Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
Open Community
Post to this Blog
« June 2005 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
Announcements
Breaking News
Direct Testimonies
Main News
Mishandled
MJ's Side Segments
Open Letters
Prosecutor Press Release
Truth Or Fiction
Advertizements
Parr's Corner
You are not logged in. Log in
The Michael Jackson Followers News
Thu, Jun 23 2005
Michael Jackson's Mother Speaks Out About Trial
Mood:  hug me
Topic: Main News
KNBC-TV

LOS ANGELES - In a "Today" show exclusive, Michael Jackson's mother, Katherine, talked to MSNBC's Rita Cosby one week after her famous son's acquittal on all charges of child molestation.

Katherine Jackson is considered to be "the rock" of the Jackson family. With nine children, including Michael Jackson, the "King of Pop." The Jackson matriarch told Cosby that the seven days she waited for the jury to come back were nail-biters. The whole trial took everything out of her son, physically and mentally, Cosby reported. "One of the reasons why it devastated him," Mrs. Jackson said, "he would tell me, 'Mother, when they say 'call your next witness,' and I look around and I'm surprised. It's people that I've helped, and they're up there trying to make money off of me by lying. I don't understand how people can do that.'"

When asked if she felt Michael has shaken the allegations of child molestation once and for all, Mrs. Jackson said, "he'd been proven not to be a child molester, and they know he's not. But some people just believe what they believe and I can't stop that. But I wish they would stop and think about it. That he is not a child molester. He is not a pedophile. He doesn't give liquor to children. These kids were bad kids." Cosby asked Jackson, "If you could see the boy and the mother, what would you say to them?"

"I could not even answer that right now," Mrs. Jackson said. "It all depends on what mood I am in when I see them. I feel sorry for them, too. From what I hear about their past, I feel sorry for their future if they don't change their way." Some of the jurors said that they believed Michael Jackson may have molested someone else before, but they didn't believe the words of this family.

"I think there was one juror, I think they said juror No. 1 said that. I can't change his mind. He believed what he wants to believe," said Mrs. Jackson. Cosby said following Jackson's acquittal, Attorney Tom Sneddon was unapologetic and said he made no mistakes and would do it again.

"Maybe he didn't make what he calls 'no mistakes,' but he made a big mistake. My son is not a pedophile," Mrs. Jackson said. "Are you angry at the way some perceived he targeted your son," Cosby asked.

"My son is a better person than he is," said Mrs. Jackson. "What he did to my son, my son would never do to anyone else." "Another thing, too," Mrs. Jackson continued, "that ranch was not built to lure little children just to molest them, as the prosecutors tried to say. When he let people come out there and enjoy the ranch, everything is free. He has always been taught to give and to share." Michael Jackson's mother said Michael told her if he had to help people from now on, he would help them from a distance. "Do you think from here on out, he will say, 'OK, no kids, no boys in the bedroom because I don't want to be accused of something,'" Cosby asked. "I am sure he won't do that now. Twice he's been accused of doing something he hasn't done," Mrs. Jackson said.

When asked how the trial affected Michael Jackson's mother personally, she said, "I had anxiety sometimes, I prayed about all of that. He was my child and I loved him, and I was going to stick by him."

? 2005 MSNBC.com
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8302648/


Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 5:25 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Profile: The Arvizo family
Mood:  irritated
Topic: Main News
By Matthew Davis
BBC News, Washington

The credibility of 15-year-old cancer survivor Gavin Arvizo and his mother Janet was key to the case against Michael Jackson, who has been acquitted of child abuse and abduction charges by a California court.

The defence sought to portray the boy and his family as dishonest gold-diggers who saw Mr Jackson as a celebrity fall guy to be milked for cash.
Janet Arvizo proved to be a loose cannon and one of the most explosive witnesses in the case with her erratic courtroom outbursts.

The many faces of her son - downcast and ghostly in a police interview, or fresh-faced and confident in documentary footage - gave the jurors a compelling dilemma. But what emerged above all was a sad picture of a family fragmented, and of a teenage boy - still with serious health problems - laying himself open in a case seen all over the world.

Father assaulted mother

Gavin Arvizo comes from a troubled background. His mother remarried in 2004 - to US Army Major Jay Jackson - following an acrimonious divorce from her previous husband, 37-year-old lorry driver David Arvizo. Mr Arvizo lost custody of the teenager, his younger brother and older sister after admitting an assault on Janet Arvizo.

The trial heard how the father was persistent in begging celebrities for money after Gavin was diagnosed with a rare form of cancer in 2000, which required the boy's spleen and left kidney to be removed. It was in that year that Gavin first met Michael Jackson, introduced to the star by Jamie Masada, owner of The Laugh Factory in Hollywood.

'Jesus juice'

Gavin claimed the abuse started after his appearance with Mr Jackson in the British documentary by Martin Bashir - filmed in 2002 and aired in 2003. He said it was after the interview that Mr Jackson started serving him and his younger brother wine, which he claimed the singer called "Jesus juice", and began making sexual advances.

But defence lawyers were able to put a number of dents in Gavin's credibility as a witness. It emerged that the boy, and his younger brother and older sister, had taken acting lessons ahead of a 2001 lawsuit against US retailer JC Penney.

The boy himself said Mr Jackson broke his heart by rejecting him as a friend, and defence lawyers suggested the accusations were a case of revenge. In separate interviews with a social worker and a teacher after the airing of the Bashir documentary, Gavin denied he had been molested by Mr Jackson. Prosecutors said this was because he wanted to put an end to the teasing he was enduring in the wake of the film. The low, downcast demeanour of the boy in a powerful video shown at the very end of the case, in which he haltingly described the alleged abuse, was a powerful boost to his case.

'Are you Catwoman?'
From the outset of the trial, Janet Arvizo proved to be a mercurial character. She rarely gave a straight answer to any of the defence's questions thrown at her in court, often replying using a repetitive array of words and phrases.

Among her favourites were "It's burned inside my memory" and "Money doesn't buy happiness". At times she drew laughter from the courtroom - often directed at her - as in the time she tried to explain she was acting in the so-called rebuttal video.

"You are not going to call Halle Berry and say, 'Are you Catwoman?'," she said in response to questioning.

She was accused of exploiting her cancer-stricken son for money. Defence witnesses said she had concealed sources of income while receiving welfare cheques. It was also suggested that she spent $7,000 (#3,800) shopping and dining out at the same time as she alleged Mr Jackson kept her and her family captive. Now their claims about Mr Jackson's behaviour have been rejected by a jury, their motives for making the allegations against the singer will come under close scrutiny in the coming weeks.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/entertainment/music/4584531.stm

Published: 2005/06/13 21:29:38 GMT

? BBC MMV



Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 5:17 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Jackson mother sorry for Arvizo
Mood:  hug me
Topic: Main News
Michael Jackson's mother has said she felt sorry for the teenager who accused him of child abuse, which resulted in her son being acquitted in court.

Katherine Jackson did not know what she would say to Gavin Arvizo and his mother Janet if she met them, she said.

"I feel sorry for them, and from what I hear about their past I feel sorry for their future if they don't change their way," she told NBC's Today show.

Last week Michael Jackson was cleared of 10 charges at his California trial. Katherine Jackson told the US TV network she believes her son's name has now been cleared beyond doubt. "He's been proven not to be a child molester and they know he's not. He's not a child molester, he's not a paedophile, and he doesn't give liquor to children. These kids were bad kids," she said. She added that Jackson would change his friendships with children, no longer allowing them to share his bed.

Radio 'boost'

"I'm sure he's not going to do that now because twice he's been accused of doing something he hadn't done," she said. In 1993 the singer paid a reported $20m (#12.7m) settlement to a boy who accused him of molesting him, although no charges were ever brought in the case. Since his acquittal, there has been a rise in the amount of times Jackson's music has been played on US radio stations, research has suggested. "There was an absolute spike in airplay subsequent to the reading of the verdict," Mediabase 24/7's president, Rich Meyer. "Only time will tell whether the increased airplay will be sustained," he added.

The top three most-played songs were Billie Jean, Beat It and Rock with You.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/entertainment/music/4118014.stm

Published: 2005/06/22 07:58:03 GMT

? BBC MMV



Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 5:09 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Tue, Jun 21 2005
Commentary: All the little voices deserve equal attention
Mood:  surprised
Topic: Breaking News
January 17, 2004

by Steve Corbett / Times Columnist

While the world watches Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon prepare to make his case against superstar Michael Jackson on charges of child molestation, the Santa Maria parents of another alleged molestation victim wonder why Sneddon abandoned them in their search for truth.

David Bruce Danielson retired last year from the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department, where he worked as a detective until his July 20, 2002, arrest on suspicion of child molestation.

In August 2002, Sneddon decided not to prosecute Danielson, of Orcutt, who was then 49, married and a veteran forensic investigator who had worked on some of the county's most serious criminal cases.

During a subsequent internal investigation into the molestation allegations, Danielson remained on paid administrative leave until he retired, according to sheriff's Lt. Julie McCammon.

Citing confidentiality, Sheriff's Department officials declined to release specifics about how long Danielson collected his paycheck while on administrative leave or how much money he received when he retired June 17, 2003.

Danielson received full pay during the time he did not work and applied that time to his pension, McCammon said. Danielson did not return to partial duty because of the seriousness of the child molestation allegations, she said.

The completed internal investigation did not exonerate Danielson, Sheriff Jim Anderson said Monday.

"He retired in lieu of termination," Anderson said.

Danielson could not be reached for comment.

Sneddon did not respond to a request to discuss the difference between freeing Danielson and prosecuting Jackson. But the district attorney has previously said that Danielson's lack of provable criminal intent figured prominently into the decision to release the detective.

Although Sneddon has offered few details about the charges against Jackson, the veteran prosecutor obviously believes Jackson acted willfully.

But Danielson admitted only to accidentally fondling the then 14-year-old child in a one-time occurrence, according to Sneddon, who said in an August 2002 interview that the deputy admitted touching the girl "in areas people would consider inappropriate."

Sneddon said Danielson came home after a night of drinking and crawled into his wife's bed where the child, who was a guest in the home, was sleeping.

"He touched (the child) a few places (and) by what he was touching realized it wasn't his wife," Sneddon said. "He said, 'Oh my gosh,' and jumped out of bed."

Sneddon said the subsequent investigation into the girl's claims did not provide the required evidence necessary to file a formal charge and prepare for court.

The child's parents, whose names are not being used to protect the identity of the alleged victim, believe that a provable case existed against Danielson.

The girl's mother and father also wonder why the Sheriff's Department - and not an outside police agency - conducted the investigation. One of the detectives even identified himself as a friend of Danielson, the child's mother said shortly after Sneddon declined to prosecute.

The child's father said last week that the Jackson case seems to depend on the word of a child who, like his daughter, cooperated with Santa Barbara County law enforcement officials.

But Sneddon didn't take his daughter's statements seriously enough to go to court.

Jackson's alleged victim, however, is expected to testify as Sneddon's star witness.

Shortly after Sneddon decided not to prosecute Danielson, the child wrote about her feelings, her father said.

"When I came clean I expected to be set free from the burden I had been carrying for so long, however, the only person set free was David Danielson," the child wrote.

"I am astounded at the stupidity the DA showed by allowing this man to be released of all charges. David Danielson may be free, but I am still emotionally trapped. There is not one day that I don't wish I wouldn't have come clean..."

"This happened to me when I was 14," she wrote. "I am now 16. I am a junior in high school, and I feel alone in this. I am asking the community to please help me to bring this man to justice. I don't want this to happen to other young girls. Santa Barbara County, please HELP..."

The child signed her letter "The "IGNORED' Teen.

The girl's father describes the now 17-year-old high school senior as bright, busy and sensitive. Yet, he worries that she will feel even more alone now that Sneddon has taken the word of another alleged child molestation victim more seriously than hers.

"Maybe it's because it is high profile, higher profile, but still, in her mind it's the same situation," he said. "She's still angry."

Although the child is "over what actually happened," the child's father said "her anger stems toward Sneddon." Although the girl's family dealt with an assistant district attorney in Santa Maria, "it all boils down to Sneddon's hands" in Santa Barbara, he said.

Despite Danielson's shocking admission to several people, Sneddon judged the evidence to be weak.

Maybe so.

But, in this uncelebrated case, even the best legal judgment does little to convince a still-vulnerable child that trust and truth matter.

Steve Corbett's column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. He can be reached at 739-2215 or e-mailed at scorbett@p... Read Corbett online at www.santamariatimes.com.

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 12:10 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Janet Jackson Thankful, Somber At Humanitarian Awards Acceptance
Mood:  special
Topic: Main News
LAUNCH Radio NetworksMon Jun 20, 3:00 AM ET

Grammy-winning performer Janet Jackson struck a somber note as she expressed her gratitude at an awards ceremony Saturday night honoring her humanitarian work for several AIDS-related charities. It was her first public appearance since older brother Michael Jackson was acquitted of child molestation charges on June 13. After a joking introduction by actor Alan Cumming, Jackson apologized for her own lack of humor, according to AP reports. She said, "My family and I have just gone through the least humorous chapter of our lives. I'm going to leave the jokes to the late-night (comics), if that's OK."

No stranger to controversy herself after the 2004 "Nipplegate" controversy at the Super Bowl, Janet added: "What I've learned in these recent months is that there is a light at the end of the tunnel. And it's real, it's a beautiful light that both comforts our minds and strengthens our souls. Tonight my heart is filled with gratitude for that light. I'm so grateful that prayers are answered, that faith is rewarded and tolerance is celebrated as a virtue. I'm grateful that God is of unconditional love."

Jackson received a standing ovation at the fundraiser, held June 18 at the Beverly Hilton Hotel in Los Angeles. She was honored for the millions of dollars she has both raised and donated for humanitarian causes, including the American Foundation for AIDS Research, the Elton John AIDS Foundation and the Children Affected by AIDS Foundation.

For more news at Yahoo! Music, click here.
Copyright ? 2005 LAUNCH.

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 11:53 AM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Mon, Jun 20 2005
"How Do You Feel?"
Mood:  special
Topic: Main News
Created: Sunday, 19 June 2005

That seems like the question that I am asked the most…. that, and the media begging for an interview or a sound bite. The answer to the second question is a radical “NO!”

There is absolutely no way I want to give the media one second of anything that belongs to Michael, just so they can get one more minute of ratings, a job advancement for themselves, or some more money in their greedy little paws, even if it is just me. I am not what they want. They just want another piece of Michael, and they are NOT getting it from me. I hold every moment we spent together sacred and personal. That belongs to us. My silence is the ultimate allegiance to my friend and hero.

The only one that has the authority and integrity to speak, at this time, is Thomas Messereau. He must speak in order to balance those scales of justice… remember that symbol?

I have been at “ground zero” throughout the entire year and a half. From the second day of production of ONE MORE CHANCE shooting in Las Vegas when my wake up call was interrupted by a news alert and helicopter shots of a raid on Neverland; the airplane ride to Santa Barbara where I witnessed Michael’s arms being twisted behind his back to slam shackles on his wrists. My heart has been in shackles until I heard the words NOT GUILTY repeated over and over again. Now how do I feel?

I AM FILLED WITH RAGE!!!!! I saw my dear friend go slowly from a vibrant, creative, loving man to a frail, broken hearted, human being. He was repeatedly raped (emotionally and mentally robbed and destroyed by force and violence). Day in and day out, in the courtroom and in the media, he was abused and violated in the worst possible manner in front the entire world, and me.

How do I feel? I am glad that the jury finally came to the same conclusion we knew all along. And what was the purpose of torturing this beautiful human being not only by a few ignorant (lacking a sense of awareness) lawmen, but also by a media willing to participate in the crucifixion for greed? I am ENRAGED!

I am trying to find the peace in my heart to forgive. Rage is a useless and horrible emotion to carry. Over this past week I have tried to cry it out. I went to the Neverland Gates on vindication day and tried to “hug” it out with all of my friends who marched beside Michael on this journey. I am still working on it.

Michael shared so much with me every day, and I still can not even conceive of how his body and heart is feeling now. All I do know is that Michael needs to recover (reclaim, recuperate) from this most heinous act that anyone could have put him through.

I know he needs to find peace. He did share with me his desire to be ALONE with his children… for him NOT to speak or see any one for a long time. I know he said this to also include me, not in any selfish or greedy manner, but for his own survival. I will respect this completely. But also in the same breath, he shared his love and gratitude for all of his friends that stood by his side.

I know we have so many feelings deep within us that need to be expressed. Many of us feel elated and want to party, some want to bow their heads in prayer and give thanks, and I have my rage to work through. Whatever we may be experiencing, let us please be respectful of Michael’s healing process and give him the time he needs to be able to regain his spirit to the fullest.

I have confidence that the artist, the God energy that dwells in Michael, will not be able to remain still. I am sure the music is still dancing in his mind. I am excited to know how his experiences will translate into his art.

Please, all of his friends, be patient and let us learn, and put the negative behind us quickly.

Let us turn this page with all the knowledge that we have gained. Let us leave Michael in peace. He KNOWS we are here… and waiting for him.

Lets keep dancing.

Karen Faye

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 4:21 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Symphony of INNOCENCE
Mood:  hug me
Topic: Main News
Created: Sunday, 19 June 2005

June 17, 2005
By MJJsource Contributing Writer, John Karrys

Children of the world, there is hope. It is okay to be different and be self-made in mind and spirit. We are now reminded that one should strive to tell the truth and be loyal to one’s conscience and remember that karma returns to those who lie with malice. You can choose to stand apart from those who would like to manage your mind and not believe you have to fit into any conventional wisdom or pyramid of conformity. It’s really okay to choose not to follow this cliquish opinion of the moment, or that sheepish behavior. At this moment, Michael Jackson’s symphony of innocence is the best thing America has exported to the world in a very long time. It is a blaze of hope.

Listen to the symphony. Listen and watch closely. Notice the nuances from this or that pundit who was so sure that Michael Jackson was guilty. What do you hear? Does it sound logical? Did it ever sound logical? Do you notice certain faces puffing up? Listen to Tom Sneddon’s mumbling press conference; it felt like a Humpty Dumpty moment did it not? To all of those who hedged their careers on a Michael Jackson conviction, fear not, the angels of retribution will visit you shortly. Consult your lawyers for details. This includes those who felt it was their right to meddle in his private financial affairs. Last time I checked the pulse of this nation, any person’s private property was generally to be respected and honored. Most working people can appreciate that. I guess those moral vultures living outside of that pulse will learn that lesson. Perhaps they need some music for some insight.

A great thing about captivating music is that it can elevate ones awareness toward a more productive plateau. Listen closely to the attempted Michael Jackson career obituaries. This media has tried to tell the public that Michael Jackson’s career took a dive in the 90’s and has never recovered since. What standard did they use to decide that? A musicologist? Is it because he began to create music and videos that questioned the prevailing conditions of the time, instead of creating music for the dance clubs and charts? Revisionist music historians have tried, unsuccessfully, to desecrate the Jackson name by marginalizing his musical trailblazing achievements. Many “experts” will now have to undergo a credibility review.

For the last week, the world saw pictures of a jail cell. Who should really be there as a retribution of justice? How many? Throughout the world, the use of malicious force seems to be used illegally as a tool to exercise more state power over millions of innocent people. Out of this display, children begin to see value in lying and abandon values because they see adults lie constantly only to profit and be rewarded without consequence. Not this time around. There is a wheel of possibilities as to who should fill that jail cell and set an example. Media and legal statisticians are still working out the final tally as to the number of perjuries committed. Stay tuned.

In schools, universities, corporations, and our courts, we have clearly witnessed an epidemic of lies, frauds, the manufacturing of false profits as well as rampant perjury. As a result, we are sleeping complacently in a dangerous bed of lies. Michael Jackson’s explosive symphony is a victory for the truth and justice that is possible in all of our lives.

Ladies and gentlemen, to personify integrity isn’t out of style. To add value to the world is something to strive for as opposed to striving to be a vampire of someone else’s work and wealth. Victory is both peace and an authentic expression of what is possible throughout the cycle of life.

Michael’s triumph and rite of passage is a composition to the world; a unique symphony of innocence. At least, it seems possible that we can lock and load our victorious consciences with faith, diagnose our dangerously sick institutions and peacefully heal our communities.

For You And For Me.

A Note from MJJsource:

Team MJJsource would like to express our deepest thanks to John Karrys for the profound and powerful articles that he has contributed to this website over the past year.

John, in your articles you have so eloquently expressed the words that we felt so strongly but, as Michael's official website and voice, were gagged by law from expressing. We thank you for 'speaking' those often unpopular opinions and for courageously looking beyond the contorted image and twisted stories that were being force fed to the world on a daily basis throughout this process. We applaud your independent and insightful mind and thank you for letting us share 'you' with the world!

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 4:08 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
To All of Michael?s Friends, Fans & Supporters: THANK YOU
Mood:  party time!
Topic: Main News
Created: Sunday, 19 June 2005

On behalf of Michael Jackson, MJJsource would like to express his deepest appreciation to everyone who extended their love, prayers and support to him, his family and his entire team during this very difficult year and a half.

As we close this chapter in all of our lives and embrace a new beginning, Michael wants every fan, friend and supporter to know how truly loved and valued you are. He felt the power of your prayers, your personal sacrifices and the passion of your hearts in your many acts of love, letters, gifts and emails. There are no words to express how important each of you are to him. He is so deeply thankful to God, his family, his attorneys, his friends and his fans… the incredible power of all your love and dedication was invaluable to him and sustained him as he fought for his life everyday.

Throughout this experience, you were never far from his thoughts. He knew about your support demonstrations and vigils all over the world. He saw your faces, your banners and your signs at the beginning and end of each court day. Your constant presence and your cheers were an invaluable source of encouragement for him. He noticed every expression of love placed at his gates; the hearts, the angels, the stars, the banners… He drew strength from your strength… and he expressed his heartfelt gratitude and love for all of you, to those around him, time and time again.

It is of the highest importance to Michael, that his fans be acknowledged and that they truly know how special they are to him. He is so blessed by your loyalty and your ability to see the truth through all of the deception.

He sincerely thanks you all, with a humble and grateful heart, for standing with him, believing in him and fighting for him. His love and gratitude for you knows no bounds and he shares this victory with you. If he could have, throughout this experience, he would have told each one of you personally, “I love you more.”

From Team MJJsource:

As Michael’s official website, we were gagged by law from expressing our anger and outrage at so much of what was being done and reported… but you, the fans, did it for us… And, to you all, we say a sincere, thank you. Thank you. Thank you… for your unwavering loyalty to Michael and to the truth.

We continually cheered with you as you courageously stood up to the powerful forces of deception behind this trial. We know you cried and screamed with us as lie after lie was perpetuated and sold as fact to the world through the media. Often we looked to you to speak when we couldn’t… and you did, sacrificing your own time, money and sometimes relationships with those who refused to see Michael’s innocence. Michael has been a warrior; we have all been his army.

Each of us, in different ways, have had to stand up against much adversity as we have fought to let the truth of this incredible injustice be made known, most importantly and significantly, Michael himself. We know that it has not been easy; we know that so many of you have sacrificed so much to be there for Michael and stand up for truth.... no matter what.

The tireless 'campaigns for victory' of Michael's fans and friends were such a source of beauty and strength for Michael and for all of us involved. But most of all, throughout the entire ordeal, Michael was there, leading us all on, a source of immeasurable inspiration as he bravely walked in that courtroom each day, withstanding indescribable pressure and pain. His strength and endurance is a wonder and blessing to every one of us. We thank him, with all of our hearts, for finding the incredible fortitude within himself to see this horrible experience through to its victorious end. It is a profound lesson for all who have witnessed this triumph, “…and the truth shall set you free.”

For so many years, Michael has given his fans all he had to give on stage and in life, over and over again… and when it was your turn to give back… you were there, in force. You made him proud. You made him strong.

On behalf of Michael Jackson and everyone on his team, MJJsource wants to recognize and praise you all for your roles in this victory of truth. You always knew, you never questioned, you never wavered...

We give you a standing ovation.
Dancing IN the Victory.
Team MJJSource


Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 3:56 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Sun, Jun 19 2005
Jackson Case Exposes Prosecuting Pitfalls
Mood:  surprised
Topic: Main News
Published Saturday, June 18, 2005

By JEREMIAH MARQUEZ
Associate Press Writer

SANTA MARIA, Calif. Set aside Michael Jackson's wealth and celebrity, and his trial could be a textbook lesson - a study in the pitfalls prosecutors face in trying to make child-molestation charges stick.

The credibility of the accuser and his family came under withering attack. Some of the children's testimony was inconsistent and muddled. And there was no DNA evidence, no smoking gun.

"Some prosecutors don't want to touch these cases with a 10-foot pole because they are so difficult," said Victor Vieth, director of child abuse centers at the American Prosecutors Research Institute in Alexandria, Va.

It's unclear how many of the thousands of molestation cases filed each year nationally end with jurors returning guilty verdicts; rough estimates run between 50 and 75 percent. In California, more than 3,420 defendants were found guilty of various sex crimes against minors in 2003, a conviction rate above 74 percent, according to the state Department of Justice.

However, the rate generally is lower in cases that depend heavily on the victim's word, Vieth said.

That's partly because prosecutors not only have to present a case against the alleged abuser, they must protect the accuser against defense counterattacks.

"The first question the jury is going to ask is 'Why would this child make up these allegations?'" said Leonard Levine, a prominent Los Angeles defense lawyer who has handled close to 100 child molestation cases. "And if you can give them a reason as a defense attorney, you're halfway there."

Jackson's prosecutor, Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon, said molestation cases are hard to prove because they often leave no physical evidence.

"They're far more difficult than murder cases. Murder cases you usually have a gun or a knife or blood or fingerprints or something," Sneddon said in an interview. "I've tried cases where they never found the body. I've had two of those cases. And those cases were much easier to try than some of the child molestation cases I've had."

The Jackson case had factors that complicated the prosecutors' job, said Sneddon's deputy, Ron Zonen.

"This case became more difficult because we were dealing with a 13-year-old boy from East L.A. who was rather unsophisticated, who was against not just a celebrity but an international superstar," Zonen said.

The deep pockets that come with celebrity tipped the scales even more. Jackson was able to hire a top defense lawyer, Thomas Mesereau Jr., who dug up alleged scams involving the accuser's family to portray them as career con artists who had been after the singer's money.

Prosecutors were able to capitalize on an unusual California law to introduce old - and uncharged - molestation allegations against Jackson, but those accusations couldn't eclipse doubts about the family's credibility.

Sneddon and his team also couldn't produce any biological or medical evidence of abuse. Only 20 percent of cases involve such physical evidence, according to David Finkelhor, director of the Crimes against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire.

As a result, many prosecutors are forced to build cases on testimony alone, a strategy made more risky when the witnesses are children, who can be rattled and have trouble recalling key details in court.

Concerns about flawed child testimony grew in the 1980s and '90s, after molestation cases such as the McMartin Preschool case in Los Angeles County, the Little Rascals case in North Carolina and the Margaret Kelly Michaels case in New Jersey fell apart.

Interviewing techniques have since improved, and some jurors have become more forgiving of child testimony partly because of the Catholic church sex abuse scandal and child abduction and murders that have drawn national attention, lawyers said.

However, none of that helped when the brother of Jackson's accuser testified and gave an account of the alleged molestation that differed from statements he made to sheriff's investigators. And the accuser himself initially couldn't recall telling a grand jury that Jackson said it was "natural" when the singer appeared nude in front of him and his brother.

"As a prosecutor, once you lose the credibility of your witness, you're done," said Larry Hardoon, former lead prosecutor in Massachusetts' infamous Fells Acres sex abuse case, which produced convictions but led to the discrediting of the interview techniques used by investigators. "It's the end of the story."

---

Associated Press Writer Tim Molloy contributed to this report.

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 1:12 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Sat, Jun 18 2005
Jackson documents show jury's actions
Mood:  party time!
Topic: Main News


SANTA MARIA, Calif. (AP) — The release of six handwritten notes from jurors in the Michael Jackson case show they reached their decision to acquit the pop star after careful consideration of evidence, including a total review of the accuser's testimony.

A request from the jury foreman to Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville resulted in a court stenographer going to the jury room and reading back the boy's entire testimony.

The notes, which were disclosed in response to a news media request, also showed jurors were briefly deadlocked on two lesser charges that accused Jackson of furnishing alcohol to a minor. They quickly broke that deadlock and agreed on an acquittal.

"We cannot agree on the lesser counts of seven and eight," said one note, which was quickly superseded by another saying, "Please disregard our prior request with counts 7 and 8."

A short time later, jurors unanimously acquitted Jackson of all 10 charges against him as well as the lesser options that were offered to them if they acquitted him of the more serious counts.

The jury notes were sealed by the judge during deliberations. He agreed at a hearing Thursday to release virtually all documents he had sealed during the trial.

"I have no intention to keep anything sealed except something that might involve privacy matters of a juror," Melville said during the hearing that led to release of the documents. The judge also ordered authorities to return the passport Jackson had to surrender when he was arrested. Melville had already ordered that Jackson's $3 million bail be returned.

Melville delayed the release of many items to give attorneys time to object to unsealing specific documents. He told lawyers to submit any requests to keep matters sealed by June 23.

On Monday, Jackson, 46, was acquitted of all charges alleging he molested a 13-year-old cancer survivor in 2003, plied the boy with wine and conspired to hold him and his family captive to get them to make a video rebutting a damaging television documentary.

Jackson has not appeared in public since the verdict, but the Los Angeles Times reported Friday that the singer's family was throwing a party for his most loyal fans at the Chumash Casino in Santa Ynez on Saturday night.

The paper reported that a group of fans selected by the Jackson family would likely find out later Friday who was invited to the bash. It wasn't immediately known if Jackson himself would be at the party.

"We don't know who will perform. We're just told the Jackson family is putting together an event for fans they have selected," Frances Snyder, a spokeswoman for the casino, told the Times.

The casino is close to Jackson's Neverland ranch, and members of the pop star's family, including his father, Joe, have been staying at the casino hotel in recent weeks and eating at the resort's restaurant, the Willows.

"We get a lot of famous people, so it's been business as usual," said Snyder. "For Saturday, we're expecting a lot of people to be interested."

Jackson's security detail was expected to join the casino's security force for the party, Snyder said.

Melville said it could take as long as a month to release the voluminous amount of information that was sealed during the trial. Among the items are search warrants, sections of motions that were blacked out, questions asked by the jury during deliberations and transcripts of hearings in the judge's chambers.

The judge initially refused to allow the electronic media to copy videos shown during the trial after Jackson defense attorney Robert Sanger argued there was no legal right for the media to be allowed to sell evidence in the case by broadcasting it worldwide. Sanger said the videos included pictures of Jackson's home.

"There's no right to sell those around the world. This is not a public-interest issue," he said.

Media lawyer Theodore Boutrous Jr. argued that certain videos, primarily the so-called rebuttal video, had been a focus of the trial and "we think there's a public interest in that."

The judge acknowledged he had clashed with the news media over First Amendment issues before and during the trial.

"The issues are very important issues," Melville said. "... I had issues to protect, things that needed to be done to create a fair trial for both parties."

He commended Boutrous' work in arguing the news media's positions.

Outside court, Boutrous said he was glad the material was to be released.

"But it would have been preferable and constitutionally required to have this information as we went along in the case," he said. "We continue to believe that the First Amendment supported greater access."

On another issue, the judge agreed to return Jackson family memorabilia that had been seized from a New Jersey man who bought the items at an auction of a commercial storage locker's contents.

Edgar Pease III, the lawyer for Henry V. Vaccaro, said his client was now a defendant in a federal lawsuit by Jackson and his sister Janet, who want the materials back and claim they were stolen.

Sanger said outside court that Jackson is entitled to the return of all property that was seized from him.

"Mr. Jackson was exonerated. He was not guilty 10 times over. He should be allowed go on with his life," Sanger said.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

? Copyright 2005 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.



Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 1:16 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Jackson prosecutors still see pop star as a danger
Mood:  irritated
Topic: Prosecutor Press Release

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. (AP) — Michael Jackson's prosecutors said Friday they still believe the pop star could be a danger to children, despite his acquittal on charges of molesting a boy two years ago. Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon and his two lead deputies in the case said in an interview with The Associated Press that they believed the jury set too high a bar for evidence.

Jurors rejected the prosecution's entire 10-count case Monday after a 14-week trial. Some later said that Jackson probably had molested other boys but insisted the case they heard was not proven. (Related story: Jackson documents show jury's actions)

Sneddon, who said immediately after the verdict that he would not second-guess the jury, discussed the nature of child molesters but said he was not talking about Jackson specifically.

"They don't even stop when they get treatment," he said. "This is a sickness that is very, very difficult to cure."

Senior Deputy District Attorney Ron Zonen stressed the importance of Jackson's future dealings with children.

"He's been exposed to the criminal justice system in a very profound way. Whether he poses a threat to children in the future is, of course, entirely up to him. If he brings kids back into his bedroom and even into his bed, then yes, there's probably a high likelihood that he will pose a threat or danger to the child," Zonen said.

Jackson's attorney, Thomas Mesereau Jr., said earlier this week that Jackson would no longer share his bedroom with children or their families because it could put him at risk for future accusations.

Mesereau persuaded jurors that there was a reasonable doubt in the case by arguing that the accuser and his mother made up the allegations against Jackson to get money.

On NBC's The Tonight Show Friday, Mesereau said Sneddon had a "personal vendetta" against Jackson and "mischaracterized the case from day one." He said Sneddon had been searching for accusers since a previous case fell apart after the boy's family accepted a multimillion dollar settlement from Jackson.

"It was like an open casting call on Michael Jackson. The best they could come up with was this family, which we thoroughly discredited from A to Z," Mesereau said.

The prosecutors said they did not buy the defense's claims that sleeping with children was part of an effort by Jackson to compensate for a childhood lost amid his rise to stardom and abuse by his father.

"I'll tell you this: I'll match my days in the bakery working with my dad (with) his dancing routines with his dad any day of the week," Sneddon said.

Sneddon said he would have considered a conviction tragic in some ways, considering Jackson's accomplishments.

"If he had been convicted, I think that part of it would have been a tragedy — like a Greek tragedy play of a person who obviously can bring great joy and entertainment to the people around the world," he said.

Also Friday, a Jackson Web site said the singer "has not made any plans for a party," responding to a report that a weekend celebration was being organized by the pop star's family to thank fans for support.

The statement was posted on mjjsource.com, which was used by Jackson's family to release information during the trial.

A spokeswoman for the Chumash Casino near Jackson's Neverland ranch was quoted in the Los Angeles Times saying the casino had learned the family planned to hold an event Saturday for selected fans.

Phone messages seeking comment from the casino were not returned Friday.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

? Copyright 2005 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 1:06 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Fri, Jun 17 2005
Jackson Detective "Scott Ross" Interviewed
Mood:  happy
Topic: Main News
Michael Jackson may very well be a free man today thanks to Scott Ross, a private investigator who many believe found information that led Jackson to beat the charges of molestation.

"My focus was very specific," Ross said. "It was to develop information on the accuser's mother."

And after Ross put the accuser's mother in his cross hairs, he found that, "Lying, cheating and stealing seemed to be a way of life for her."

Ross has a history turning the tables in high-profile cases. He was the guy who exposed the sordid past of Bonnie Lee Bakley in the Robert Blake case. Attorney Tom Mesereau had a blunt directive for Ross. "He said, 'You need to do to the accuser's mother what you did to Bonnie Lee Bakley,'" Ross revealed.

And to do that, Ross needed his own Deep Throat. But unlike Watergate, we don't have to wait years to learn his identify. "The accuser's father was fully aware of and knew that these allegations were not true," Ross said.

The father turned Ross on to celebrities like Chris Tucker. Ross got the reluctant actor to spill the beans. "Mr. Tucker, of all witnesses, was the first person to say to me, 'I don't really care that it's Michael Jackson. This is wrong. Someone is being falsely accused.'" Ross said.

Ross also became privy to other witnesses like Jay Leno. As it turns out, the defense had no idea Leno was even involved until the prosecution handed over an audio tape of an interview with Leno that sheriffs had secretly recorded.

"These people had to turn over the material to us, and that's how Jay Leno became a witness." Ross told us.

Actor Macaulay Culkin proved to be even better for Jackson. And Ross said that contrary to media reports, Culkin was an easy witness. "Macaulay Culkin was never not going to testify," Ross insisted. "It was never an issue."

But some witnesses weren't always available, like comedy shop owner Jamie Masada. So Ross showed up at Masada's press conference, cleverly blended in with the press corps, even asking questions, and then slapped him with a subpoena.

When the trial got underway, Ross was in a unique position to observe Michael Jackson. He said the King of Pop became the king of Post-It notes. "He would grab Post-Its, write something down, "Ross revealed. "I don't know if he's writing a song or thinking about music or putting himself in another place."

And as for those who consider Michael Jackson a "freak", Ross says they've got it all wrong. "I've been involved in hundreds of cases," Ross said. "He is one of three people who have thanked me. He doesn't sound like freak to me; he sounds like descent human being."

Source: Celebrity Justice

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 7:44 PM JST
Updated: Fri, Jun 17 2005 7:53 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Jackson ?wants his stuff ? returned
Mood:  surprised
Topic: Main News
Lawyers ask court to return items seized in 2003 raid

Reuters
Updated: 7:49 p.m. ET June 16, 2005

SANTA MARIA, Calif. - Three days before they acquitted Michael Jackson, jurors asked to hear all testimony from the boy who accused the pop star of molestation, newly released documents showed Thursday.

A handwritten note from the jury foreman and Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville?s response that the request would be granted was one of six notes released at the request of the media.

On the day they returned their verdicts, jurors were briefly deadlocked on two lesser charges that accused Jackson of furnishing alcohol to a minor, the documents also showed.
?We cannot agree on the lesser counts of seven and eight,? said the note which was quickly superseded by another note saying, ?Please disregard our prior request with counts 7 and 8.?

A short time later, jurors acquitted Jackson of all 10 charges. The judge, who placed a tight lid of secrecy on evidence in the trial, said at a hearing earlier in the day that he intends to release virtually every sealed document and also ordered that authorities return the pop star?s passport.

Melville, who said he accomplished his goal of providing a fair trial to both sides, was still considering a request to release videos shown during the trial. He delayed the release of many items to give attorneys time to object to unsealing specific documents. He told lawyers to submit any requests to keep matters sealed by June 23. ?I have no intention to keep anything sealed except something that might involve privacy matters of a juror,? Melville said.

On Monday, Jackson, 46, was acquitted on all charges that alleged he molested a 13-year-old cancer survivor in 2003, plied the boy with wine and conspired to hold him and his family captive to get them to make a video rebutting a damaging television documentary.

Jackson, who surrendered his passport after his arrest in 2003, has not appeared in public since the verdict. His brother Jermaine said Wednesday on CNN that he was resting, and, on the issue of whether he might move away, said that ?we?ve always had a love for places outside the U.S.?

Material that was sealed included search warrants, sections of motions that were blacked out, questions asked by the jury during deliberations and transcripts of hearings in the judge?s chambers. Melville said the material was so voluminous it probably cannot be released for about a month.

The judge initially refused to allow the electronic media to copy videos shown during the trial after Jackson defense attorney Robert Sanger argued there was no legal right for the media to be allowed to sell evidence in the case by broadcasting it worldwide. Sanger said that the videos included pictures of Jackson?s home, which he said have privacy interests.

?There?s no right to sell those around the world. This is not a public-interest issue,? he said. Media lawyer Theodore Boutrous Jr. argued that certain videos, primarily the so-called rebuttal video, had been a focus of the trial and ?we think there?s a public interest in that.? Boutrous said the judge should release those videos that were central to the case.

The judge acknowledged that he had clashed with the media over First Amendment issues before and during the trial.

?The issues are very important issues,? Melville said. ?I had issues to protect, things that needed to be done to create a fair trial for both parties.?

On another issue, the judge agreed to return Jackson family memorabilia that had been seized from a New Jersey man who bought the items at an auction of a commercial storage locker?s contents. None of the items were used as evidence in the Jackson case.

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
? 2005 MSNBC.com
URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8246356/


Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 7:29 PM JST
Updated: Fri, Jun 17 2005 8:10 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
CNN LARRY KING LIVE- Interview with Jermaime Jackson
Mood:  happy
Topic: Main News
Aired June 15, 2005 - 21:00 ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


LARRY KING, HOST "LARRY KING LIVE": Tonight, exclusive, Michael Jackson's brother Jermaine Jackson, his first sit-down interview since Michael was found not guilty of child molestation. He's here for the hour. We'll take your calls -- exclusive -- Jermaine Jackson, next, on LARRY KING LIVE.
Just a quick program reminder. Tomorrow night, Reverend Billy Graham, doing his last crusade in New York. Billy Graham will be our special guest tomorrow night.

Joining us now from his home in Encino, California, is Jermaine Jackson. He was with us on the phone right after the verdict. He's now with us live from his house on screen. We'll be taking your calls.

Jermaine, first, what is the latest update on Michael? How's he doing? What did he do today?

JERMAINE JACKSON, MICHAEL'S BROTHER: Michael's recovering. Michael's recovering, but it's a time for rejoice for the family, and we're very, very happy. As you can see, I'm smiling, and we always knew he was 1,000 percent innocent.

KING: Is he at Neverland? Or -- there were reports that he was spending time in a hotel.

JACKSON: I can't tell you. I can't tell you that, Larry, but he's at peace and we're very happy.

KING: Any reason that the location to secret?

JACKSON: Well, he just -- look what they put him through for so long and it's time for him to just get back into himself and just let the light come into him, and the peace. That's what this moment is all about. It's time to rejoice.

KING: How is his health?

JACKSON: Well, his health, he's been sort of not eating. But he's strong. Michael's very -- he's probably one of the strongest people I know, because to see him each day, and to sit there and hear these things said about you and to just -- can't say anything, because people just attacking you, and at the same time, just -- the media, and the outpour of just misinformation and things like that. I mean -- but he's strong. He got dressed every morning. He came to court. He was there and he was there for the verdict. So, I give him -- he's a strong, strong person. KING: Jermaine, you say he -- you said he was not eating much during the trial. Is he at least getting fed well now?

JACKSON: Well, he was eating sandwiches and things like that, but it's just very tough. It's just a tough time, and any human being, to go through that and to come out the way he did, they're very strong.

KING: But he's eating now?

JACKSON: Yes, he's eating.

KING: He did a -- there's a brief statement on his website. Naturally, people want to hear more. Do you expect Michael to do a major interview somewhere and to come out and do a press? What do you expect from him publicly?

JACKSON: I really don't know yet. I mean, the family is meeting. We're coming together and sort of just -- sort of trying to get all of this behind us, to move forward. And Michael has just been unbelievably strong through this whole ordeal, but he's -- I'm pretty sure he's just looking to rest. That's his most important -- to rest and get his mind back and just focus on just being a person. Nothing about doing this or doing that, but just resting. That's most important.

KING: You think he's wary of media now, a little wary of any kind of interviews after the Bashir thing? Do you think he'll hesitate to do anything? His lawyer last night appeared with us for an hour, and Tom said he'd recommend that he lay low for a while.

JACKSON: I recommend that, too, and that's what he's feeling as well but it's just very, very sad that the media and just certain people have hidden agendas. I mean, as you know, Larry, we've been beat up, we've been beat down, but still we stand, and we've stayed strong and it's because of the family unity that kept us strong through all of the adversities (ph) and the false accusations, and -- to accuse someone of something like this is just horrendous.

But at the same time, he has family and he has the love of his family and what kept him strong, and god, which is first, and the supporters from around the world. I always said, my brother is a 1,000 percent innocent.

KING: Do you -- Mesereau said it last night -- do you think that a lot of people in the media were unfair, were ganging up on Michael, convicted him before the trial started?

JACKSON: Absolutely. But even before the trial started, Larry, when you look at how many times, how many warrants they went into his property, how it was done, the bail, and just -- to take his passport, like he's a fugitive, like he's going to run. I mean, to treat a person like this, especially Michael Jackson, who's just the most wonderful person.

I mean, it saddens me deeply because it's 2005, but yet we haven't gone anywhere. I mean I call this, as you know, a modern-day lynching. And it was -- I really meant that, because people, they all just jumped on him.

And I have, an 18-page thing of this ongoing charities and things he's done around the world in every corner of the globe, helping people, giving, giving so much. The world needs to see this. They need to know who he really is. When you look at the song "Childhood," and you listen to that song, you listen to what he's saying. We're not ready. We have so far to go, and we're in the year 2005. That's what saddens me, because we should be proud. America should be proud to have someone like a Michael Jackson.

KING: But yet, you'll agree, Jermaine, it was difficult for people for people to comprehend...

JACKSON: Excuse me?

KING: ...a grown men who has boys who sleep in his bed, right? I mean, that's -- it's just unusual to understand that.

JACKSON: Larry, let me stop you right there. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Larry, let me stop you right there. Michael does not sleep in the bed with children. Also, Michael's quarters, at his ranch, is the size of a 2,000 or more square foot condo, OK? And at same time, Michael does not sleep in the bed with children.

So, that was the misunderstanding that everywhere put out there. And the fact he love and care about children so much -- listen to the song "Childhood" and you'll find out who Michael Jackson is, and he's been trying to tell the world this since day -- they don't want to hear that, OK? And it's really crazy, that even the prosecution and even the authorities, and I say the authorities up in Santa Maria would just jump on him and not even care if their witnesses or their accusers were credible. It's a shame...

KING: Well, Tom Mesereau said last night that he might recommend a case, a suit on your part, of malicious prosecution. Do you think the prosecutors didn't think they had a case? You think they were just obsessed with your brother?

JACKSON: They were obsessed because Tom Sneddon had a personal vendetta. He spent the taxpayers' money up there, which they should really do an investigation on him and the whole organization up there.

I'll say it again. This is what I feel. It should be a thorough evaluation of people who are in authority, because people to have a personal vendetta against anyone and especially someone of status, and then put it before the press and the press jumps on it and they blow it up all out of proportion, is that fair? I mean, is this constitutional? Is this the time and age that we're living in?

I will say this, though -- the jurors and whole Santa Maria County has been wonderful, because this is what makes a smile. This is what make us smile.

KING: Let me get a break and we'll come back and we'll be taking calls for Jermaine...

JACKSON: No one believes this. No one believed that.

KING: Hold it, Jermaine. We've gotta take a break. We'll take calls for Jermaine Jackson. He mentioned the song. As we go to break, here is Michael Jackson's "Childhood."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We're back with Jermaine Jackson. We'll be taking your calls in a while.

Let's -- I want to cover some areas that have being reported. Jermaine, there are reports that Michael may take part in Bob Geldof's Live 8 concert series. A British press is claiming he is keen to participate. It's planned to happen in advance of the G-8 summit out July 6. Do you know anything about that.

J. JACKSON: No, I don't. No, I don't.

KING: Speculation he might leave the United States? He doesn't feel comfortable here anymore.

J. JACKSON: Well, we've always had a love for other places outside the U.S. -- I don't know. But I do know that he needs to go and get some rest somewhere.

KING: You think he might want to leave the -- I mean, change residence?

J. JACKSON: I would. Yes, I'm pretty sure.

I mean Michael's an American. He's born African-American. He's born here. He's done so much for the world. So much for people. So much for America. And I say it again, we should be proud, the U.S. should be proud that he's been just a positive representation from America, for the world. And instead, they're the ones who's trying to put him under.

KING: So you wouldn't be surprised if he lives somewhere else?

J. JACKSON: I would be right with him, yes. I wouldn't be surprised.

KING: "The Hollywood Reporter" says that your family is pushing a reality television series. Any truth to that?

J. JACKSON: The family's pushing what?

KING: A reality television years.

J. JACKSON: I've have never heard anything like that, Larry. That's a surprise to me. That's something new.

KING: Do you hear a lot of strange reports? J. JACKSON: A lot goes on. And what's sad about it, when it gets to the media, they report and they inject their opinions instead of reporting the truth. It's just people talk. And then rumors spread that are not true. And things evolve into just a lot of horrendous lies. Lies, lies, lies.

KING: We spoke to your mom earlier, how is she doing? How's your mother doing?

J. JACKSON: Larry, I can't hear you, if you're talking.

KING: How's your mother doing?

J. JACKSON: My mother's doing wonderful. We are very, very happy. It's been a tremendous load off of her and the whole entire family. Like I said, we're rejoicing now. And she's been wonderful.

Because she's been in the courthouse everyday with her son. And she would have done it for any one of us. Because she knew in her heart she was a thousand percent innocent.

And at the same time, she was there. She's a mother who care for her child. And my father was there. And we were only allowed six seat, Larry. That's why we couldn't come in there, because we're a family of 11. And that's strength. That's unity. And the judge did not allow us us all to be in that courtroom at the same time. But we were there. So we took turns. And we all just sort of changed it up at times.

KING: Now, Tito happened to be in the courtroom. You were in the courthouse, but not in the courtroom. How did you hear the verdict? What was your first reaction?

J. JACKSON: OK, what had happened was, Janet and I went upstairs. And we were sort of pacing the floor. And we were just -- so we went -- so they put us in a room. A private room. And I hear all this -- I heard all of this screaming and fans cheering and screaming. So I walked over to the window. And I looked out of the window. And every time there was a scream, there was a dove released. I guess, they were releasing a dove for each count. And then I went back into the room, and all of a sudden, somebody ran upstairs and said, he was innocent on all ten counts. And we just screamed and jumped up.

It was just the most wonderful moment. God is real. We thank everyone around the world, especially the black community who has been there since day one. His fans who come from all around the world. And it's the positive energy and the prayers.

Michael's done a lot of good, Larry. A lot of good. And I wish the world could see, he's the No. 1 charitable supporter from any celebrity. It's in the world's Guinness Book Records. And people need to know this.

KING: Are you surprised then that Gallup --CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll says 48 percent of the people disagreed with the verdict, 27 percent were pleased. Is that one of the reasons you are thinking about living somewhere else?

J. LACKSON: Listen, listen. Larry, listen. This is my point. The media bashed my family and Michael all during this trial. They bashed him. They talked about him, even other legal people. And at the same time, they say, OK, let's go to the polls. Let's take a poll.

OK, we didn't want to talk. So you tell me if that's all they're hearing is negativity. And still the polls were favorable towards us. But you can't just talk about someone so much and say, let's go to the polls. That's the system in which we live. We know why they were doing that. And at the same time, we said, my brother's innocent. And he will come through all of this.

KING: Are you also angry at Court TV? Tom singled them out last night.

J. JACKSON: I don't even want to talk about them, because they're ignorant to even make statements like that. And I will not mention any names, because they don't deserve that.

But the fact that -- what happened to this country? What happened to just knowing the facts? Reporting the news, not injecting your own opinion, what happened to this? I mean, this is America. But what happened?

I mean, we're five kids that grew up in Gary, Indiana worked hard, worked hard. Had strong people behind us to launch our careers and the whole Motown thing in which set the foundation for all of the success you see. And we went on with our lives. And to be faced with something like this. We tried the system and justice was served.

KING: So you have come out of this bitter?

J. JACKSON: People out there, Larry, how many people out there tried the system and it doesn't work for them?

KING: Yes.

J. JACKSON: So, we're happy that Michael has been found not guilty, innocent. But at the same time, why did it have to come this far?

KING: Let me get a break, and come back. We'll take calls for Jermaine in a little while. He's with us for the full hour.

Billy Graham tomorrow night. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Jermaine Jackson's our guest.

Michael has paid millions to settle previous allegations. Tom Mesereau said last night, that was -- he had bad advice. Michael shouldn't have paid anything. Do you agree?

JACKSON: Yes, I agree, but during the time, Michael was on tour. Janet was on tour. My mother was very ill, and it just -- he felt that it wasn't the time to fight. But this time he fought, and we were victorious.

KING: The impact on his future behavior -- do you think he's going to change some of the things he does just for public image?

JACKSON: Larry, there -- OK, Michael is not a weird person. Michael is not -- I mean, this is just a bunch of talk, calling him Wacko Jacko, all of these crazy names. He doesn't do anything. Have you ever heard of him throwing televisions out of the hotel windows and setting fires and doing this and that? I mean, that behavior goes on in our industry as we know that. But I guess it's because they pick on him because he is the largest, largest entertainer in the world, and they will find something to say.

KING: But will...

JACKSON: I mean, there are things that he's going to change.

KING: Right, like...

JACKSON: Excuse me?

KING: Like...

JACKSON: Well, not to let people get so close to him, and we're going to make sure of that as well.

KING: Nor -- he's not going to let anybody take advantage of him?

JACKSON: Well, people come around you and they smile, but they have a hidden agenda and we're faced with that everyday. Everybody who's patting you on your back is not your friend. But at the same time, it's up to us to know who's who. I do know that -- all my brothers, we will make sure that these type of people stay far away. Far away.

KING: Is he -- you think he'll ever write a book?

JACKSON: I really don't know, Larry. I really don't know.

KING: In his song about being a victim, about -- his song "Billie Jean," he described himself a victim. Do you think he's a victim? Is that a correct term to apply to him?

JACKSON: Well, when you're in an industry and you're out in the public, you're victims of all types of things. And his music influences, people take context of his lyrics the wrong way, and things happen. I fear sometimes when I'm out, and now since Michael's been vindicated, we all just -- we all have to be careful. I mean, we -- we love the fact that the family held up and there was a family support, but still at the same time you never know when someone's plotting and planning.

KING: Would you describe your brother as child-like?

JACKSON: I would describe my brother as a person who was in search a childhood that he never had, but at the same time, he was around adults, and when you're around adults all the time, you hear -- who wants to hear about all of the ugly things that are going on in the world? I mean, Michael's a person who loves peace. He's a very humble person. I call him St. Michael because he's the most wonderful person I know, and I mean that. He's a wonderful, wonderful person.

KING: When you get that big, though, does anyone say no to him?

JACKSON: Of course.

KING: Because sometimes you can get so big, you have power. Does he have people around him who say no?

JACKSON: Yes. My mother tells him no. Randy tells him no. We tell him no. But at the same time, when you've had so much success, you feel that your way is a positive way, is the way to go about things, and I'm referring to just the day-to-day things that he does with his music and making decisions and creative decisions and things like that.

KING: Will he entertain again?

JACKSON: I think so, but that's on him. He's -- it's in his blood, and I think he's just resting. He's resting. He's always got time or an ear for a melody or a nice beat, but it's been so much negative -- just the whole environment has been totally negative, what they've done to him, but at the same time, he's strong. He's not going to let it beat him down. He's going to stand and move forward with his life.

KING: He must miss applause. He must miss a stage.

JACKSON: You're probably right, but he has a stage at home! He has a stage at home. We can give him -- we're giving him all the applause he needs.

(CROSSTALK)

KING: We'll take a break, and come back, go to phone calls. We'll go to phone calls for Jermaine Jackson.

Couple of program notes -- Billy Graham, tomorrow night. Shania twain on Friday. Saturday night, Bob Costas, host Vanessa Redgrave, and on Sunday night on LARRY KING LIVE, you will met my children, on Father's Day night.

We'll be right back with Jermaine Jackson and your phone calls right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: With Jermaine Jackson -- Columbus, Georgia -- as we go to calls. Hello.

CALLER: Hi, Larry and Jermaine. Jermaine, you said just a few minutes ago that the jurors were wonderful. How do you feel about juror number one on numerous interviews saying that he truly believes that Michael has molested young boys and has the tendency to do so?

JACKSON: Well, that's just his opinion, but the bottom line is this: I know, Michael knows, god knows, in his heart that he's been a wonderful person. He's never done anything like that.

KING: Mobile, Alabama, hello.

CALLER: Hi, Larry, and thanks for your very fair and balanced show.

KING: Thank you.

CALLER: Hi, Jermaine. Will Michael consider filing...

JACKSON: How are you?

CALLER: Hi. Would Michael consider filing a multimillion dollar lawsuit against Tom Sneddon and entourage for the very unfair and horrific crime that they committed against him?

JACKSON: Well, I really don't know what he's going to do, but I would.

KING: Tom Mesereau said he would too. I other words, if it were up to you, you would take action?

JACKSON: Kick their butts, yep. They tried to bury him, Larry. They tried to bury him but they made him bigger.

KING: Santa Maria, California, hello.

CALLER: Hi, Mr. King, this is Diane.

I'm wondering, Jermaine, as a personal person who does know Mr. Sneddon and what he can do to families, I am wondering if Mr. Jackson, your brother, Michael, will be receiving or seeking counseling for the victimization he's received or endured at the hands of, quote, city hall, here in Santa Barbara County?

KING: I gather you're in the a fan of the prosecutor?

JACKSON: Well --

KING: Is Michael going to seek psychological help for just all that's happened to him?

JACKSON: I think Michael is going to rest and he's going to -- the psychological help Michael has is his family, and I would say it's just down home family love. But I do think there will be a time that the prosecutors and all of that will be dealt with. But right now, he's resting and we're rejoicing and my mother is very, very happy.

KING: What is his financial situation?

JACKSON: Well, I'll say this, Larry. Michael is no way, as they're saying, broke. When you have an incredible, incredible asset, instrument, like the catalog, and when you have other things. I mean, who's broke? I mean, look at major organizations, like AT&T and some of the major Fortune 500 companies out there. They tighten their belts at certain times. SO, this is a belt-tightening time. But Michael's no way broke, and he's still the number one superstar in the world, bigger than what he was before.

KING: Does he -- what does he own, the music rights to what, the Beatles and what else?

JACKSON: Probably everybody's music now, Larry. But it's so much. There's not enough time that we can go into that. But he's been very wise and very smart. The bottom line he's a person. Let's forget about money. Let's forget about all those things. Michael's a human being and that's what's wrong with this country now. They judge people on how much money they have. What about his -- the person he is? The love of a person? And the love that you give to others? What happened to that? What do we look for -- if a person walks around and say, I have all of this money. Everybody flocks to him.

That's not what life's supposed to be about. I mean, judge him as to who he is. Listen to his lyrics. Look at what he's done. Look at what he's done around the world, every corner of the globe -- charities, millions and millions and millions of dollars, hundreds of millions, given to people of all walks of life. He didn't deserve what happened to him.

KING: Wright City, Missouri. Hello.

CALLER: Hi, Jermaine. I'm so happy that Michael was found innocent. My question is, will Michael continue helping cancer patients like he did before? I know he did an awful lot with kids when cancer and I think it would be a shame if he had to stop.

KING: Good question.

JACKSON: I'm pretty sure he will, because one apple didn't spoil the whole bunch. It's like something that's so beautiful, and godly- like to help and give to others. That's what we've been taught. That's how we've been raised, and that's the blessing that god has giving us, to have such talent and such international appeal to give back to others. So I'm pretty sure he will, because that's what he was -- blessed with all of this talent and all of this success is to give back to others and give other people a much brighter life and that's what Neverland is all about. I mean it's about giving children who are terminally ill and on their last days, that are last bit of joy. Not to do what they said. It's a beautiful place. It's a wonderful, wonderful beautiful place, Neverland. KING: Jermaine, siblings have always disagreements. What about your brother don't you like? What aspect through your life with him bothers you?

JACKSON: He's too nice, and they say I'm like that, too, but I see myself a little different than Michael. But at the same time, he's my brother. This is how we were raised. But he's very strong in business. But that would be the thing. He's just too nice.

KING: So you're saying he's not weak, he's nice?

JACKSON: No, he's not weak at all, please believe me, because it took a strong man to show up at that court, Larry, every day to hear this rubberish (ph) and all of this stupid stuff said about you. And then -- this whole thing was just a sling his name...

KING: But...

JACKSON: ...through the mud, and I'll say this. Wait, wait, wait. This is really important. It's like there're conspirators out there who were behind this whole entire thing. It's almost like a magician. They throw this child molestation crap on you with the right hand, while the left hand is trying to do something else. So, this was the whole plan. But at the same time, we've always said Michael is a thousand percent innocent.

Now, the conspirators out there, yes, they are shaking in their boots, because they know we know. We knew from day one, and it's not going to work. They're not going to get away with this.

KING: Although not guilty doesn't mean innocent. You can't declare someone innocent. They declare him not guilty. But when you say too nice, you mean he's -- he gives to people too much? He's easily swayed?

JACKSON: No, he gives too much, and he wants to help everyone, and that's what his music's been about, that's what...

KING: He's a soft touch?

JACKSON: ...the building of Neverland. He's a soft touch, but he's strong when he needs to be, but this was a situation that he thought -- would -- that he could help, and it turned out to be they had a hidden agenda. They had a hidden agenda, and it's sad that Sneddon did not evaluate his accusers and his witnesses. They had no credibility, but to shame someone. That's why I said the authorities up there, they need to do a better evaluation of people, judges and D.A.'s, because you can't do this. This is not constitutional. This is not America.

KING: We'll be back with more of Jermaine Jackson right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TOM SNEDDON, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SANTA BARBARA COUNTY: He was very down. He just didn't understand why people didn't believe him. A little cynical about the system. And I just encouraged him and told him what a hero he was and how courageous he was to come forward. And that he did the right thing and it was time for him to move on with his life and never look back, because he did the right thing. And how much we believed in him and supported him.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: That was Tom Sneddon talking about the accuser.

Any comment on that, Jermaine?

JACKSON: I don't believe anything that comes out of his mouth, because I'll tell you why: It doesn't take a hundred times of going to somebody's property for something like this, which was a lie in the first place -- and if you look at the family, that there was no credibility even from the mother.

From all of the things she -- I feel that this was all planed. We know this was all planned. And for Sneddon to go into his property so many times, as I said before, I wasn't worried about what they were going to take out, I was worried about what they were going to put in there -- some book they keep bringing up.

KING: How's Michael's kids doing? In the -- this is a wacky world. Do -- are they kind of normal-life? Do they go to school?

JACKSON: Yes. They -- my kids play with them and they're fine. Michael's a wonderful father. He's changed diapers. He does it all and he's very, very keen on making sure his kids are disciplined. And Michael's no wacky entertainer, out there, that doesn't care about his kids and this and that. I mean he's a wonderful father. He's had a lot of...

KING: Are they...

JACKSON: ... Brothers to learn from.

KING: Are they sheltered when they go to school? Are they watched?

JACKSON: No. No. They have -- they have private school, but at the same time, he wants them to be able to interact with the -- with children so we bring ours over. And they get a chance to do things, but you hear a lot of things, Larry, and it's up to, I guess, the public to know what the truth is.

It's very hard. It's very hard.

KING: Were you happy with Debbie Rowe on the stand?

Tom, last night, said he was very pleased with her even though she was a prosecution witness. JACKSON: I was very pleased. I was in the Middle East during the time, but I was very pleased because they tried everything. I felt that the judge worked with the prosecution. They didn't allow us anything. I -- Michael wasn't even allowed to use the bathroom half- of-the-time. We weren't allowed to -- even to sit there. There were empty seats there and we couldn't sit there. And this is -- what is --they tried to strip us of every bit of truth and strength that we portrayed as a family.

KING: The judge, too?

JACKSON: But still we prevailed. We prevailed.

KING: You include the judge.

JACKSON: Yes. Yes.

I did, yes.

KING: New York City -- hello.

CALLER: Yes, hello.

Hi, Larry.

Hi, Jermaine.

KING: Hi.

CALLER: My question to Jermaine is: Is Michael going to take Donald Trump up on his offer of doing a headline show Vegas, when he's better?

JACKSON: Sweetie, I don't know anything about that, but Donald Trump has been a friend in the past and if that's what he wants to do, that's what he'll do.

KING: Donald Trump has done nothing but praise your brother, but he doesn't have the hotel in Vegas, yet.

So, it would be premature. But that's a possibility. He would work Vegas, wouldn't he? He was always big there.

JACKSON: Well, we started out in Vegas, as children. Well, we started at The Apollo, but we played Vegas and I'm -- he loves Las Vegas. So, you never know.

KING: Miami -- hello?

Caller: Hi, Jermaine. I have a question and a comment. I wanted to say that: I've loved Michael my whole life and have never doubted his innocence and what he said...

JACKSON: Thank you.

Caller: ... life runs sprints but the truth runs marathons, is true. I just wanted to know: How did you feel about the media coverage, especially Court TV and Nancy Grace, whom I thought was extremely unprofessional and --

KING: Well, I asked him about Court TV. He didn't want to name names, but you were very critical of the whole network, right?

JACKSON: Well, I'll just say this: My mother and father's attorney, Debra Opri, was banned from Court TV, but after she had really bashed, you know who -- which I don't even want to mention their names.

But the media has been very unfair because they have not reported the news, they've injected opinions. And that's not what a reporter is supposed to do. You're supposed to report.

KING: We'll take a break and be back with more of Jermaine Jackson, more of your phone calls.

Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JACKSON: This is a very historic room here where we are right now. Because this is where the meeting took place for the Jackson Victory Tour: 1984 tour that broke all records of course.

We were sitting here on the couches and negotiating and talking and sort of getting our ideas together,creatively, of what we're going to do on stage live, real soon. So, we're very proud of this room.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Speaking of that, Jermaine, how about a Jackson family reunion tour?

JACKSON: That sounds good, Larry.

KING: I mean, you would do that, right?

JACKSON: Sounds very good.

KING: Do you think Michael would do it?

JACKSON: We're ready. We're ready.

KING: By the way, in all honesty...

JACKSON: Victory two.

KING: Are you -- Victory two -- Are you, Jermaine, a bitter winner?

JACKSON: A bitter winner in what sense? Can you...

KING: That you have won, you are happy, but at the same time, very bitter at the whole turn of events.

JACKSON: I'm not bitter. I'm just disappointed in the system. Michael didn't get off because of money, because of his popularity. He got off because he was innocent and they never presented a case. But at the same time, I'm bitter because he's done so much -- we've done so much. We represent this country and for them to act as we were some -- from somewhere else, I mean, it's just...

KING: So, there's some bitterness.

JACKSON: Yes.

JACKSON: Yes. Yes, but we move on. We have to be bigger than that. We have to be -- we have to move on, but it's hard to turn the other cheek.

KING: I'll bet.

JACKSON: They tried to bury us. They tried to bury us. You would be the same way, right?

KING: If I thought I was being buried, I would be mad, yes.

Big Rapids, Michigan, hello.

CALLER: Hi, Larry. Hi, Jermaine.

KING: Hi.

CALLER: I'm a huge fan of Michael's.

JACKSON: Hi.

CALLER: He saved me life as a child, and I would love to let him know that. My question is...

JACKSON: Oh, thank you.

CALLER: ...will there be a victory party for the fans?

JACKSON: Well, Randy -- Randy is arranging things now. He's done a wonderful job of pulling the team together for Michael. And I guess that's in the plans. I spoke to him just before I came on.

KING: So, there might be a party put together for the people who supported him?

JACKSON: Absolutely. They came so far, Larry. The fans sent -- they put out so much positive energy in the prayers. One time I was leaving the gates and they were standing and holding hands in the circle and just that positive light, positive energy, and that's what it was, and I thank everyone from around from the globe and here and far and near, because they know who Michael is, and if you get past the media and get to the fans and to the public, they know who he is.

KING: Poughkeepsie, New York, hello. CALLER: Hi, Jermaine. Hi, Larry.

KING: Hi.

JACKSON: I would like to know, how has Michael been feeling? And if he has any plans on going on tour or to record a new CD?

KING: Ah, we have asked about touring. How about recording?

JACKSON: Well, I really don't know. Right now he's resting. He's just -- he doesn't have to wake up at 4:00 in the morning anymore. He was there everyday, Larry. He was there. They thought he would flee. They thought he would run.

But he's -- he loves music. I'm pretty sure he's always going to sing, but right now, that's not important. What's important for him is just to get himself back and to -- just to be a human being, a person again.

KING: We'll be back with remaining moments with Jermaine Jackson. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Jermaine, it's been no secret the family has feuded in the past. There've been public feuds and problems with your dad and growing up. Has this, in a sense, brought the family closer together?

JACKSON: Well, this has brought us closer, but at the same time, we're a family. We're no different than any other family who has feuds and problems. What is life without problems? I mean -- but at the same time, we're united, and we have united front that is very, very strong, and its supported by god. My mother and father did a great job in instilling the morals and principles in us from the very beginning. We feel that with that, with that, that's all you need to go through life.

KING: Your father was -- your father was tough, though, was he not? Have you forgiven some of the -- the way you were treated as a kid?

JACKSON: I was treated fine. There's nothing to forgive. I mean, any black family or any black child or just person out there listening, we grew up like any other black family. You did something, you got your butt tore up, and it wasn't tore up, it was just, you got a spanking. And so, making this more than what it is -- they're looking for problems.

But I will say this. He kept us off of the streets. He kept us away from drugs. He kept us away from gangs and we were able -- like I said, we're five kids from Gary, Indiana, house the size of a two- car garage, but at the same time, we've been able to project a talent out there and have the support of strong people to entertain the world. So that's a blessing from god, and so -- at the same time, having good parents.

(CROSSTALK)

KING: But, Michael never really had what could be called a normal childhood.

JACKSON: No, because he started so early.

KING: Yes.

JACKSON: And, like I said, people would approach him. That's why he doesn't feel comfortable -- and I feel the same way -- being around adults and talk to you about this and that and business. Who wants to be reminded of just -- the world should be a better place, and that's been the challenge of man to try to make it a better place.

KING: Do you still keep -- you ever keep in close touch with the Osmond boys? The two of you were so big together at one time.

JACKSON: Yes, well, I've been talking to Merrill a while back but we'll been so busy with what has just happened and -- but we stay in touch. We'll get a call from him and I speak to Donny on and off. And I'm pretty -- I mean we're in the same circle, so we run across each other or someone who is with him, we tell them we are looking for him.

KING: So, what are you going to be doing, Jermaine, now that this is over?

JACKSON: I'm going to be, just, probably just working on some music, starting a label, and just staying strong, staying by my family, staying by my brothers. My brothers are -- we're strong. We're ready for whatever. If there's a tour, fine. If not, we're going to continue to be a family, a united family. We came through this.

KING: If Michael leaves the country, would you?

JACKSON: I'll be right there.

KING: You would?

JACKSON: Right there with him. We love -- we love the people in America. It's been the media and we have nothing bad to say. I mean there's some wonderful places here, but at the same time, there are wonderful places all around the world and we need to just travel and see more.

KING: Yes. Well, that would be understandable if you -- feelings are that way, you known all over the world -- I guess he'd be taken in -- a lot of places would warmly accept the Jacksons.

JACKSON: Thank you, Larry.

KING: Jermaine, thank you very much for giving us this hour. We appreciate it. Thank you for taking phone calls, and we appreciate you're spending the time with us.

JACKSON: Thank you.

KING: Jermaine Jackson from his home in Encino, California.



TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

International Edition Languages --------- Arabic German Japanese Korean Turkish
CNN TV CNN International Headline News Transcripts Advertise With Us About Us

? 2005 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us. All external sites will open in a new browser.
CNN.com does not endorse external sites.
Denotes premium content.
Add RSS headlines.

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 12:49 AM JST
Updated: Fri, Jun 17 2005 12:57 AM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Michael Jackson could face civil suit
Mood:  quizzical
Topic: Main News
Accuser, family expected to seek monetary damages in court

The Associated Press
Updated: 9:28 a.m. ET June 16, 2005

SANTA MARIA, Calif. - Part of Michael Jackson's winning legal strategy was convincing jurors that his accuser's family intended to get rich by suing the pop star for a cash bonanza. Whether that happens to Jackson may soon be clear.

When a celebrated criminal case ends without a conviction, it is often not the end of the defendant's legal troubles — O.J. Simpson, Kobe Bryant and Robert Blake are just a few celebrities who have been hit with civil suits.

Civil suits have their appeal: Victory can result in monetary damages and a sense of vindication, and such cases are easier to win because the burden of proof is lower. In Jackson's case, he already has a history of paying millions of dollars to make child molestation allegations go away.

During Jackson's criminal trial — which ended Monday with the pop star being cleared of molesting a 13-year-old boy — defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. told jurors that the accuser and his mother were "looking for a big payday" at the pop star's expense. The mother testified she did not plan a lawsuit and did not want "the devil's money." She could still change her mind. The accuser's family has not spoken publicly since the verdict. The lawyer who appears most likely to file any civil suit, Los Angeles attorney Larry Feldman, did not immediately return a call Wednesday.

Feldman represented a boy who received a multimillion-dollar settlement after making molestation accusations against Jackson in 1993. Feldman is also the attorney the accuser's family approached after their close relationship with Jackson ended.

Lower standard of proof required

One key difference in a civil trial that would benefit the family is the lower standard of proof required. While all 12 jurors in the criminal case would have had to find Jackson guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt," in a civil case plaintiffs must simply prove their case "by a preponderance of the evidence." Also, only nine of the 12 must agree. For those and other reasons, Jackson will have to be well-prepared for another trial, said Carl Douglas, a lawyer who has represented Jackson in past civil matters and a member of the "Dream Team" that won Simpson's murder acquittal.

"He has to send a message to the world: `If you're going to come after Michael Jackson, you have to be ready for a war,'" he said. Another key difference in civil litigation is that the accuser's family could force Jackson to testify both in depositions and at a trial, said Daniel Petrocelli, the attorney who sued Simpson for the family of slaying victim Ronald Goldman.

Jackson exercised his right not to testify at his criminal trial. But in a civil case, "if he refused to take the stand, there would be a default entered," and Jackson would he held liable for damages, Petrocelli said.

At the same time, family members would face even more stinging attacks on their credibility than they did during the criminal trial, where Jackson's lawyers worked to bring out the mother's history of welfare fraud and other possible scams. "The defense was able to portray the mother as greedy, manipulative, grasping," said John Nockleby, director of the civil justice program at Loyola University Law School. "If she is the plaintiff, her credibility is sorely lacking." The family's motives in pursuing a lawsuit could be critical in the eyes of the jury.

"Money is not a good enough reason," Petrocelli said. "The jury will see right through that. In the O.J. Simpson case, it was about justice, and money was barely mentioned." If the accuser's mother sues, she will not have trouble finding a lawyer — the publicity alone would attract many eager candidates. "It's considered to be golden," Douglas said. "They will take a case with a big-time defendant just to get in the papers."

Any lawyer taking on a suit against Jackson would face enormous costs. The lawyer would have to study the entire file of the criminal case, which had over 600 pieces of evidence. Pretrial depositions would probably stretch over months, and a team of investigators would have to be hired. Those costs would have to be borne by the attorney in the hope of receiving court costs if the suit is won.

And the payoff in cases brought against celebrities is not necessarily a sure thing. A jury held Simpson liable for the slayings of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and Goldman, and awarded $33.5 million to the families. But little was ever collected.In Jackson's case, prosecutors presented evidence that his once vast fortune is in peril.

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
? 2005 MSNBC.com
URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8242221/


Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 12:30 AM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Thu, Jun 16 2005
Jermaine Jackson says Michael is ?at peace?
Mood:  happy
Topic: Main News
Also says his brother is ‘sort of not eating’

The Associated Press
Updated: 10:32 p.m. ET June 15, 2005

LOS ANGELES - Michael Jackson is “at peace” as he recovers from the ordeal of his molestation trial, his brother Jermaine said Wednesday.“Michael is recovering, but it’s a time (to) rejoice for the family,” Jermaine Jackson said on CNN’s “Larry King Live.” “He’s at peace and we’re very happy.”

He added that his brother was “sort of not eating.” Pressed on the issue, he said his brother “was eating sandwiches and things like that but it was just very tough.” Jermaine Jackson would not say where his brother has been staying since being acquitted Monday of molesting a 13-year-old boy, plying him with alcohol and holding his family captive to rebut a documentary in which Jackson admitted having non-sexual sleepovers with young boys.
He said he didn’t know if the pop star would want to do an interview.

“I’m pretty sure he’s just looking to rest. That’s what’s most important, to rest and get his mind back and focus on being a person — nothing about doing this or doing that but just resting,” he said.

When asked whether the entertainer might move somewhere else, Jermaine Jackson said, “We’ve always had a love for other places outside the U.S.” He added that his family was concerned for their safety.“I fear sometimes when I’m out. Now that Michael’s been vindicated, we all have to be careful. ... You never know what someone’s plotting and planning,” he said.

? 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
? 2005 MSNBC.com
URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8235996/

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 2:01 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Jackson Accuser Having 'Difficult Time'
Mood:  don't ask
Topic: Prosecutor Press Release
By GREG RISLING, Associated Press Writer
Wed Jun 15, 9:06 AM ET

Michael Jackson's accuser is distressed and having "a difficult time" dealing with the not guilty verdict against the pop singer, the prosecutor in the molestation case said Wednesday. Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon told NBC's "Today" that he spoke to the accuser immediately after Jackson was acquitted on all counts Monday.

"He's very down. He's having a difficult time understanding why people didn't believe him," Sneddon said.
"He's gone through a lot in his life. He's survived cancer, a very serious bout of cancer," he said. "He didn't necessarily want to get involved in this case. ... It was very painful for him to tell people what had happened to him."
Sneddon and Senior Deputy District Attorney Ron Zonen defended the decision to put the accuser's mother on the witness stand. Jurors have said she put them off by staring at them, snapping her fingers during testimony and winking at the jury foreman.

"She behaved as she behaves," Zonen said on CNN. "This is her. She does snap her fingers when she talks to you; she has unusual behavioral patterns. I was hopeful that the jury would be able to understand that she is who she is and simply accept her testimony accordingly." He said she was a vital witness because she had information no one else had.

Jackson himself hasn't been seen in public since returning home to his Neverland ranch immediately after the acquittal was announced. He looked exhausted as he shuffled slowly out of court, giving a tentative wave to fans.
"He has to spend some time healing," lead defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. said.

By late Tuesday night only 20 to 30 hardcore Jackson fans remained outside Neverland. Of the dozen or more television trucks that had once lined the walls outside Jackson's estate, only two remained. "People don't know who Michael Jackson is," said defense attorney Susan Yu. "I spent a lot of time with him. I've never seen anybody so vulnerable. This person is totally incapable of doing any of the things they said he did."

Both Mesereau and Yu said they haven't discussed Jackson's future with him, adding he needs to recover his strength before considering returning to work. During the trial, Jackson was taken to a hospital several times for an aching back.Despite the acquittal, at least three jurors said afterward they suspected the pop star has molested some boys, but not the one who accused him in court. Because of the public perceptions, Mesereau said Jackson will have to change his lifestyle
.
"He's going to have to not let people easily enter his life," Mesereau said. "He was very generous to people who didn't deserve it."As for letting children sleep in his bed, Jackson is "not going to do that because it makes him vulnerable to false charges," Mesereau said. The entertainer's concert and recording career had seemed to be sagging even before his arrest, and there has been much speculation as to whether he'll ever be able to regain the stature that saw him widely regarded as the "King of Pop" in the 1980s.

The accuser, once frail as he battled cancer, is now a high school football player who aspires to a career in law enforcement. His mother is married to an Army major with a good paycheck, and the family says abuse by the children's biological father is behind them. With the trial over, the tents outside the Santa Maria courthouse were being taken down. Also gone were the sheriff's deputies and police officers who stood sentry, as well as the barricades that limited courthouse access.

"The goal right now is to try to restore the place to the condition we found it in when we first arrived," said Peter Shaplen, media coordinator for the thousands of journalists. "It's a tough deal when you had 2,200 people here."
Carmen Jenkins, 46, said a surge in sales at her Coffee Diem store near the courthouse would help her buy a new BMW. The coffee shop, popular with journalists for its caffeine, food and wireless Internet connection, had only a few patrons the day after the verdict.
A chalkboard sign on the storefront Tuesday politely announced: "Dear Media, We will miss you very much. Thank you for everything."
___
Associated Press Special Correspondent Linda Deutsch contributed to this story.
___
On the Net:
Jackson site: http://www.mjjsource.com
Copyright ? 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
Copyright ? 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions or Comments
Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 1:54 PM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
CNN LARRY KING LIVE- Michael Jackson's Attorney Speaks Out About Trial
Mood:  happy
Topic: Main News


Aired June 14, 2005 - 21:00 ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


LARRY KING, HOST: Tonight, a prime-time exclusive: Michael Jackson's defense lawyer, Thomas Mesereau, how he won yesterday's total victory in Jackson's child molestation trial. How Michael is really doing right now and more.

Thomas Mesereau for the hour with your phone calls, a prime time exclusive next on LARRY KING LIVE.

He comes to us from Santa Maria, California, his great victory there yesterday, a shutout victory.

By the way, Tom, on your skills on cross-examination, Loyola law professor Lauri Levenson said she's the best she's ever seen. Is that an art or a science?

THOMAS MESEREAU, MICHAEL JACKSON'S LAWYER: It's really an art, Larry. And I'm very flattered by the comment. I don't know if it's well deserved, but it is an art. It's something that you're always learning about, you never completely master. And you have to always be open-minded about how to do it.

KING: How did you get this case?

MESEREAU: I had known Randy Jackson for many years. Initially, when the search of Neverland took place, I did get a call about flying to Las Vegas to meet Michael Jackson. I could not do it then. I was tied up in the Robert Blake case, getting ready for trial and, eventually, I had a falling out with Mr. Blake.

And about three months after that, I got another call to fly to Florida and meet Michael, and one thing led to another.

KING: Is -- is it common in criminal cases for lawyers to be switched, like Blake drops you, you go somewhere else?

MESEREAU: I don't know if it's common, but you know, the criminal defense business is a very tense, high stakes business, and clients do get very upset at times. They're very vulnerable emotionally, and changes do happen from time to time.

KING: Did you work with Jackson's preceding lawyers?

MESEREAU: A little bit. Mark Geragos was very gracious and very professional at all times. I've known him for a long time. He's a very, very decent and very, very skilled lawyer. And he was very helpful in the transition. KING: You said that you were not surprised by the verdict, meaning you were confident. But most lawyers say never predict a jury. Never be confident. Explain.

MESEREAU: I was confident. I thought that we had really destroyed their case very effectively on cross examination, and I thought we had called a lot of very effective witnesses in our case. And I thought when you put that whole package together, they were going to have trouble.

KING: How do you psychologically prepare a client for something like -- like for example, do you make him aware that he might be in jail that night? Do you discuss that at all, or do you only go the positive routes?

MESEREAU: It depends on the client, Larry. You have to be candid with your client. You have to explain the possibilities and the options without sounding defeatist. And at no time did I ever take a defeatist attitude with Michael Jackson, because I always thought we'd win this case.

KING: What kind of client was he?

MESEREAU: He's a wonderful client. He's one of the easiest clients to deal with that I've ever experienced. He's very kind. He's very gentle. He's very cooperative. He's a very, very honorable, decent person. And I thoroughly enjoyed representing him, and I consider him a friend.

KING: Was there any thought of him taking the stand?

MESEREAU: Yes, there was. When I gave my opening statement, I intended to put him on the stand, and he intended to testify. As the case developed, it became very clear to me that he didn't have to.

We had cross-examined very effectively. We had shown the jury a videotape of a two hour and 45-minute interview with Michael Jackson, where he explained his life and his philosophy of music and living and his experiences growing up. And when we put all that together, we decided there was nothing really to be achieved by it.

KING: Was there ever a point, Tom, where you were, during this, down?

MESEREAU: You know, Larry, it's interesting. All trials have ups and downs. And all trials have surprises.

But in this case, I felt that we were very aggressive from the opening bell, in our opening statement, in our cross examination of their initial witnesses. And our plan was to be extremely aggressive and put them on the defensive as quickly as possible. And I think we achieved that.

So, we had a lot of good days in this trial, particularly in their case, and particularly in our case. And I was always confident.

KING: There were some who were saying the prosecution was obsessed with Michael Jackson. Do you share that view?

MESEREAU: Yes, I do. I share it completely. I think they were not objective about this case. They were not objective about their witnesses. They were not objective about the theories they tried to prove, which were unprovable, because they were false. And I think their obsession really hurt them.

KING: You think it goes back to the settlement years back?

MESEREAU: I don't know where it began, Larry. It would appear around that time there developed an obsession about Michael Jackson in this prosecuting agency, but, clearly they were not being objective when they put this case together.

KING: Now, why, Tom? I mean, they had people come to them. They had a lady come to them, the son telling them stories. They had other people who were witnesses. Why did they make a mistake in going ahead with this?

MESEREAU: Well, first of all, they never thoroughly investigated the accusers and the accuser's family, in my opinion. And if you look at the early interviews with the accusers, you'll see the police basically accepting their story before they even investigated who they are.

It was really us that found all the problems with these witnesses, what their history, with their backgrounds. The prosecution almost turned a blind eye to what was really going on. And I think even in the middle of the trial, they were trying to deny reality, and it caught up with them.

KING: How big a factor was Macaulay Culkin?

MESEREAU: He was a big factor. He was a wonderful witness for Michael Jackson. And I will always have tremendous respect for Macaulay Culkin. He's on top of the world. He didn't have to go to bat for his friend. And he did it anyway.

And there never was any doubt that he was going to come and testify. He always said, "I want to be there. I want to help Michael Jackson, and I want to tell the truth." He was a big factor, and he was a man of really strong character.

KING: Do you like to talk to jurors after trial, win or lose?

MESEREAU: I do. I haven't had the opportunity to do it here, but, yes, I do. You always learn things from jurors. And I've never had the privilege to be a juror myself. So -- and I've always liked to have the opportunity, but I never did. I always get bumped off when I get called for jury duty.

KING: I would imagine. We had one of the -- we had the foremen on last night. We also had one of the jurors who said he believed that Michael Jackson was or is a pedophile. It's just that this prosecution didn't prove this case. How do you react to a statement like that? MESEREAU: Well, I think he's wrong. Michael Jackson is not a pedophile. He's never been a pedophile. The prosecution has spent years trying to put together a story which they hoped they could prove and failed to prove. Michael Jackson is not a pedophile. He's never molested a child, nor would he ever even conceive of doing such a thing.

KING: So these were concocted stories?

MESEREAU: Well, certainly, they were concocted by the main accusers, and certainly, the prosecution tried to create the impression that other people were molested. And they all came in and said they weren't.

KING: The amazing thing, though, is when you have a guy who's certainly different from the norm, an older -- a man who sleeps with boys, to get a jury, as my friend Edward Bennett Williams used to say, what you have with a jury is to get the jury to put themselves in your client's shoes. If the jury can put themselves in your client's shoes, you win.

How does someone put themselves in Michael Jackson's shoes?

MESEREAU: Well, first of all, Larry, this notion that he sleeps with boys was a concoction by the prosecution. What he said very openly was that he allows families into his room.

Now, his room is the size of a duplex. It's two levels. He's had mothers sleep there, fathers sleep there, sisters sleep there, brothers sleep there. The prosecution concocted this little saying about sleeping with boys, because they thought it would turn off the jury, and they failed.

But yes, we did have to explain who Michael Jackson was to the jury, that he's a very creative spirit, a very gentle soul, a brilliant musician, a brilliant choreographer, and a very sensitive person who's very concerned about the world and the problems in the world. And he has a very childlike spirit and essence to him, and he attracts children all over the world.

We did have to explain who he was. But this is a country which prides itself on diversity, on the freedom to be who you are. And we never diverted our attention from who Michael was. We never tried to make him look like anything but himself. He never tried to dress differently for the courtroom. Our whole intention is to show who Michael is and be proud of it and embrace it.

KING: We'll be right back with more of Thomas Mesereau, Michael Jackson's very successful defense attorney. We'll have more questions. We'll take your calls, as well. He's with us for the full program. Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

THOMAS SNEDDON, SANTA BARBARA COUNTY D.A.: When a victim comes in, the victim tells you they've been victimized, and you believe that and you believe that the evidence supports that, you don't look at their pedigree. We look at what we think is what's right. You do the right things for the right reasons. If it doesn't work out, that's why we have a jury system. But we did the right thing for the right reasons.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Thomas Mesereau is our special guest.

What's it like in your gut? Now, you can be as confident as you wish, but when they walk in, before those words are uttered, what goes through you?

MESEREAU: You know, Larry, it's a very tense, uncomfortable moment. You never really get used to it. Your heart skips a few beats. And it's something that I never look forward to, in a sense, because it's never easy.

KING: Did you, at all, clutch Jackson's arm or he your arm?

MESEREAU: Yes. When the verdicts were being read, I did grab Michael's hand. And he seemed to appreciate it. I wanted to show him my support. And I also wanted to send the message, "We are winning this case."

KING: What did he say to you when all 10 counts were read?

MESEREAU: He said the word, "Thank you, thank you, thank you." His first reaction was gratitude. Gratitude to God, gratitude to his defense team. Gratitude to his family and friends. That's really all he said.

KING: And that's the joy of a criminal defense lawyer, right?

MESEREAU: You bet.

KING: What happened -- he posted bail, did he not? Is that returned immediately? How is his -- what, did he take a lien on the house? How is that done?

MESEREAU: Well, that was done early in the case. It was done, actually, before I was -- appeared on the case as council of record. And bail was posted by a bail bondsman. It was secured by property.

KING: And is that then torn up immediately?

MESEREAU: Yes, yes. When he was acquitted, the provision was made for bail to be revoked, and he moves on and he's free.

KING: When your friend, Mark Geragos, who was on this program last week, he was highly critical of pundits, television pundits, 24 hour news, round-the-clock people knocking, making forecasts. He was even giving thought that maybe the British system of not allowing coverage of trials is better. What are your thoughts about pundits? MESEREAU: By the way, I used the word "revoked." Bail was exonerated, not revoked.

KING: Good.

MESEREAU: I share Mark Geragos' comments. I think that we have developed an industry of would-be experts who are not professional, who are not experienced, who are very amateurish about their comments about what's going on in courtrooms and who are willing to give opinions when they're not even there. And I think it has become the theater of the absurd, and I think it reached its lowest level in this case.

KING: What was it like for you to -- you weren't under an order not to watch it. What was it like to watch it?

MESEREAU: Well, I didn't watch it that often, Larry. I was too busy working on the case.

KING: But you knew it was going on?

MESEREAU: I knew a lot of it was going on. When I would take a break in my apartment while I was preparing, I would turn on the TV set. And a lot of it was appalling: the factual inaccuracies, the obvious bias among people like Court TV, who I felt was really an arm of the prosecution through this case. It was very amateurish and very unprofessional and very disturbing.

KING: Would you say it is -- it is hard or impossible to predict an outcome of a trial you didn't attend?

MESEREAU: It's very hard, because you don't know the chemistry of the courtroom. You're not watching the interaction between the witnesses and the jury and the judge and both sides. There's just so much that you miss if you're not there.

And plus, how do you compress, you know, six to eight hours of testimony into a sound bite? You can't possibly be accurate.

KING: What about the British system? Once an arrest is made, no coverage?

MESEREAU: Well, there's certainly a lot to be said for that. I frankly like freedom of the press. But it's reaching an absurd state when it comes to trials in America.

We are obsessed with celebrity trials. It's become an industry of pundits who really are trying to be movie stars and not real legal experts. And it's just -- it just reached the bottom of the barrel in this case.

Fortunately, the jury was not affected. They did the right thing.

KING: The prosecutor, Mr. Sneddon, said that there is celebrity justice, like in California. Blake is an example. This is an example, O.J. How do you react?

MESEREAU: That's sour grapes on his part.

I'll tell you what celebrity injustice was in this case. It was sending 70 sheriffs to raid Michael Jackson's home in a search. It was putting more experts, more sheriffs and more investigators on this case than they do with serial killers. That's what I call celebrity injustice.

So in a sense, he's correct; he just is looking at it the wrong way.

KING: Does...

MESEREAU: Michael Jackson was treated differently because he was a celebrity.

KING: Does, though, a celebrity have an edge in that we can assume going in most of the people like them?

MESEREAU: I don't consider that necessarily an edge. I think that jurors tend to be very mindful that they're not supposed to treat celebrities differently, and they might even go -- bend over backwards to make sure they don't do that.

So, there's a lot of injustice that's directed at celebrities. They're bigger targets for prosecutors. They're bigger targets for sheriffs and police officers. They're bigger targets for people who want fame and fortune.

KING: What do you make of -- what's your assessment of the performance of the prosecution in the courtroom?

MESEREAU: They were extremely aggressive and extremely prepared and very determined. I think their biggest problem was they were not objective about their case. They believed things they wanted to believe. They tried to prove theories that were absurd. And they tried to demonize Michael Jackson in a way which looked absolutely ridiculous when you really took a close look at the evidence. And they went way over the edge, and it hurt them.

KING: Weren't you very concerned, though, when that tape was allowed in at the end?

MESEREAU: I was concerned. I didn't think there was a legal basis for it. But after looking at it a second time and realizing how many conflicting statements this accuser had made in that interview and how that interview showed the police officer was willing to accept his story before he even investigated the case, the more I looked at it, the more I thought it would probably help us. And based on some of the juror's comments, it did help us.

KING: Emotionally, is it hard to press when you cross-examine an accuser, a young accuser, a mother?

MESEREAU: Well, you have to gauge your cross-examination to the witness. You don't want to look like a bully. You don't want to look like you're -- you're really taking advantage of your position.

However, you have to adjust, depending on the personality in front of you. Some young kids are -- have a level of maturity that's extremely high. And as Chris Tucker said about the accuser, he was very cunning and very smart. We had to take all of that into account and factor our cross-examination accordingly.

And I think you also want a cross-examination -- you want to cross-examine at different speeds with different tones, and you want to do whatever you think will be effective for that particular witness.

KING: We'll be right back with more of Thomas Mesereau. We'll be including your phone calls.

Tomorrow night, Jermaine and Tito Jackson, Michael's brothers, will be our special guests. And Thursday night, a very special hour with a very special man, Reverend Billy Graham.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SNEDDON: We believed in the child. We believed in the case and we believed that there was sufficient corroboration for what the children said occurred.

And so, whether it be Michael Jackson, or John Smith, or whoever it may be, this is the kind of case that a sheriff investigates. The sheriff believed in this case, and their detectives believed in this case, and we believed in this case. And like I said, I'm not going to apologize for what we do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: I guess, Tom Mesereau, the jury didn't agree?

MESEREAU: They certainly didn't.

Michael Jackson was acquitted of every felony count and every misdemeanor count.

It was a clean sweep.

KING: Did you expect any -- did you have any worries about some of the misdemeanor counts?

MESEREAU: I really didn't, because to convict him of any of the misdemeanor counts, you had to believe the accuser beyond a reasonable doubt.

And that was not going to happen, in my opinion.

KING: So, even as small a thing as serving liquor without any intention for sex was turned down as well by the jury?

MESEREAU: They were completely turned down by the jury. They did not believe these accusers. They did not believe any of these -- this family's testimony on any significant level.

KING: Would you like cameras in the courtroom?

MESEREAU: You know, I have mixed feelings about it. I'm glad there were not cameras in this particular courtroom.

I think it would have created more of a circus-type environment than existed outside the courtroom, already. I like the idea of the public seeing what goes on in courts, because we're supposed to conduct public trials.

But I think given the media's repeated attempts to make a circus- liken environment out of criminal trials, I'm beginning to change my opinion of that, and maybe they don't belong in courtrooms.

KING: Do you like gag orders?

MESEREAU: I don't particularly like them. I think in this case, it worked very well. I think the temptation among lawyers and prosecutors to become movie stars, and essentially promote themselves on camera is something that's got to be avoided, if we're going to have justice in our criminal justice system.

KING: Mr. Mark Geragos a good witness for you?

MESEREAU: He was an excellent witness.

He was a very, very honest witness. He really spoke for his client. He explained, very simply and very carefully and honestly, what he had done to surveil this family because of his suspicions. And he really did go to bat for his client.

KING: There were some Jackson supporters concerned over the fact there was no black on the jury -- composite of that community, of course.

There was a black alternate.

Were you concerned about the race issue?

MESEREAU: Well, certainly Michael Jackson is part of a very prominent African-American family and initially, we did hope there would be some African-American representation on the jury.

But once the jury was picked, I always had a good feeling about this jury. I always felt they were very independent-minded. Nobody was going to intimidate them. They were going to take their job very seriously and be very fair.

And I was correct.

KING: Do you like jurors who take notes? MESEREAU: I don't know how to answer that, Larry.

I think note-taking is an indication that someone is paying attention and very concerned about their job. But on the other hand, you can also be paying attention and absorbing what's going on without taking notes.

So, I don't really know how to answer that question.

KING: All right.

When the jury asked a couple of questions of the judge, they were not revealed to the press or the public.

Were you concerned about any of that? Anything you can tell us about what they asked?

MESEREAU: You know, I really don't want to reveal that.

I don't know if Judge Melville has unsealed those questions, or not.

So, at this point, I'd rather not discuss that.

KING: Were you concerned by any of them, without telling us what they were?

MESEREAU: I was not concerned. I was actually encouraged by them.

KING: So, when you heard the question, that furthered your confidence?

MESEREAU: Yes, it did.

KING: How well did the judge do?

MESEREAU: The judge was an outstanding jurist.

I think all judges in America should learn a lesson from the way Judge Melville conducted this trial.

He was determined, from day one, that this was not going to get out of control. He was determined that justice was going to be done in and outside that courtroom.

He employed some very creative procedures to make sure that order was kept throughout the trial. He did a masterful job and I have total respect for Judge Melville and his wonderful staff.

KING: Even though he got mad at you a few times?

MESEREAU: Yes, he did, but he got mad at the prosecution, also.

He was very fair-minded.

KING: That's all you want, right? balance and fair?

MESEREAU: That's, I think, the most we can expect, and we had it with Judge Melville. He's an outstanding judge.

KING: We'll be right back with more a Thomas Mesereau.

We'll be including your phone calls on this edition of LARRY KING LIVE.

Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... The mother, when she looked at me and snapped her fingers a few times, and she says, "You know how our culture is," and winks at me. I thought, "No, that's not the way our culture is."

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: As a mother to -- the values and stuff that she has taught them and they've learned -- and that is really hard for me to comprehend, you know, because I wouldn't want any of my children to lie for their own gain.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We're back with Thomas Mesereau. We certainly thank him for giving us this time tonight, exclusively. Let's take a few calls.

Tulsa, Oklahoma, for the victorious defense attorney. Hello.

CALLER: Hi. Um, Mr -- hi, Larry.

KING: Hi.

CALLER: Mr. Mesereau, do you have any idea when Michael might make a statement?

MESEREAU: You know, I really don't. I have not talked to him about that. Michael is going to have to go through a period of physical recovery. He's exhausted. He was not sleeping. He was not eating. It was a very, very traumatic experience for him and it's going to take a while for him to recover. I don't anticipate his making a statement very soon, but I suppose it's possible. But I have not discussed it with him.

KING: You then would not recommend any immediate in-depth interview?

MESEREAU: I really would not. I think Michael needs to spend time with his children and his family. He needs to savor his victory. He's a very, very grateful, very spiritual person. I think he would like to be left alone, and would like to heal and mend and move forward.

KING: They all took off in their cars back to Neverland. Where did you go right after the verdict?

MESEREAU: After the verdict, we went to see Judge Melville and his staff to thank them for their very professional behavior towards all of us and then we went to Neverland as well.

KING: Indiana, Pennsylvania, hello.

CALLER: Hello. My hats off to you, Larry, for your fairness during this thing and to you, Mr. Mesereau. My question is, the media has branded Michael Jackson as a freak and pedophile. How can he recover as the consummate talent he is?

KING: Good question.

MESEREAU: Well, I think he can recover because Michael is a very resilient person. Yes, he has been a target for many years. He's been maligned. He's been scandalized, but he's also one of the world's greatest artists and one of the world's greatest talents and also one of the world's greatest humanitarians and Michael has all the tools and the skills and the support to recover and go forward and do very well.

KING: Do you expect him to return to the stage?

MESEREAU: Larry, I'm not an expert on the music industry or the entertainment business, but I know Michael is an artist. He's a creative soul. You can't stifle his creativity and I would not be surprised if he makes a rebound and does it very effectively.

KING: Was the family easy to deal with for you? They're such a tight-knit group.

MESEREAU: The family was lovely to deal with. They're very, very wonderful people. They were all very supportive of Michael. There were a lot of rumors about dissension that were not true. They were a joy to deal with, a very lovely family.

KING: What happened to Raymone Bain?

MESEREAU: Well, you know, I worked with Raymone for many months. We worked very effectively together. We had a few differences towards the end, but that happens in big cases, but I have a lot of respect for Raymone, and always enjoyed seeing her and working with her.

KING: Why let her out that late in the case, though?

MESEREAU: You know, there's some confidential reasons why we had some differences at the end, but they're really insignificant. The fact of the matter is we were a team and we won and she did a very fine job.

KING: There's the famous tape of you apparently having an argument with, I guess, Brian Oxman and there was strong -- of course, correspondents went nuts with that tumult in the Jackson defense. What was that about? MESEREAU: I'm not going to talk about that, Larry. I think that's a matter of confidence. Brian was a very hard worker. He has known the Jacksons for a long time. He has given them very effective representation in many areas. We had differences. It happens in big cases when the stakes are high.

KING: None of our business?

MESEREAU: That's correct.

KING: You have said that Michael was a victim of bad advice in the past, that settling past molestation claims led to greed begetting greed. Are you saying he shouldn't have settled anything?

MESEREAU: That's correct. I think, looking backwards -- you know, we can all be Monday-morning quarterbacks in life and change things we've done, but I think if Michael could go back, he would never have settled those cases. He would've fought them to the end and the message would have got out, don't make false claims against Michael Jackson or you're going to trial.

KING: Oxman still represents -- he told Paula Zahn -- he still represents the family, right?

MESEREAU: That's my understanding. I have not talked to Brian since he left the defense team.

KING: Are you concerned there might be civil suits against Michael after this? Or does this wash that out?

MESEREAU: Well, I think it would be crazy to file a civil suit against Michael, given what happened in this trial. It's always possible. But, if it's done, he will fight it until the end and he will win.

KING: His ex-wife, Debbie Rowe, was called by the state. She appeared to help the defense. Do you agree?

MESEREAU: Yes, I do. She helped us a lot.

KING: Why, then, was she called?

MESEREAU: You'll have to ask the prosecutors about that. They wined and dined her at a local restaurant the night before. From what I understand, a lot of pressure was put on her to say what they wanted her to say. When she got on the witness stand, she told the truth and she explained who Michael was and was very effective for us.

KING: Anyone you called you regretted?

MESEREAU: Not really, Larry. You know, there were a couple of witnesses that didn't pan out exactly as we had hoped, but we did pretty well. We put on a very strong defense after, I think very effectively cross-examining their witnesses. So, we had an extraordinarily large number of good days in this trial.

KING: Sometimes defendants are a very important part of their case, sometimes not. Was Michael very involved in the defense?

MESEREAU: Yes, he was, but Michael is an artist. He's a musician. He's not a criminal defense lawyer and he was very willing to listen and to do what he was advised was the correct thing, and he was actually a joy to work with.

KING: So, in other words, if you had told him, Michael, I think you should take the stand, he would have?

MESEREAU: He absolutely would have. In fact, he expected to.

KING: We'll be back with more, and more phone calls for Thomas Mesereau on this edition of LARRY KING LIVE. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We're back with Thomas Mesereau. Let's take another call. Glenolden, Pennsylvania, hello.

CALLER: Hello, Larry. I'd like to ask Mr. Mesereau if there's a possibility that a malicious prosecution case be filed against the D.A.'s office of Santa Barbara and Mr. Tom Sneddon?

MESEREAU: I think it would be warranted but I have not discussed it with Michael Jackson. We just got the verdict, you know, recently. He's now recovering. Nobody has really discussed that issue. But if you ask me...

KING: But you think it was malicious?

MESEREAU: I do. I think that he was treated in a way that no one else would've been similarly treated. It was because he was a mega-celebrity. Why 70 sheriffs searching Neverland Ranch, based upon what this accuser and his family said, before they'd even investigated the background of the accuser and his family?

KING: So, you're saying, if he wanted to, he could bring a malicious prosecution suit, and be successful?

MESEREAU: I don't -- I'm not going to say right now what the merits or demerits of the suit would be. That would have to be explored. But do I think this was done maliciously and unfairly? Absolutely.

KING: You had a tragedy happen to you during this trial. Your sister died of lung cancer, right?

MESEREAU: That's correct.

KING: How did that affect this whole thing for you, I mean, emotionally?

MESEREAU: Well, it was very difficult emotionally. It happened right as the trial was beginning. Judge Melville gave me some time to handle the funeral and all the things related to that. It was very difficult, but I will say that one of her last messages to me was that she thought we were going to win. And I thought about her throughout the trial, yes.

KING: How old was she?

MESEREAU: She was 53.

KING: She smoked?

MESEREAU: Yes, she did. She smoked from the time she was 13, and, unfortunately, it took a toll.

KING: Was Michael compassionate about that death?

MESEREAU: Michael was not only compassionate; he sent her the most beautiful, the largest bouquet of flowers you've ever seen. He wrote a little poem for her. It came from he and his children. And it was one of the most meaningful and most wonderful things that he could have done for her during her final days.

KING: How does he interact with his kids?

MESEREAU: Beautifully. He loves his children. They love him. He spends a lot of time with them. He is a loving, doting, caring father. And his children just adore him.

KING: Are they well mannered?

MESEREAU: Yes, they are. They're wonderful children. I was with them yesterday.

KING: When you were doing your pre-trial questioning of Michael, when you have to get into a lot of subjects that are not everyday table conversation, was that hard? When you have to ask your own client, did you do this to this boy?

MESEREAU: I'm not going to go into the questions I asked Michael; they're privileged and confidential.

KING: Of course, but were they difficult for you?

MESEREAU: Frankly, no, because the more I got to know Michael Jackson and the more ridiculous I realized these charges were, and the more of a gentle, charitable, kind-hearted, decent person he is, the less difficulty there was. I mean, he always was a very straightforward, honest, down-to-Earth person to deal with. And the Michael Jackson that I know doesn't even come close to the Michael Jackson they tried to portray.

KING: And when you asked...

MESEREAU: So he was an easy person to deal with.

KING: And when you asked him questions, he answered you directly?

MESEREAU: Of course he did. He's very honest and he's very down-to-Earth. If you look at the few interviews he has done, you see a very, very simple, down-to-Earth person who is very honest about who he is, honest about his loneliness, honest about his childhood. He is a very, very decent, kind person and easy to deal with.

KING: And trusting?

MESEREAU: Too trusting. That's been his downfall. He has trusted the wrong people. He has felt sorry for the wrong people. He has tried to heal the wrong people. And they have turned on him and tried to take advantage of him through the legal system.

KING: Will he be tougher?

MESEREAU: Yes, he will. We've already had a talk about that. He will, for sure. This was a horrible experience for him, and he's not going to allow people to just run wild through his home, and -- because he feels sorry for them and wants to take care of them and wants to heal them. He has to get much firmer and he will.

KING: You said earlier, you let him be him. You didn't tell him what to wear or anything, but the pajama incident that got a lot of press, did that bother you?

MESEREAU: Well, but that was not something anybody planned. He had to go to the hospital. He expected to be there for a short period of time. Judge Melville took a very firm position, which he had the right to do, and said, get him here quickly or he was going to issue a bench warrant. So Michael had to run right from the hospital to the courthouse. He complied with Judge Melville's order. That was not something anybody planned or wanted. It just happened.

KING: You think it was much ado about nothing?

(CROSSTALK)

MESEREAU: I agree. Absolutely.

KING: So, therefore, you didn't deal with you telling him how to act in court? Sit up, sit this way, do this, do that, wear this, wear that?

MESEREAU: No. I wanted Michael Jackson to be who Michael Jackson is. And you know, jurors are smart. They're intuitive. They're instinctive. They know what they're being asked to do to somebody at the counsel table. And you don't want to have your client to do something that is phony or unrealistic. I wanted Michael Jackson to be exactly who he was and is, and be proud of it, and that's what he did. There was nothing phony about our side of the table. There was a lot that was phony about the prosecution's side of the table.

KING: Phony?

MESEREAU: Yes.

KING: Meaning they knew they were doing something that wasn't right? MESEREAU: I don't see how they could not have known that. Look at their conspiracy theory, for example. They were trying to say that Michael Jackson had a financial motive to essentially abduct a family and ship them to Brazil. It was the most ridiculous theory I have ever heard of. I don't know how they did it with a straight face. And it backfired on them, as it should have.

KING: We'll be back with more of Thomas Mesereau, some more phone calls, too, on this very interesting hour of LARRY KING LIVE. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We're back. You mentioned earlier how you boosted your client and always tried to be optimistic. But do you have to give -- do you have to talk at all about the possibility of a guilty verdict, tell him what might happen to him? Deal with what might happen?

MESEREAU: Well, Larry, you have to be honest with your client at all times. You do have ethical and professional obligations to explain the situation the client is in, but at the same time, you know, if you really believe in your case and you really are optimistic about your chances, you also have to convey that as well. And I was always optimistic about this case once I learned about it, because the more you looked into who these accusers were and who the witnesses the prosecution was going to call were, the more ridiculous everything looked.

KING: So, there was no reason to say, Michael, be prepared, you might be in jail tonight?

MESEREAU: Well, you never know what a jury is going to do. You don't know those 12 people. They're not personal friends of yours. You don't know what makes them tick. But I always had a good feeling about this jury. I always felt that our case was going in very well. And I always thought the truth would prevail. And I really felt that these jurors were very independent-minded, that nobody was going to push them around, they were going to follow the law and do what's right.

KING: Tempe, Arizona, for Tom Mesereau. Hello.

CALLER: Hello, Larry, I love your show.

KING: Thank you.

CALLER: My question is, how do you think the media coverage affected this case, Mr. Mesereau?

KING: Yeah. Did it?

MESEREAU: Well, ultimately, we had the right result. Justice was served. An innocent man walked free. So, I can't say that, in the long run, the media had the damaging effect that I was worried about at certain points in the trial. The problem I have with the media was they tried to turn it into a circus. They tried to pursue biases and prejudices against Mr. Jackson, because they thought it would generate interest and ratings, and they tried to make a circus out of the case. And to some extent, they did. But in the end, justice prevailed, because this jury was not going to be unduly influenced by other people. They were going to do what was right, and they did.

KING: Do you believe, therefore -- do you believe the jury didn't watch television?

MESEREAU: I believe they didn't. I believe this jury took Judge Melville's orders very seriously. I believe they took their job very seriously and I believe they were determined not to be unfairly or unduly influenced by anybody.

KING: Manillapan, Florida, hello.

CALLER: Hi, Mr. King. I love your show.

KING: Thank you.

CALLER: I'd like to know if Mr. Mesereau could disclose the approximate cost of the defense.

MESEREAU: I'm sorry. I didn't totally understand the question.

KING: If you could disclose the approximate cost of the defense.

MESEREAU: I will not talk about legal fees or cost. That's confidential.

KING: What did it cost the state?

MESEREAU: It had to have cost them many millions of dollars. I have been told that the board of supervisors of Santa Barbara county has been up in arms about the cost of this case and if you look at the number of sheriffs and investigators and experts and people and prosecutors put on this case, it's absurd. They wouldn't do it in a murder case. They wouldn't do it in a serial killer case, but they did it because Michael Jackson is a superstar and they wanted to take a superstar down.

KING: How important was your investigator, Scott Ross?

MESEREAU: He was extremely important. Scott Ross did a fabulous job, as did Jesus Castillo, our second investigator. They were critical to our defense. They were relentless. They were professional. They dug up the facts. They found the witnesses. They got them to court. These guys were just terrific.

KING: Do you use your team a lot, Tom? Did other lawyers work with you?

MESEREAU: Yes. My co-counsel and law partner, Susan Yu, was absolutely essential to this defense. She was tireless in the way she put the evidence together, the way she assisted me in preparation. Bob Sanger, my co-counsel from Santa Barbara was an unbelievably effective lawyer. He was a trial lawyer in the trial court. He argued in the appellate courts. He did law in motion. He knew the local procedures and system. We had a lot of assistants helping us out in his office and my office and it was a great team effort and it succeeded.

KING: And, we'll be back with some more moments with Thomas Mesereau, ask about him, his future. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: One more call. Gainesville, Georgia, hello.

CALLER: Yes. I'd like to ask Mr. Mesereau if he believes that Tom Sneddon is responsible for the grand jury testimony being leaked to the press.

MESEREAU: I don't know if Tom Sneddon is personally responsible for that, but certainly somebody in the prosecution side, it would appear, was responsible and when I say prosecution side, I'm including the sheriff's department.

As you know, those transcripts were leaked just as the trial was beginning, and it's my belief they were leaked to try and prejudice the entire process. Do I know that Tom Sneddon did it personally? I do not have any understanding of that, but I think somebody who favored the prosecution did it. That's my belief.

KING: You said Michael's going to stay at Neverland?

MESEREAU: I don't know the answer to that, Larry. We just haven't had a chance to talk about his future very much.

KING: He's got such an interest in kids. Do you think he'll still have some come over? Or are you going to advise him against...

MESEREAU: Again, well, I really haven't talked to Michael very much about the future. I do know, as we said before, that he has to get a lot tougher with who he lets into his life and who he feels sorry for and who he wants to heal and help because he's a real target.

KING: We'll ask his brothers tomorrow.

One other thing I didn't cover. Were you surprised -- I know you left the case -- were you surprised at the Robert Blake verdict?

MESEREAU: No, I was not. As you may recall, I did the three- week preliminary hearing in that case.

KING: I remember.

MESEREAU: I thought the case was full of holes and full of problems.

KING: You told me that.

MESEREAU: I was not surprised at all.

KING: You told me then you thought he would win.

MESEREAU: Yes.

KING: Sorry you left it?

MESEREAU: No. You know, life goes on. We had a falling out and those things happen in the high-pressure world of criminal defense. But he hired a very, very excellent lawyer who did a very excellent job and he's free.

KING: Interesting thing about Thomas Mesereau, born in West Point, father, lieutenant colonel; worked for his in-laws restaurant business, Mama Leone's, one of the most successful restaurants ever in America, famous in New York; was an amateur boxer; and represented defendants in death penalty cases in the south, pro bono, didn't charge; gives free legal assistance through the First African Methodist Episcopal Church in L.A. -- were you glad about that apology yesterday, for slavery and (INAUDIBLE) hangings?

MESEREAU: Well, what -- you know, Larry, yesterday was a wild day. Which apology...

KING: The Senate -- the Senate apologized for the treatment in the past of the American black.

MESEREAU: I'm absolutely in favor of that, if that's the way it was done and it was articulated properly, I am absolutely behind that.

KING: Are you looking forward to a lot more criminal cases? I mean, you're famous, widespread now. You know, it's obvious you're going to get a lot of calls. Are you ready for an onslaught of new business?

MESEREAU: No, I'm ready to get some sleep.

KING: But you seriously know you're going to get a lot of attention now?

MESEREAU: I'm sure I will, and, you know, I'll take it as it comes. I have strong views about my profession. I love what I do. I have a strong belief in civil rights and in making sure our justice system works and we'll just move forward. I feel very blessed by god to have been in the case.

KING: How many partners in your firm?

MESEREAU: Just four partners. It's a small firm.

KING: Might you expand?

MESEREAU: I don't know. We'll have to take it as it comes. I don't have any plans, other than to get some sleep, see my family and friends and move forward.

KING: Take a vacation for a while?

MESEREAU: I could definitely use one, yes.

KING: Thomas, thank you so much for a very informative hour. I appreciate you giving us an hour. We know how tired you are.

MESEREAU: Well, thank you for having me.

KING: Thomas Mesereau, very successful defense attorney, quite a career, quite a life, quite a story.

Tomorrow night, Tito and Jermaine, Jermaine and Tito Jackson, Michael's brothers who promised to appear on this show when the trial was over, no matter what the verdict, will appear on this show.

And on Thursday night, Billy Graham. That should be extraordinary. And Friday night, Shania Twain. Speaking of big stars, we have a big star right here in New York where I'm here with my whole family. I got father of the year award today. I was humbled. It was tremendous day for me to have the whole family here.


TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

? 2005 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us. All external sites will open in a new browser.
CNN.com does not endorse external sites.
Denotes premium content.
Add RSS headlines.

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 4:16 AM JST
Updated: Thu, Jun 16 2005 4:22 AM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Cnn Lary King Live- Jackson Found Not Guilty
Mood:  bright
Topic: Main News
Aired June 13, 2005 - 21:00 ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We, the jury, in the above-entitled case, find the defendant not guilty of the...

(CHEERS)

LARRY KING, HOST, "LARRY KING LIVE": Tonight, Michael Jackson walks away a free man, acquitted on all counts in his child molestation trial. We'll hear from reporters who were inside the courtroom, and outside, among the fans, for the dramatic climax to this trial. And, we'll speak with Jackson camp insiders, and more, and it's all next, on LARRY KING LIVE.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Momentarily, we'll be talking to a whole panel of people.

And I'm joined here in New York by Cynthia McFadden, ABC News senior legal correspondent. We spoke on the phone earlier with Jermaine Jackson, one of Michael's brothers, and we'll -- hopefully -- we'll be talking with him by phone tonight during the program.

And tomorrow night, Tom Mesereau, the defense attorney, will be our exclusive prime-time news guest. That's tomorrow night, Tom Mesereau, the defense attorney.

But let's begin in the opening segment with Paul Rodriguez, better known as juror number 80, the jury foreman, the retired high school counselor.

How tough was this for you, Paul, first, to serve on jury duty?

PAUL RODRIGUEZ, JACKSON JURY FOREMAN: It was tough because it's been at it since about the middle of January when I first got my summons to appear for jury duty. So, it's been tough. It's been a long, long haul.

KING: What was the -- was there a key to this decision?

RODRIGUEZ: Was there a key to this decision?

KING: Yes.

RODRIGUEZ: Yes. We just couldn't buy the story of the mother for one, and the corresponding stories of the children, they were too much like the mother's. Although, you know, it's almost like they rehearsed it in so many ways. And anyway, some of the timelines weren't matching up. So, yes. Those were the things we probably looked at.

KING: It -- was it difficult not to hold all the prior things against him? The film? The settlement years ago? Does that enter into the discussion?

RODRIGUEZ: Yes, it did. Entered into the discussion and we probably spent quite a bit of time referring to that case and coming back to it on various occasions, just depending on what we were talking about or deliberating about at that moment. So, yes, it did enter into it, but in the final analysis, that's not what we needed to use for determining the guilt or not guilty verdict.

KING: When you left on Friday, did you have a pretty good idea it would be over on Monday?

RODRIGUEZ: No, we did not. When we left on Friday, we all decided that we needed to into something to get away from this and just think about other things because we knew it was going to be -- we thought it was going to be another few days before we would finish up and we just didn't think it would go this quickly, especially not today, on a Monday.

KING: So what happened today?

RODRIGUEZ: Well, what happened today is that we started out with this whole thing on the conspiracy charges, and that was on day one, and we couldn't get anywhere even after reading the instructions over and over again. There's 98 pages of instructions, and so we'd refer to that. Since we couldn't -- we were just at opposite ends on too much many issues there, so we decided to go onto something else, and after we did that just a few things were left, plus the conspiracy charge. So, we went back to that and we had a clear mind and a clear focus on what we needed to do and that's how we ended the day or ended the whole scenario.

KING: Are you saying the other charges were clearer than the conspiracy?

RODRIGUEZ: No. There was some -- we had to do a time line in order to get the charges clear in our minds as far as the molestation charges. But that seemed to come together a lot faster than what we thought it would. We thought that would be one of the toughest things, but it came together a lot faster than the conspiracy.

And the conspiracy, we might've been able to get that done sooner, but we decided that, let's go see if we can get some other issues taken care of and come back to that and that's basically the way we approached it.

KING: I don't want to knock pundits, Juror 80, but most of the pundits said the conspiracy was the easiest one. That would be not guilty. The hardest would be the others. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, it was. That's why I say we came back to it and I don't know why we just tabled it, but we decided to table it, and you are right, it was one of the easier ones to do. But I think that also what balanced out was just by completing the other charges against him.

KING: What did you -- how did Michael appear to you in court? What was it like to look at this for all these days?

RODRIGUEZ: Well, there for a while, you look at him and you watch his demeanor, you watch his body language, and yes, there was days he looked awful. You know, there was days where he looked like he had plenty of sleep, but after a while, you lose concentration that he's even there. You know, you're focusing on what's being said in the courtroom, what the lawyers are saying, what witnesses are testifying to, so he became secondary to the whole thing, although that's why we were there in the first place, is because of him.

KING: When it was finally decided unanimous, not guilty, were you happy for him?

RODRIGUEZ: No, not really. I think it's just a job that we had to get done and we did the best that we could and we just felt that the job was completed, and rather -- I don't know. There were some tears from some of the jury members. I don't know if there was tears of happiness or tears it was over with. But I had, you know, really, personally, had no real feelings one way or the other. I just felt like we needed to leave there with a clear mind and saying we did the best that we could under the -- with the evidence that we had presented to us.

(CROSSTALK)

KING: Couple of other quick things -- I thank you for giving us the time. Did his lifestyle, which had to be uncommon to 99.5 percent of all of the people, did that throw you?

RODRIGUEZ: We did consider that a lot, you know, just him sleeping with children and so on, so forth. There's not too many grown men that we know that would do that. But, again, we had to base it on the evidence presented to us, and come out of there with -- deciding on everything with -- beyond a reasonable doubt. I can't emphasize that strongly enough. So if the evidence was there, we would have worked with it but there was a lot of things lacking, so we just didn't have anything that we needed to complete the case.

KING: One other thing before I let you go. Cynthia McFadden has a question for you. Cynthia?

CYNTHIA MCFADDEN, ABC NEWS SR LEGAL ANALYST: Yes. I was wondering, the allegations of past abuse that the prosecutor presented, the so-called 1108 evidence. Did you find any of those other allegations credible?

RODRIGUEZ: Yes, we did. To a certain degree, we didn't -- again, we couldn't take that as complete evidence, to use that as information that we needed to complete this case. We could just use that as information presented to us of what a pattern could be developed to -- so on and so forth.

MCFADDEN: So, you did think there might've been a pattern, just not proof beyond a reasonable doubt in this case. Is that what you are saying?

RODRIGUEZ: Yes.

KING: Yes, Paul, I thank you very much. Thank you for the time, man. It was terrific of you. I know it's been a tough day for you. Thank you very much and thank you for your service.

RODRIGUEZ: OK, thank you.

KING: Joining us now by phone is Tito Jackson, one of Michael Jackson's brothers. He's on a cell phone kicking in now. Are you there, Tito?

TITO JACKSON, MICHAEL JACKSON'S BROTHER: Hey, Larry, how are you?

KING: How are you? Where were you? Were you in the courtroom?

T. JACKSON: Yes, I was in the courtroom.

KING: Did you drive back with Michael?

T. JACKSON: I'm sorry, Larry?

KING: Did you drive back in the car with Michael?

T. JACKSON: I was in the car behind -- of Michael's vehicle. Third car, I was in the third car.

KING: What happened when they announced the verdict in your heart? What was your feeling? Were you worried?

T. JACKSON: Of course, everyone would be worried. But they kept reading the counts. The pressure was lifting off me, and I was holding my mom tight, and we all cried through every count. We cried through every count. Justice has finally been served and Mike's a free man.

KING: What's first thing he said to you?

T. JACKSON: He told me he loved me and I told him, I love you, too.

KING: How did he hold up today?

T. JACKSON: Well, it would be hard on anyone, you know? Michael kept his strength and he hung in there. He didn't do any events and I think it was a very personal thing on Tom Sneddon's part. We want to come onto your show and we'll be able to get more into that, but Larry, you know, I also have here with me is my brother Jermaine. So, he wants to get on the phone as well.

KING: OK, put him on.

T. JACKSON: So, I'm going to pass it over to him.

KING: All right.

JERMAINE JACKSON, MICHAEL'S BROTHER: Hi, Larry.

KING: Hi, Jermaine. I look forward sitting down you in person, but I thank you for joining us with Tito. Did you ride back with Michael or were you in a different car?

JERMAINE JACKSON: I was in the third car but we were very, very, very, very happy, and, like we always felt from the very beginning and knew that he was (INAUDIBLE) innocent. And, I'll just say this, it takes one person to tell the truth, but it takes many to concoct a lie and that's what you saw there. And I just feel that the community up there in Santa Maria is a wonderful community. They are wonderful taxpayers, but the people who are in power and who are in authority, whoa. They need some work, because what they have done to -- well, what they tried to do in the lies they put out there against my family and Michael is just ridiculous.

And, at the same time, to report -- there were reporters reporting all this stuff and going on and on and on and then, go take a poll and try to see what the poll is going to be, around the U.S. -- it's just unfair. I mean, we kept quiet because we knew all the time justice was going to be served. It was on our side, but we can't control what the media is going to say, because they weren't reporting the right thing. So they were suading all the viewers and all the public's opinion.

KING: Were you surprised, though? Therefore, in view of that, with public opinion polls and the condition of the Santa Maria power structures you cite (ph), were you surprised by any part of his verdict?

JERMAINE JACKSON: I wasn't surprised by any part of the verdict, because I always felt and always said that Michael is 1,000 percent innocent. I know why this was done, and I'll say it again, Tito and I would love to sit down with you and share with the world, because what's important is that people know who we are and really know who Michael really is, and that's what's most important. He's a wonderful, wonderful person. And Neverland was never built to do what they tried to say. Neverland was built to bring happiness to the kids who were terminally ill, and he just wanted to give them a brighter day. That's all it was built for.

KING: How -- how are his kids?

JERMAINE JACKSON: His kids are fine. They're all fine, and the family is just strong -- stronger. We were strong before, but we're stronger now. And so I dare anybody to try to stand up against us, because we're very strong, and that's what a family's supposed to be. Michael is 1,000 KING: What are you doing tonight?

JERMAINE JACKSON: Excuse me?

KING: What are you doing tonight?

JERMAINE JACKSON: I'm going to go to sleep early. We're going to just probably rest, because we've been tired. This has been a long two years and more of just grueling and just -- just -- we're just going to just hug each other and jump up and down, and we can't wait to share this with you when we see you.

KING: Yeah, I look forward to it. And is Michael going to work again soon?

JERMAINE JACKSON: I really don't know. Right now, he's going to rest, but you know, it's in his blood. It's in his bones. And so -- but he's going to rest right now and get past all of this. But I will say, thank you to all the supporters around the world and the people who always believed and still believe in my family, in Michael, in all of us. So thank you very, very much, Larry.

KING: Thank you. Do you want to stay on or you want to come on later in the week?

JERMAINE JACKSON: I want to talk to you in person, so you can really -- because Tito and I got so much to say, because we were the ones there and just really...

KING: All right.

JERMAINE JACKSON: We got something to say. We got...

KING: We'll set it up for you...

JERMAINE JACKSON: We need to talk.

KING: ... and Tito. And thanks so much for doing this.

JERMAINE JACKSON: Thank you, Larry.

KING: Thank you, Jermaine and Tito Jackson, two of Michael's brothers.

The whole panel will assemble. Your calls later. We'll be right back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We the jury in the above-entitled case find the defendant not guilty of conspiracy, not guilty of a lewd act upon a minor child, not guilty of administering an intoxicating agent to assist in the commission of a felony as charged in count seven of the indictment.

(END VIDEO CLIP) (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Here's your shot of Neverland.

Let's meet our panel. In Santa Maria, CNN correspondent Ted Rowlands. In Neverland -- at Neverland is Brooke Anderson of CNN. In Santa Maria, Jane Velez-Mitchell, the correspondent for "Celebrity Justice." Michael Cardoza, defense attorney and former Alameda County prosecutor. Craig Smith, the former Santa Barbara County prosecutor and Superior Court commissioner. He knows Tom Sneddon quite well. He teaches law at Santa Barbara Ventura Colleges of Law. And here in New York, you've already met her, Cynthia McFadden, ABC News senior legal correspondent, co-anchor of "Primetime Live." And broke a lot of exclusives during this Jackson case.

All right, Ted, were you surprised?

TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: No. Because we really didn't know which way this was going. It was an amazing scene inside and outside the courthouse. I was outside when the verdicts were read. The fans, there were hundreds of them, were so quiet. You could hear a pin drop. Everybody listening to the audio feed from inside the courtroom, and with each not guilty, they would erupt, and then quickly get quiet again. Go ahead.

KING: But you weren't surprised, you yourself?

ROWLANDS: Well, I sat through this entire trial except for a few weeks, and I think that the jury did an excellent job of evaluating the case and mulling it over. And if you listened to the jurors afterwards, they were a conscientious jury and they did go through it. And you heard Mr. Rodriguez say that they just didn't feel like it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

KING: Brooke, were you surprised?

RROOKE ANDERSON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Larry, you know, like Ted said, we did not know what to expect. The fans here, they were gathered as the verdict was read. And as each count was read not guilty, we heard elation and cheers.

KING: I know that, but were you surprised? I'm asking you.

ANDERSON: Honestly, you know, I guess I was a little bit surprised that all 10 counts not guilty, but then you never know what these 12 jurors are thinking, and this is what the jury found, and this is what we're going to go with.

KING: Cynthia, you're surprised?

MCFADDEN: Yes, I was surprised, Larry. I'll tell you why. Usually when the state gets to offer evidence like it did in this case, the 1108 evidence, which is really powerful evidence, these past allegations of bad acts, it's very difficult for the defense to prevail. So yeah, I was surprised. I think this was an absolute rejection of the prosecution argument. KING: It was a wipe-out, right?

MCFADDEN: It was a wipe-out. And I have to say, I was surprised that the prosecution was able to get absolutely not one vote for...

KING: Jane Velez-Mitchell, were you surprised?

JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, CELEBRITY JUSTICE: I was surprised, Larry, because I was sitting in the courtroom. And when the jurors filed in, they looked grim. They looked very serious. And then they did not make eye contact with Michael Jackson, and normally that's not a good sign for the defendant. Michael Jackson, by the way, looked terrified as he walked in, almost as if it was an effort to get to the defendant's chair.

But then boom, boom, boom, not guilty across the board. So it was an absolute stunner, and the room was surrounded in sobs. I had sobs behind me. The fans sobbing. Mother Catherine, two seats in front of me, sobbing. Michael Jackson had a tissue going up to his eye, and those on the side who could see him said he was crying. His attorney, one of them, Susan Yu, was sobbing. Then I look over at one of the jurors, who's mother of four, and she was sobbing outright. So a lot of tears in that courtroom.

KING: Michael, same question as everybody, were you surprised?

MICHAEL CARDOZA, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: No, I wasn't. But remember what happened in the beginning of this case, Larry. All the legal pundits were saying, not guilty all along. Then as this trial progressed, and that prior sexual misconduct came in, the famous 1108 evidence, as that came in, some people started to say, uh-oh, we might get a guilty verdict in this case.

And then closing arguments came. I thought Mesereau gave a very, very good closing argument. Ron Zonen, I think he really outargued him. Gave a great closing argument, brought the case even closer.

Anything could have happened. I was really expecting, either way wouldn't have surprised me. Was I surprised? No. But I'll tell you what, the jury did the right thing in this case, because they isolated out the accuser's crime in this one. They took the accuser, the accuser's family, looked at that and said, did not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt and shoved that 1108 aside.

KING: Craig Smith, what did you think?

CRAIG SMITH, FORMER SANTA BARBARA COUNTY PROSECUTOR: Well, was I surprised? Yes and no. We knew all along that it was a very close case, that it was on the fence. Certainly when the case went to the jury, people thought it could go either way. No one could call it. I really thought there was going to be some kind of split verdict, some type of compromise. I thought at the very least they would find Michael Jackson guilty of one of the lesser-included offenses of simply furnishing alcohol but they didn't even find him guilty of that. So I am surprised. KING: We'll take a break and come back, and when we come back, Angel Howansky a Jackson family spokesman and Majestic Magnificent, Michael Jackson's friend, confidante, and personal magician -- I never had one of those -- will join us. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We're joined now in Santa Maria, California, by one of Michael Jackson's closest friends and confidantes, Majestic Magnificent, who's called Michael's personal magician. What does a personal magician do?

MAJESTIC MAGNIFICENT, MAGICIAN, FRIEND OF JACKSON: That's something the press is labeling on me. I'm not Michael's personal magician. I just happen to be a magician from Muhammad Ali transferred to Michael.

I want to answer that question that you asked everybody else. I had no doubt whatsoever that Michael would be acquitted on all the charges. Neither did Michael. From the very beginning, he said over and over again, justice will prevail and I will be acquitted and you will see, I'm innocent.

KING: So, are you saying, Majestic, then, this morning, when you got up, you weren't worried at all?

MAJESTIC MAGNIFICENT: Not even a little bit, because I know his character. I know he would not hurt a child, and if justice is going to be fair, not like -- not unlike these tabloids shows. You're a credible journalist, but these people like Nancy Grace, Diane Dimond, all these people trying Michael in the press, that is not in courtroom. It's the normal people and the jurors that make the decision. That's how I knew he was going to be acquitted.

KING: How's the family doing?

MAJESTIC MAGNIFICENT: Great, wonderful. I just spoke to Randy, everybody enjoying the moment of happiness and they all together and having this like, hey, it's over, and Michael will be making music. He will be singing. He will be dancing. You know, can't nobody do what Michael do on a stage. So, people say, he can't make a comeback and all this. He never been nowhere. Ya'll just -- they just tied him up for a while.

KING: So you're saying he's coming back?

MAJESTIC MAGNIFICENT: Oh my god. Can you -- name somebody who can sing and dance like Michael, Larry. Of course the world want to see that.

KING: Did you talk to him today?

MAJESTIC MAGNIFICENT: No, I haven't. I just spoke to Randy today.

KING: When are you going to see him? MAJESTIC MAGNIFICENT: Probably this week some time. I'm going over there -- I am sure there's going to be something in the next couple -- coming days. I'll probably go out to the ranch sometime.

KING: Thank you, Majestic. Always good seeing you. Majestic Magnificent.

MAJESTIC MAGNIFICENT: You, too. Take care, Larry.

KING: Not a personal magician, just happens to be a magician. Thank you. Glad we cleared that up.

MAJESTIC MAGNIFICENT: Thank you for being fair. Thank you so much!

KING: Thank you. We always try to be that.

Ted Rowlands, the crowd outside, as you discussed them earlier, they were jumping, they were happy, et cetera. What was the Jackson family like when they came out?

ROWLANDS: Very subdued. Relief, I think, would be the way to characterize them. Michael Jackson waved to the crowd, but no means were they raising their fists or smiling or high-fiving, not by any stretch of the imagination. Tom Mesereau was also very business-like, almost as if, you know, they were relieved and almost angered, too, that they had to put forth so much effort, so much heartache to get to this point, but not maybe what you would think. At least not -- that surprised me.

I thought there would be more smiles and a more of a pleased aura around them. But it was, pretty -- it was just, let's get out of here. Let's get home time type of feeling you got.

KING: And Brooke Anderson, what happened when they got home?

ANDERSON: Oh, when they got home, Larry, they were greeted by hundreds of fans. I even saw part of Jackson's staff at Neverland walk to the gate. I saw housekeepers. I saw chefs waving at him, cheering him on. The mood of the fans has definitely changed today from tense and anxious to celebratory and excited. We've seen some of the family members leave. We've seen Randy and Tito and Joe leave.

We haven't seen signs of Michael Jackson yet and I estimate there are about 200 fans here right now. Some of them tell me they're waiting to see Michael, hoping that he'll invite them into Neverland.

KING: Jane Velez-Mitchell, what do you gather public opinion will be of this, generally?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, in general, I think that people are going to say, that's the way it goes with celebrities. There's a celebrity justice and then there is justice for everyone else, although I do think that they will accept the jury's decision. I think people really feel this jury did as good a job as anyone could possibly do. They weighed the evidence. They worked hard, and they really fought to be fair, and I think they acquitted themselves in how they handled this. So, I think the general public, while possibly thinking well, something fishy's going on over there, is going to accept that Michael Jackson is not guilty of these particular charges.

KING: We'll take a break and be right back. We'll meet Angel Howansky, a Jackson family spokesperson; Debra Opri, attorney for members of the family; Jesse Jackson, more of our panel. Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOM SNEDDON, SANTA BARBARA CTY D.A.: Obviously, we're disappointed in the verdict, but we work every day in a system of justice. We believe in the system of justice, and I've been prosecutor for 37 years, and 37 years, I have never quarreled with a jury's verdict and I'm not going to start today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We're back on what will be a historic day, June 13th. Joining us now from Santa Maria is Angel Howansky, the Jackson family spokesman. First, people have been asking this, Angel, how's Michael's health?

ANGEL HOWANSKY, JACKSON FAMILY SPOKESMAN: Michael -- this was definitely a long trial for Michael. I believe he just was a little dehydrated. But other than that, I know right now he's probably eating and having a good time. I'm not sure.

KING: Where were you when the verdict came in?

HOWANSKY: I was actually upstairs. There's a section where they have the family upstairs in the courthouse.

KING: Yes.

HOWANSKY: I was upstairs. And then when I heard that, when I -- when everybody started running, I ran downstairs so I could hear everything, too. There is only so many seats for the family in the courtroom, and family comes first. So I wasn't in there, but I was upstairs.

KING: Did you talk to Michael?

HOWANSKY: I had not spoken to him yet. I have spoken to the parents.

KING: What did they say?

HOWANSKY: And I know -- they are so happy this is behind them. They are so overwhelmed. This was a very long trial. And I really admire Mrs. Jackson. Every day she came to court, never missed a day, and that was a lot for her, and I'm so glad. And they're happy that this is over with, so they can put this behind them and move forward. And I just love that family. They are very generous people. And Michael should not have gone through this. And he was finally able to tell the world that he is innocent. And no one else can question that anymore. And I'm so proud.

KING: But they also are, as Jermaine and Tito spoke with us earlier, they're also angry. Do you understand that?

HOWANSKY: Absolutely. I understand that. He shouldn't have gone through this in the first place. And for him to have to go through all of this, publicly -- his family went through a lot as well, and there is definitely going to be a lot of anger, I understand. Because this should not have happened in the first place.

KING: Majestic says he's definitely going back to singing and performing. Do you concur?

HOWANSKY: I concur. The world would be at a loss if Michael Jackson did not get back out and sing and perform. His music -- I talked to some Koreans today, and they told me that Michael's music liberated them, liberated Hong Kong. And I'm just -- there is no one in the world like him.

KING: What happened to the other spokesperson?

HOWANSKY: Raymone?

KING: Yeah.

HOWANSKY: I wasn't involved in that. I am not sure exactly what happened. I've been with the family for 15 years. I've been a longtime family friend. Then I started representing the parents, probably since the last time, 1993. But I wasn't involved with the other spokesperson, and it wouldn't be fair to me to make a comment on that at all.

KING: What do you think the public's perception of Michael is now? Do you think they'll view this as a celebrity who got off, or a guy who got a fair trial and was judged fairly?

HOWANSKY: When I was out with the family, when I was out with the parents specifically, you would not believe the people that came out of nowhere and told the family that they support them and that Michael should have never gone through this. I don't believe he's going to be known as a celebrity that got off. From my understanding and what I know of the family, they're very generous people, they're very loving and they're very sharing. And those who really know them really know that that's how they are.

Michael loves children. He gives millions and millions of dollars to children and to charities. And people -- you know, the media made it seem like the public was anti-Michael, and we found quite the opposite. The public loves Michael Jackson. And the minute the verdicts came in, I got calls from Norway, I got calls from South Africa, all over the world with people crying, singing in their different languages for Michael, and just tears of joy. And I'm so happy for him, that he stood and he stood strong. KING: Thank you. Angel Howansky, the Jackson family spokesperson, from Santa Maria.

Back to Santa Maria and Michael Cardoza. Did the prosecution goof?

CARDOZA: No, I don't think they did goof in this case. Well, maybe a little goof. And what I mean by that is with Sneddon, back in '93, '94, he loses the Jordy Chandler prosecution because of that $20 million settlement. All right, that said; then what he does in my opinion is put Jackson in his crosshairs. He's looking to get Michael Jackson.

And I'm sure he believed Michael's a pedophile. So he's saying, I got a pedophile loose in my county, not going to happen. Then this family walks in. I think he was a little too quick to believe them and didn't really look at their background that carefully. Didn't look at the J.C. Penney case. Didn't look to the fact that they committed perjury in that case. Brought this case, and what he did, he bolstered this case with a prior misconduct, sexual misconduct. That made this case a lot stronger, but as I said, the jury did the right thing. They looked at this case and said, you didn't prove it.

KING: Cynthia, you think they were too zealous?

MCFADDEN: The prosecutors?

KING: Yeah.

MCFADDEN: Well, listen, I think they certainly appeared that way, at least to the public. You know, we didn't ask the jurors about what their opinion of the prosecutors were. But listen, I think if you're a prosecutor, and a young man comes into your office and says that he has been sexually molested by a man who you know has previously settled several other similar cases for multi millions of dollars, you have an obligation to investigate.

Now, maybe Michael is right, maybe a due investigation would have suggested that the case shouldn't go forward, because we knew from the start there were credibility problems with this accuser and his mother. But I certainly don't think the prosecutor was misguided in bringing these charges initially. Now, whether or not they should have proceeded, I don't think they tried the case very well. Listen, when you make your opening statement and say your witness is going to say one thing and then either you don't produce the witnesses or they say the direct opposite, you've got a problem, and we all know that's what happened.

KING: Craig Smith, you're a former prosecutor. Was this -- do you have questions about the way this was prosecuted?

SMITH: I really don't. And I have to disagree with what my friend Michael Cardoza had to say. Tom Sneddon has not had Michael Jackson in his crosshairs ever since 1993. He did have the rug pulled out from under him with the settlement of that earlier case for the $20 million or so. But he was not pursuing Michael Jackson all these years. This case came to him.

And so once this case came to him, and there was credible evidence to believe there was probable cause that Michael Jackson had done these things, I think Tom felt he had an obligation to follow through. And indeed, many of the things they did to try to check out and corroborate this story -- and what ultimately led to the filing of the conspiracy charge. The fact that there were these surveillance tapes found in the office of Mark Geragos' investigator, when they went out and executed the search warrant. That added strength.

Unfortunately for the prosecution, when they actually got into trial, every time there was a break, it could have been a good break for them or a bad break. It always went a bad break. For instance, they had more evidence before the grand jury on the conspiracy and the furnishing of alcohol than they had in front of the trial jury. Remember, they lost their crucial witness because their crucial witness got arrested and therefore, was unable -- or unavailable to testify at trial.

KING: Let me get a break and we'll come back with more. Don't get away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was very uncomfortable with that. A lot of the witnesses looked over at us from time to time, but then they'd look back. But she didn't take her eyes off of us, so that was a very uncomfortable feeling.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I disliked it intensely when she snapped her fingers at us. That's when I thought, don't snap your fingers at me, lady.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We're back on LARRY KING LIVE. That's the fingers of Ted Rowlands holding the latest edition of "The Santa Maria Times." Not guilty on all counts. I understand, Ted, you also have a poll result, right?

ROWLANDS: Yeah, CNN-"USA Today"-Gallup poll is out already on this. Verdict in the Michael Jackson case: 34 percent of those polled say they agree with it, 48 percent say they disagree. This is an interesting one. Outraged by the verdict in the Jackson trial is the question: Yes, 24 percent; no, 73 percent. Clearly people, maybe not agreeing with the verdict, but by no stretch of the imagination outraged, and then the question you asked everybody, are you surprised by the verdict? Yes, 47 percent; no, 52 percent. The latest.

KING: Surprised, Cynthia?

ROWLANDS: From the polling of CNN and "USA Today."

KING: Are you surprised at that poll? MCFADDEN: I think that's -- I think that's really interesting.

KING: Thirty-four percent support it and 47 don't?

MCFADDEN: Forty-eight percent disagree with the verdict. You know, it's really hard, especially when you're not in the courtroom, Larry. I mean, it's easy to have a 3,000-mile-away opinion. And I think that you know...

KING: Well, you haven't attended the trial is what you're saying.

MCFADDEN: Yeah, we haven't seen it all. I mean, one the virtues of having a camera in the courtroom is that the public actually has a much more informed opinion, because they get to evaluate the witnesses for themselves and not through the filters of those of us (INAUDIBLE).

KING: Jane Mitchell, why do you think more people aren't upset? They may disagree with it, but only 30 percent -- less than 30 percent are upset?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Because they've been hearing about this case from the beginning, and they've been hearing about the problems with this case. The timeline, the conspiracy charge that was so problematical of the cover-up, the conspiracy begins 19 days before the alleged molestation. And people, pundits have been saying what are they covering up before an alleged incident even occurs? And the jurors themselves said during their news conference that the timeline did bother them. There were a lot of things that just didn't make sense and add up about the prosecution's case, and they never fully explained them away. And you can't convict somebody because you have a gut feeling, or something doesn't seem right, when you have a 98- page jury instruction book.

KING: Chicago to Reverend Jesse Jackson, the spiritual adviser to Michael Jackson, founder and president of the Rainbow/PUSH coalition. Were you surprised, really?

JESSE JACKSON, RAINBOW/PUSH COALITION: Well, I had a queasy feeling. Really, I felt the pain, the stress. I hoped for the best, I really expected the worst. In the sense that the jury was never sequestered. And there were really two trials. There was the public media trial, and there was the courtroom trial. And then in the media trial, you had the talk show hosts, whether it was Nancy Grace or O'Reilly and a thousand others saying Michael was guilty over and over again, Court TV, Michael is guilty. And yet in the courtroom, they discern opinions and impressions from fact in evidence. And they were able to make the distinction. And I was delighted that they did, but I was not sure that they could.

KING: Did you talk to Michael?

JESSE JACKSON: This morning. He called me this morning. We did have a talk today. Michael's had the combination a of the extreme excruciating pain in his back, the fall he had in Munich, Germany, complicating that by the stress he's going under, and I suppose with that kind of pain and stress, it takes away your appetite. So he lost a lot of weight. Somebody with his own sense of his own innocence, and he felt confidence in this jury, confidence in Mesereau, and he felt that he would be, in fact, exonerated today, and in the end, that happened.

KING: Did you pray with him on the phone? What was the call about?

JESSE JACKSON: Well, he called because there was concern about the outcome of the trial today. And throughout the thing -- excuse me -- I've said to Michael, that if he declared his innocence, that if you have -- the jury has the faith, you must have the faith and God has the power. That you are a champion. And sometimes -- excuse me -- champions fall down. You get up again. The ground is no place for a champion. I tried to keep his spirits boosted.

KING: Thank you very much, Jesse. Reverend Jesse Jackson, the spiritual adviser to Michael Jackson, from his hometown of Chicago. We'll be back with more of our panel. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Tomorrow night on LARRY KING LIVE, an exclusive prime-time interview with Tom Mesereau. A very happy man tonight, the very successful defense attorney in this case.

What happens to his career, Cynthia?

MCFADDEN: Home run. I mean, nothing could have been more high- profile. Tom Mesereau has a lot to applaud (ph) tonight.

KING: He's through the roof now, right?

MCFADDEN: He is. I mean, he will be getting phone calls from everybody who gets in trouble, certainly.

KING: Cardoza, are you jealous?

CARDOZA: Am I jealous? You know? On a certain level, sure, I would have loved to have tried this case, but kudos to him. He tried a heck of a case. He put it on the line. He did it all. He did it right. He won. That's great. I'm really happy for him. I think he's a great guy.

I talked to him a little bit during the trial because the bailiffs would shoe us off, you know, don't talk, you can't talk. But I think it's great for him, and I'm really happy for him.

And if I might add -- you know why people are mad, Larry? Remember that poll you just talked about? Because there are some people who by that 1108, the past prior sexual misconduct, think that Michael Jackson's a pedophile. And if they have that mind-set, they are going to say, I don't care if he did this one, I would have found him guilty and I would have kept him off the street. I am not letting him at another little boy, and those are the people who say they're outraged. KING: Craig, do you think people, the viewer at home, was thrown by the pundits? That they may have built an opinion based on what the pundits were saying that had nothing to do with what jury was thinking?

SMITH: Well, I don't know that people were really thrown. And I don't know that the pundits were uniformly predicting a verdict of guilty on the molestation charges. I think for every pundit or analyst that you could find that thought it was going well for the prosecution there were at least one or two others who thought that the defense was going to pull it out. So, I don't think people were fooled by whatever the pundits were predicting.

KING: I'm going to take a break, come back and get a final comment from all our panelists on what happens to Michael Jackson now. Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We all came in with our personal beliefs, and some of those did differ. But we spent a lot of time really seriously studying the evidence and looking at the testimony, and the jury instructions, and obviously came to an agreement.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Before we get some final thoughts from our panel, we're going to meet another juror. Raymond Hultman is joining us from Santa Maria.

Raymond, what did you think of the prosecution and how well -- or didn't -- not well -- they presented this case?

RAYMOND HULTMAN, JACKSON TRIAL JUROR: Larry, I think they presented the case probably as well as they could have under the circumstances. I think where the jury was left with some questions was the fact that there was not enough evidence to directly point to the accuser, and I think that was the most troublesome issue with the whole deliberation thing.

KING: Did you ever, Raymond, come close to guilty on any of the counts yourself?

HULTMAN: Well, to be quite honest, and everyone in the deliberation room was aware of this, I had some real strong feelings toward guilt after I viewed the sheriff's interview with Gavin Arviso, and I don't know if it was because of some naivete on my part, but in any event, it was quite -- it was quite compelling to me. But that's really not completely what this trial was all about, or what deliberation was all about. It had to do with other circumstances that were taking place, and just basically the credibility of the witness.

KING: Did other jurors, say, talk other jurors out of opinions? Did someone say, I think this and another juror would say, well, you ought to think this.

HULTMAN: No, I don't think anybody was really talked out of an opinion. It was more of presenting additional information about the timing of certain events. I mean, it's very conceivable that somebody can appear to be telling the truth and their demeanor would indicate that and everything else. But when you look at past history of the accuser, there's some doubt. There's room for reasonable doubt, and really, that's what it was all about.

KING: And you didn't let -- you didn't let the past record of Michael Jackson affect you with regard to this charge?

HULTMAN: No. It affected me. It affected me, certainly. There were -- there were some jurors that I think would have you believe that this was all about the accuser and all about the Arvisos in this particular case but I tried to make it quite clear that I felt it was very important to consider all of the evidence in the case including the evidence that was presented from 93-94, all of the other circumstances surrounding the actual molestation accusation.

But that evidence could only be used in the case of the 93-94 case to show a possible pattern that Michael Jackson may do this kind of crime, and -- but when it came right down to it, we were looking at 10 counts in this case that dealt with very specific items, and they were all directed at the accuser, the -- Gavin Arviso -- and we had to make a decision on that and it showed that there could be reasonable doubt.

KING: So you will sleep well tonight?

HULTMAN: I will sleep well. I mean, I don't think I lost any of my convictions. I -- I feel that Michael Jackson probably has molested boys. I cannot believe that, after some of the testimony was offered, I can't believe that this man could sleep in the same bedroom for 365 straight days and not do something more than just watch television and eat popcorn. I mean, that doesn't make sense to me, but that doesn't make him guilty of the charges that were presented in this case and that's where we had to make our decision.

KING: Thank you, Raymond. Raymond Hultman, a very honest appraisal. Thank you, Raymond, very much. Extraordinary, huh, Cynthia?

MCFADDEN: Yes, really, these two jurors have been just fascinating. Both of them suggest that they thought there was some truth to the allegations of past molestation, but there wasn't enough in this case. Very interesting.

KING: Yes, isn't it to you, Jane?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Oh, absolutely. I think what that juror just said hits the nail on the head. Michael Jackson obviously still has huge image problems, but America is willing to forgive, as long as the individual in question admits mistakes they did make and is willing to change and grow, and I think that's the real challenge for Jackson: can he change and can he grow and learn from all of this? KING: I apologize to the rest of the panel, but they will be back as we are, as they say in the business, plumb out of time. Ted Rowlands, Brooke Anderson, Jane Velez-Mitchell, Michael Cardoza, Craig Smith, Cynthia McFadden, and all of our other guests.

Don't forget, Tom Mesereau, exclusive prime-time appearance tomorrow night on LARRY KING LIVE. We will include your phone calls for the very successful defense attorney. My whole family was supposed to be on the show tonight but because of this, we taped them earlier and it will air Sunday night on Father's Day night.


TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

? 2005 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us. All external sites will open in a new browser.
CNN.com does not endorse external sites.
Denotes premium content.
Add RSS headlines.

Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 4:01 AM JST
Updated: Thu, Jun 16 2005 4:11 AM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post



CNN) -- The following are a sample of reactions to the acquittal of Michael Jackson on all 10 charges in his child molestation trial:

Chant outside the courthouse:

M.J. innocent, innocent, innocent!

Jury's statement read by the judge:

We the jury, feeling the weight of the world's eyes upon us, all thoroughly and meticulously studied the testimony, evidence and rules of procedure presented in this court since Janurary 31, 2005. Following the jury instructions, we confidently came to our verdicts. It is our hope that this case is a testament to the belief in our justice system's integrity and the truth. We would like the public to allow us to return to our private lives as anonymously as we came.

Statement from lawyer of Debbie Rowe, one of two ex-wives of Michael Jackson and mother of two of his children:

Debbie is overjoyed that the justice system really works, regardless of which side called her to testify at the trial.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson, spiritual adviser to Michael Jackson:

The jury has spoken. I hope that many lessons will be learned from this. The healing process must begin. And Michael must assess the impact of the very impropriety of these problems that got him into this trouble. We hope that all those involved now will learn a lesson that we will go through another stage.

He was tried and convicted in many newsrooms, on many TV shows. The jury had the capacity in the end to discern innuendo and suggestions from fact.

The Rev. Al Sharpton:

I think that this is a vindication for people that believe that people are innocent until proven guilty. I think that there are no winners here. I don't think that there's reason for Michael or those opposed to Michael to gloat. There's a lot of pain, a lot of hurt here -- children have been dragged into court, Michael's reputation has been damaged severely, but I think the criminal justice system worked this time.

Debra Opri, Jackson family attorney:

I am not shocked. I expected it. Did I cry? Yeah. Am I going to cry again? Yeah. After a year the stress is just melting away, and I'm so happy for Katherine, Joe, Michael, LaToya, Janet, Tito, Jackie, Jermaine and Randy. I spoke with the family as they were exiting and they're all very happy and very relieved.

Elizabeth Taylor, actress and friend:

Thank God Michael is vindicated for all time. Now maybe people will leave him alone.

Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/13/jackson.reax/index.html


Posted by MJ Friend Anna at 2:27 AM JST
Updated: Thu, Jun 16 2005 3:51 AM JST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post

Newer | Latest | Older