Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jacko 'seen in oral sex with boy'
The Australian ^ | 4/8/2005 | Staff Writers

Posted on 04/07/2005 12:25:46 PM PDT by ex-Texan

From correspondents in Santa Maria, California

A FORMER security guard at Michael Jackson's Neverland Ranch has claimed he saw the star kissing, fondling and performing oral sex on a young boy in the 1990s.

Ex-guard Ralph Chacon told the superstar's child molestation trial in California that he saw the alleged incident when he peeked through a bathroom window one evening in late 1992 or early 1993.

The then 13-year-old boy involved in the alleged assault won a 1994 out-of-court settlement from Jackson in a deal that ensured his silence and averted a criminal trial.

Mr Chacon, who left Jackson's employment on bad terms in 1994, said he first saw the star and the boy in a Jacuzzi in a building near Neverland's amusement arcade, but the two got out and headed to the shower together.

Feeling something was amiss, the guard said he peeked through a window to see what was going on and saw Jackson and the boy standing naked together in the lighted bathroom.

"I was thinking, 'what's going on in there? Grown man in the shower with a boy' ... it wasn't right," he told trial jurors, who could jail Jackson for up to 20 years if he is convicted in the present case against him.

"I saw Mr Jackson caressing the boy's hair, he was kissing him," he said, adding that Jackson kissed the boy on various areas of his body.

He then told the court in the town of Santa Maria, where Jackson is on trial for allegedly molesting a 13-year-old boy two years ago, of the alleged incident of oral sex.

The former security guard, whom Jackson's lawyer said had lost a lawsuit he filed against the star for alleged wrongful dismissal, also recalled other incidents in which he claimed he saw Jackson kissing and touching the boy.

He said that on one occasion the kissing was "not long, but passionate".

Mr Chacon, who first mentioned the alleged assaults under oath in 1994, said he did not immediately report the incident to authorities as he did not think anyone would believe him. "Who would believe me?" he asked.

Legal analysts following the case said the testimony would deal a major blow to Jackson's defence as it was likely to make an impression on jurors.

The pop icon's mother, Katherine, left the courtroom shortly before the graphic testimony began, and some fans of the embattled superstar cried in the public gallery as they heard the account.

But Jackson's lead lawyer Thomas Mesereau immediately moved to limit the damage from Mr Chacon's testimony.

He pointed out that the former security guard, who worked for Jackson from 1991 to 1994, had lost a wrongful dismissal lawsuit against the star and had been ordered to pay Jackson $US1.5 million ($1.95m) in damages and legal costs after his lawsuit was ruled fraudulent and malicious.

In the lawsuit, Mr Chacon had sought $US16 million ($20.8m) in damages from Jackson, Mr Mesereau said.

"You tried to extort Mr Jackson, right?" he asked the witness before he was interrupted by an objection from prosecutors.

Relatives of the now 25-year-old boy involved in the alleged incident have said he will not testify at Jackson's trial.

While Jackson has never faced criminal charges in connection with previous alleged acts of molestation, Judge Rodney Melville has allowed prosecutors to tell jurors of five unproved claims against the star in order to show a possible pattern of child abuse.

The star has denied 10 counts in the case against him, including molestation, plying the boy with alcohol and plotting to keep him and his family captive at Neverland.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: jackson; wackojack
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last
To: areafiftyone

that's exactly what I think. I think Jacko's a sick man, but in this particular case I don't think the prosecution has a chance. their evidence is shaky, and the prosecutors have in the past tried to wrangle money from famous people/companies


41 posted on 04/07/2005 12:59:17 PM PDT by Asphalt (Three can keep a secret if two are dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
"I was thinking, 'what's going on in there? Grown man in the shower with a boy' ... it wasn't right," he told trial jurors, who could jail Jackson for up to 20 years if he is convicted in the present case against him.

Begs the question: why didn't he do something about it then, to spare the boy the humiliation/crime/assault?

42 posted on 04/07/2005 12:59:30 PM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost (Spirit of '75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone
Sorry, as much as I think Jackson is a nut case, I think Jackson will get off in this trial. The evidence is just not there. Too many so-called prosection witnesses were money-hungry and not credible.

My sentiments exactly. I don't know whether or not MJ is a pedophile. What seems certain is he is an emotionally and mentally arrested individual in possession of great wealth who seems to surround himself with inept handlers, "yes" men, sycophants, shakedown artists and other assorted grifters.

Everybody in this case comes off as abhorrent, contemptible people!

43 posted on 04/07/2005 12:59:45 PM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rellimpank
--strangely enough, I believe he's not guilty until convicted---

You're entitled to your beliefs, my friend. But your belief seems a little strange to me.

Anyone watching the news is free to form their own opinion about Jackson's guilt or innocence. I've got my opinion. And if the jurors come back with a different opinion, it doesn't change my mind -- I sitll know what I believe.

44 posted on 04/07/2005 1:00:32 PM PDT by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone

Remember, we're talking California jury. OJ, the first trial of the brothers that murdered their parents, Robert Blake. I don't think the jurors respect evidence. They only want to get their face time on TV and a book deal.......


45 posted on 04/07/2005 1:00:47 PM PDT by Red Badger (I'd rather be a Crack-er than a Crack Ho........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: theFIRMbss

whether he is guilty or not is irrelevant. thanks to a good lawyer and questionable credibility on the part of the witnesses in many of these incidents, he will probably get off scot free.


46 posted on 04/07/2005 1:04:13 PM PDT by timtoews5292004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wrathof59
[ Tells us what type of society we have become. ]

Warped..
America has been warped into a democracy from the free republic it was created as.. and the people generally have been warped into socialists, even republicans.. Socialism is slavery by government and more than 50 percent of america wants some form of it.. Socialism is a social disease and you cannot have just a little of it.. Actually democracy is the disease and socialism is JUST a symptom.. No democracy ever created anywhere was not a socialist system.. till this day..

Are YOU a socialist.?. in some aspect.?.
Be careful with the answer.. you may be lying to yourself..

I'm over 60 and the answer is not easy for me either..

47 posted on 04/07/2005 1:04:18 PM PDT by hosepipe (This Propaganda has been edited to include not a small amount of Hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
Money is indeed the root of all "evil"...
At least much of it..

I don't know about that. Sometimes evil comes from a lust for money, or from a lust for sex, or from a lust for power, etc. The worst evil seems to be motivated by religious or ideological reasons -- not financial reasons.

48 posted on 04/07/2005 1:05:04 PM PDT by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
[ I don't know about that. Sometimes evil comes from a lust for money, or from a lust for sex, or from a lust for power, etc. The worst evil seems to be motivated by religious or ideological reasons -- not financial reasons. ]

Your on the right track.. You'll eventially put the dots together has come up with the right answer.. I have faith ye'..

49 posted on 04/07/2005 1:08:45 PM PDT by hosepipe (This Propaganda has been edited to include not a small amount of Hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: rellimpank
"--strangely enough, I believe he's not guilty until convicted---"

Why?....Are you on the Jury? The "presumption of innocense until proven guilty" only applies to the jurors. The rest of the world (including you) can think whatever they want. Do you really think he's innocent? OJ Simpson was found "not guilty" by a jury.....do you believe he 's innocent of the crime of murder?

50 posted on 04/07/2005 1:12:05 PM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

That's ignornat. He's just ignorant.


51 posted on 04/07/2005 1:15:25 PM PDT by SengirV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark; theFIRMbss; Graybeard58

--and I am thankful for those rich white slaveowners who wrote the Constitution--it even applies to the ignorant--


52 posted on 04/07/2005 1:16:50 PM PDT by rellimpank (urban dwellers don' t understand the cultural deprivation of not being raised on a farm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

I never liked the phrase about money as the root of all evil. I always thought that was used mainly by leftists -- they want to attack a productive economy, while they hide the evil motives behind their lust for power and dominance.


53 posted on 04/07/2005 1:16:51 PM PDT by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: XJarhead

I'm with you on this one.

We saw what happened when Robert Blake had unscrupulous witnesses testify against him for the prosecution.

His testimony just isn't that credible. If there was a *current* employee at the ranch, or one who left to pursue other opportunities and didn't part on bad terms with Jackson and subsequently try to get money out of him, the prosecution would get a lot more mileage.


54 posted on 04/07/2005 1:18:00 PM PDT by Heavyrunner (Socialize this.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

so will the jury members laugh about this, as they did about the other kid's testimony?


55 posted on 04/07/2005 1:18:50 PM PDT by ken21 ( people die + then you don't hear from them again. /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rellimpank
If your reference refers to "ignorance" about the presumption of innocence on the part of individuals and not members of a particular legal process, I can assure you the ignorance is all yours.
56 posted on 04/07/2005 1:19:18 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Spec.4 Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone
I AGREE....READ THIS:

They were going to pay me to lie

The tabloid offered the Newts' father, Ronald Newt Sr., $200,000 to say that something happened between his kids and Jackson

57 posted on 04/07/2005 1:31:12 PM PDT by zippee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: XJarhead
You make some good points, and if MJ walks, then the reasons you cite for the case being weak will likely be the cause for that.

But answer me this: MJ already KNEW that he would be a target after having to pay out the millions to earlier accusers. Why would he ever put himself in that position again? Only a compulsion to sleep with (and probably worse) would explain it. In that case, he needs to be locked away from the public, since there are people stupid enough to feed their children to him.

Frankly, I see this case ending with either a flight from the US (good riddance!) or a suicide. He's not going to spend one night in jail, look how much of a conniption fit he had over the 45 minute booking process.

58 posted on 04/07/2005 1:31:18 PM PDT by hunter112 (Total victory, both in the USA and the Middle East!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
That presumption of innocence thing is over rated.

Oh, really?

59 posted on 04/07/2005 1:33:50 PM PDT by rellimpank (urban dwellers don' t understand the cultural deprivation of not being raised on a farm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

I can't stand this guy, but I haven't seen anything compelling that says he's guilty either. Not yet, at least.


60 posted on 04/07/2005 1:34:28 PM PDT by WKUHilltopper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson