game and puzzle may be the accusing boy’s mother. You be the judge."
"Janet Ventura, the complaining boy’s mother, talked highly of Jackson, calling him an “angel,” and praised him for reaching out to her son. Admitting she allowed her child to stay overnight at Jackson’s Neverland Ranch, Ventura stated Jackson did not abuse her son. Later she changed her tune that Jackson did abuse her son, and opted to query an attorney with her concerns, not the police or child protective services."
"The attorney referred her to Larry Feldman, the same lawyer who represented Jordan Chandler, the boy who accused Jackson of abuse back in 1993. Curiously, Jackson’s current accuser disclosed molestation to a phantom psychiatrist, who of course is required by state and federal law to report his or her concerns to the authorities. The rest is history. Or, is it? "
"DECEMBER 9--A confidential investigation by Los Angeles police and child welfare officials concluded earlier this year that allegations Michael Jackson sexually abused a cancer-stricken boy were "unfounded," according to an internal government memo obtained by The Smoking Gun."
"The probe's findings were based, in large part, on interviews with the alleged victim, his two siblings, and the boy's mother. According to the memo, when the child was questioned in February by a social worker assigned to the Sensitive Case Unit of L.A.'s Department of Children & Family Services (DCFS), he "denied any form of sexual abuse" by Jackson and said that he never "slept in the same bed as the entertainer." While not specifically named in the DCFS memo, the 45-year-old Jackson is referred to repeatedly as "the entertainer.""
"The memo notes that the boy, now 14, and his 12-year-old brother--who also denied sexual abuse--expressed "a fondness for the entertainer and stated they enjoyed visiting his home, where they would often ride in the park, play video games, and watch movies." The pair's sister, now 17, told a social worker that she accompanied the boys on "sleepovers at the entertainers home," but had "never seen anything sexually inappropriate between her brothers and the entertainer.""
"The joint probe by DCFS and the Los Angeles Police Department ran from February 14-27 and, the memo states, the "investigation by the Sensitive Case Unit concluded the allegations of neglect and sexual abuse to be unfounded both by the LAPD-Wilshire Division and the Department.""
"Anyone up for just throwing everyone in prison and calling it a day?"
Works for me!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.