In a surprise move, the rebuttal phase of the Michael Jackson trial ended on Friday in hushed darkness with the prosecution showing a July 6, 2003 videotape of Jackson's then-13 year-old accuser quietly, somberly and seemingly reluctantly telling law enforcement interrogators for the first time of his alleged abuse by Jackson in early '03.
The hour-long interview ended with the boy pleading with two Santa Barbara detectives not to tell his mother about the molestations, leaving at least two jurors wiping their eyes, and casting clouds of doubt over the defense's assertions that the boy was coached by his grifter mother to falsely accuse Jackson for financial gain.
Although Jackson's defense attorneys had stated they would recall the boy, his mother and possibly others to rebut the videotape, they did not do so.
"How long is it going to take?" asked the boy — dressed in a short-sleeved blue dress shirt, denim shorts, white striped sneakers and white socks — to open the videotape.
After discussing baseball, school, and his cancer with Sgt. Steve Robel, the boy said, "Michael Jackson called me in the hospital [in 2000]. He started telling me he wanted me to come down to the ranch."
The boy said Jackson took him aside. "Michael asked me to ask him in front of my parents if I could stay with him in his bedroom. He wanted just me to come and I asked if my brother could come."
He said Jackson showed him and his brother pictures of naked girls on a laptop computer.
After several additional visits, the boy hadn't heard from Jackson for some time when the singer called to ask him to participate in the Martin Bashir dicumentary. "He said he wanted to make me an actor and this was my audition, and he said to talk about my cancer and how he helped me."
After the Bashir film aired in February, '03, Jackson faced a firestorm of criticism for saying that he shared his bed with children, but that it was innocent and non-sexual.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - james mclafferty
Hi ERIC:-),you should of known i'd have to find something.
Jackson may never befriend another child
By Jenny Booth, Times Online
Michael Jackson’s child molestation trial has left the singer a nervous wreck who barely sleeps or eats, and may never again befriend a child, his father has claimed.Joe Jackson said the trial may have frightened his son out of future friendships with children.
"He’s not against the kids," he said. "He’s helped so many kids all over the world. But what he’s afraid of, somebody may try something, try to make money. Plan something. "He knows that all kids are pure in heart. They don’t know anything about any dirty stuff, that comes from the grown ups."The singer's father blamed his son's ordeal on Martin Bashir, the British journalist whose documentary included an admission by the singer that he shared his bed with children. The programme led to the police investigation. Mr Jackson accused Mr Bashir of being out to make money. But he said his son was optimistic of being acquitted and had not ruled out a return to the charts.He said that the court case had placed a heavy toll on the Jackson family."It’s the worst experience I’ve ever had," he told interviewer Daphne Barak, according to the New York Daily News."I look around and everybody else is crying. I’m wide-eyed and wondering, How come I can’t cry? If I started crying, I would probably never stop."Mr Jackson said the pop star had lost a lot of weight and that both his family and fans were desperately trying to encourage him to eat."We always mention to him about it, but he says, ’I’m going to eat. I’ll eat some.’ But he doesn’t eat enough," he said."He takes a couple of bites. He doesn’t sleep a bit, and that bothers me. In his situation, he should be getting plenty of rest and eating plenty of wholesome food to keep him strong. It’s very important."He’s taking it pretty hard, because a lot of stones have been hurled at him."Mr Jackson said his son had wanted to take the stand during his trial at Santa Maria court, California, but had been advised against it.
2 - Eric Olsen
the reports have said he looked even more pale and frail in court last week, especially Friday.
So what do you think about this last bit of drama? It seems to me the prosecution landed a serious blow here at the end.
3 - Eric Berlin
Yeah, serious is right. I think the fact that the defense is not even going to try and refute this damning evidence tells you all you need to know.
4 - Eric Olsen
some have said they were afraid of looking extremely unsympathetic if they had hammered at the kid anymore
5 - Eric Berlin
I suppose it comes down to the jury deciding how "coached" the kid looks... and don't you give a scared 13-year old the benefit of the doubt here? If I'm on the jury, and I'm pretty sure the kid is telling the truth, or at least some version of it, I send MJ to the slammy-slam.
How 'bout you, EO?
6 - Eric Olsen
I've had the feeling all along that the kidnapping and conspiracy stuff was a distraction and a reach and did not help the prosecution at all, especially because it brought the yelping lunatic mother in.
BUT, despite the unsavoryness of the family, the actual molestation and alcohol charges have always seemed credible and I have been waiting for the prosecution to come up with someting that made these allegations real for observers and, most importantly, the jury.
I think seeing the boy just months after the alleged events, at 13 as opposed to the 15 he is now, and seeing what feelings he had about what he said happened, was exactly what the prosecution needed to cut through the weeks of Arviso-slamming the defense has done the last weeks.
7 - James Williams
This sounds like a pretty major piece of evidence if taken by itself. However, the jury is also going to have to consider that the accuser emphatically told other authority figures (school and social services) that nothing happened and waited until after talking to a lawyer and meeting the psychologist from the 1993 case before making his allegations. Finally after all of that he appears to be telling the police that they shouldn't tell his mother (as if he is telling his story for the firt time). So molestation was denied twice by the accuser when questioned by the people who are usually the first to find out about these things and then bring in police. And there is the paralegal that testified that the mother put her children in acting classes so they could be convincing at psych evaluations during the JC Penny's shakedown. Closing arguments from the defense will focus on this. So there are a lot of major things to consider on both sides. Honestly what does one juror who thinks the tape is compelling say to another who thinks video tape is the result of acting classes and mom's coaching? This will not be an easy thing to decide.
8 - William Badman
Michael Jackson is innocent of all the charges, the Arviso family are scum, Allegations - Credible???, yes about as credible as teh Jehovahs Witnesses theory that the world is going to end in 44 days - it never happened. After this trial is over they just need to leave Michael Jackson alone, and let him get on with his life, can't wait for him to return to the charts!!!
9 - Eric Berlin
Good points, James. I haven't kept up with the trial very closely. Seems a media trial like this wouldn't be complete without bizarre complications.
10 - james mclafferty
Hi eric,i'm not quite sure what to think?, if it's just what was heard at the start of the case(which i think it was),then surely it isn't anything new,BUT i do however concede that it could have some power being the last thing the jury saw.The fact is though they shouldn't hinge their judgment on that one piece.
11 - Josia
Nice writing Eric -
Is this the same MJ with the huge smile and afro that we watched dance his way to stardom?? Whenever I read something about the case I can't get him and his brothers doing ABC when he was about 8 out of my head.
Anyhow - another icon bites the dust - I think it's something we're becoming used to nowadays.
There is a much bigger scenario being played out here - we just have a glimpse of a very very narrow angle of reality in this world. The big picture will become clearer in the coming years.
Even though he's been caught red-handed molesting a cancer patient no less - I have to say I feel sorry for him - to go so high and so low in one lifetime is probably extremely painful.
J.
12 - Mahesh
I followed this trial closely and have come to the opinion that this family is after money. They have done this before (eg. J C Penny, welfare fraud) and have repetedly lied in court. Also the Paralegal's testimony has proved that the accusers mother is a inveterate liar and a seasoned grifter. Her testimony also proves that her delinquent children are/were her associates in fooling the courts by lying under oath and following the script.
To eric berlin who writes: " and don't you give a scared 13-year old the benefit of the doubt here?"
Why not give Michael the benefit of doubt. Isn't that the law. Doesn't that fall under "proof beyond resonable doubt" clause. Afterall this case is about doubts.
13 - james mclafferty
Hi josia:-).Excuse my ignorance but where has it been proved without a shadow of a doubt that mj red handedly was caught?,that's not me going on the defensive i'm just curious?.He might still be innocent.
14 - Josia
Hi James -
That's American democracy at its finest - just like with the Clinton trial - do you really think for a second that he was innocent even though he got off? (whoops!) Even if MJ is pardoned by the President himself I have no doubts in my mind or heart about what really happened. You can see the guy is sick and has probably been sick for a very long time. C'mon - would you leave him alone with your child?
J.
15 - Mahesh
Josia, You seem upset. Are you not geting the welfare checks, child support payments on time?
16 - Eric Olsen
Hi Josia, thanks and yes, I do feel sorry for him. His fall is staggering and startling.
James, James, William and Mahesh - I agree the Arvisos are shady at best best and appear to have latched on to celebrities for money and support. I think the mother is a loon and a con artist.
BUT, the point of the video is that despite whatever else, the kid is credible -- emotionally and factually -- about what he says Jackson did to him, especially when he was 13 and the events were fresh.
No, from all accounts of the courtroom -- again I reiterate that the public has been done a grave disservice by being denied access to the trial -- the boy came across as very believable and disturbed by the whole thing. If the defense had thought that anyone would believe that he was faking in he interview, they would have made him testify again.
The fact that they didn't call him back is very telling, as Eric B said.
17 - Eric Berlin
It's a little bit shocking that the defense wouldn't dare take another crack at the now 15 year-old.
18 - Eric Olsen
one columnist said the jury seeing him in person after seeing the video would oly remind them of what they saw
19 - Eric Berlin
Yes, but as you mentioned, there's a difference between a scared 13-year old on tape and a possibly shifty and less sympathetic 15-year old on the stand. With all the other factors and complications in the case, it's astounding that the defense would let this possibly damning evidence seep into jurors' minds without any kind of counter-punch.
20 - Eric Olsen
hence the dramatic shift in the tone
21 - William Badman
Gavin Arviso is a lying f**k, not worth the time of day, sorry i have seen right through him, he to many inconsistancies, he keeps changing his story, he lied before, and have coaching lessons on how to lie better in court, oops i mean sound more convincing!
22 - P
You guys are not reporting the truth, this is an excerpt from Fox News about the tape that was shown Friday:
"And then there was the boy's actual demeanor: He does not once cry or reach for a tissue. He seems embarrassed, but maybe more about selling out a friend than about being molested.
He is clearly upset when he talks about Jackson having changed his phone numbers in the past so the boy couldn't reach him. After he's finished telling his story, one of the cops hands him a soft drink and a straw and his mood brightens immediately.
Much was made in court about his composure. But the tape was more about shock than emotion. This wasn't "Ordinary People." No one in the room wept as the boy mumbled his story and looked to the ground.
Still, shock matters. The task left to defense attorney Tom Mesereau in his closing argument will be to push the jury away from what they know now: Jackson drinks and he sleeps in his bed with 12-year-old boys.
Mesereau must persuade these dozen jurors that even if Jackson did this in the past, he didn't do it with this boy. He will have to show all the inconsistencies in the boy's story, his court testimony, what he said in front of the grand jury and what he told Robel and Zelis."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,158077,00.html
Now try and spin that Mr. Eric :-)
23 - Mahesh
Eric, its quite possible that the defence doesnt want to have a crack at gavin because they believe he is too good a lier, and they don't want the jury fooled by his theatrical performance. Remember he has done this before, lied before a jury against his father, Lied in the JC PENNY case and the jury believed him then. Maybe the defence believes that Gavin is too good lier, obviously the acting lessons have done him good, and they don't want him fool this jury.
24 - Eric Olsen
Friedman is a Jackson apologist and lickspittle: consider it spun
25 - Dennis
I still say that Jackson paid out multi million dollar settlements to two other boys to silence them, would he have done that if he was innocent?
I don't think so and therefore the present accuser is most likely telling the truth, if I were on that jury I would certainly believe him in view os the previous cases.