Jackson pleads not guilty to charges, including some new ones:
- Michael Jackson pleaded not guilty Friday to an indictment charging him with child molestation and a conspiracy count alleging child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion.
The indictment also included four counts of lewd acts involving a minor child, one count involving an attempted lewd act upon a child and four counts of administering an intoxicating agent.
The alleged child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion are not individual charges. Rather they are alleged as the circumstances leading to the conspiracy count.
....The indictment, issued in secret earlier this month, replaces charges filed by prosecutors that alleged seven counts of lewd or lascivious conduct involving a child under 14 and two counts of administering an intoxicant to a child under 14.
....Thomas Mesereau Jr., a veteran criminal defense attorney, took over the case last weekend after Jackson decided to remove Mark Geragos and Benjamin Brafman, the two high-profile lawyers who had been directing his defense. The star said he wanted lawyers who could devote full time to his case.
With an indictment, prosecutors don't have to put on a preliminary hearing in front of the judge to show there is enough evidence to put the pop star on trial.
Jackson, who was scolded by the judge for being late to his previous arraignment, arrived 40 minutes early. He waved to several hundred fans as he entered the courtroom under an umbrella.
...."The indictment means things are getting serious," said Loyola University Professor Laurie Levenson. She said Jackson's behavior at the arraignment sets the tone for the rest of the case. [AP]
Spin this any way you wish, but this is deadly serious for Jackson - those new charges sound ugly as hell: "a conspiracy count alleging child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion."
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Sandra Smallson
I have been swinging one way or the other since I found out that the charges were lewd and lascivious acts and didn't include any form of penetration...BUT after today, I am firmly leaning towards innocence of the great man.
I don't think the poor sod did a darn thing. He may have been naive but that is precisely why this woman and the Sneddon moron and all around her have taken advantage of MJ's naivety.
Two reasons; these new charges. It is well known in the Legal business that when you don't think your case is strong enough, you add charges upon charges all in the hope that you get your target on atleast 1 0r 2. Conspiracy? With 28 individual charges? Oh, Poppycock! Mr Sneddon. He is really convincing me further and further that this is a personal vendetta. The crowning point is finding out that as far back as February 2003..Mr Sneddon contacted the alleged victim and his mother just A WEEK after the alleged FIRST act happened. There were no rumours of molestation even within the inner circles until March or as smart people will see it UNTIL SNEDDON GOT A HOLD OF THIS CRAZY WOMAN and her vulnerable child.
Yup. As MJ would say..I think it's a BIG LIE. It is a shame that the public think just bcos the Grand Jury indicted MJ that means there truly must be serious evidence..ha! There is nothing more one sided than a Grand Jury. It's all about the prosecution. As long as that boy continued to claim MJ touched him, Sneddon did not need to produce any smoking gun. The Grand Jury were ready to indict. They did that with little time and probably little thought.
IT IS A BIG LIE. I shall stick with that until the Prosecution show that this is not the moronic Sneddon looking for a last hurrah before his retirement. As for the mother, she's got issues. I pity her if she takes the stand. She's the sort every Lawyer would like to get on the stand. A total destruction of her from credibility to motive. She's a mess. She alone can win the case for the defence.
2 - Marc
"She's a mess. She alone can win the case for the defence."
Replace the word "she" with Jackson. And replace the word "Defense" with "Prosecutor," and the end result is the same.
I will also wait for a jury to decide, but I have one question for you Sandra.
Would you have your children "sleep" with this "poor sod" as you call him?
He may in fact be found innocent and not have a reserved room in the Iron Bar Hotel. In the court of Public Opinion he should be hung from the highest tree. If this society supports the concept of a 40 plus year old man sleeping with young boys (already admitted too) by buying movies, CD'S or any other Jackson produced material it deserves what it gets. And BTW it will also have no right to complain about little boys being molested in Churches.
3 - Eric Olsen
I have always thought MJ was a great artist, but it is inconceivable to me that at this point in the game anyone could call him a "great man." My view is much closer to Marc's, and I am not assuming guilt in this case either.
4 - Yo Bitch
Bee Otch!!!
5 - Sandra Smallson
Marc...When I have a son, would I mind him sharing a bed with his uncle, if I had a brother? I'll put one of my cousins in place of an uncle. Would I mind my 12 year old son napping on uncle Richard's bed with uncle Richard in it? I would not. Would I mind my son napping on my husband's friend's bed, let's say Mark, in it? I'm not sure I would mind. I don't know MJ as I know my cousin or the friend of lover. I only know what's been portrayed by the media. So, in effect, I have no qualms about my furture son sharing a bed with an older man provided I know the man in question.
What you should worry about is a world that is ready to call a man a pedophile bcos he has admitted sharing a bed with young friends..we must remember that he also said he slept on the floor most times. Ofcourse, it's odd. Why is a 40-some'ng old man friends with young people? Can't he get friends his own age or nearer his generation? Downright peculiar if you ask me.
Does that mean that MJ molested this young cancer patient? NO. Plus, there is nothing the prosecution have done to make us think that's the case. All they've done is sensationalise this case at every opportunity. Now, they've suddenly added two more charges..one of them with a whopping 28 subheadings..whoopee doo..MJ must be a criminal. Everyone lock up your kids.
I'm sorry that I don't buy into it just yet. Eric, MJ is a great man to me. He is a man that is an Artist. You can not split the two. He is charitable and has been very generous his entire life and wouldn't it just be typical of LIFE that it may be his charitable nature that has put him in this mess.
Until the defense get a chance to interrogate this boy and the psychiatrist or hypnotist,,the mother and all who stand by the alleged victim, I now firmly believe it is a witch hunt. All that has happened indicates it's precisely that.
That Diana woman from Court TV and her "sources" knowing the case before MJ himself. Gloria Allred who seems to have no life but to hound MJ. The persecutors are the same and I smell a rat.
They would have to go some than simply telling me that MJ admits he shares his bed with boys before I am convinced of all these trumped up charges.
Marc, if that's all it takes for you to be convinced someone is a freak..good luck to you. It takes more than that to convince me. It may be odd. It may not be what society views as normal and appropriate behaviour but I do not think MJ is the only man in America to innocently share a bed with a young child.
I look forward to the trial and this "strong" case the prosecutors have allegedly got. I fear that a lot of you will find it a huge disappointment when u realise that Sneddon has nothing but suspicions based on nothing.
Put MJ on the stands by all means. Everyone already knows he's eccentric. He can not win the case for Sneddon if he mainntains that he did nothing. The Jury may think he's mad for saying "yes, I share a bed" but that might well work in his favour. They'll say he's just a 12 yr old in a 45 yr old man's body who never grew up due to his extraordinary childhood. That is not enough to convince a jury to send a man to jail for sexually molesting a child.
What I hope is that sentimental, sanctimonious morons do not crawl out of the woodwork and prevent the defence from going to town on the boy or his mother. If he can talk big about MJ touching him to Sneddon and the "hypnotist". He better not have some health issues or whatever problems when it is time for Jackson's people to ask him in detail to truly tell us what he is saying and not what they are telling him to say. The TRUTH will be revealed in that cross examination. I forsee a cracker as long as the defence are allowed to do their job and not be prevented by people telling them he is a child or he has cancer. He was all those things when he accused a man of molesting him. He is in a position to potentially ruin someones life. He better be in good shape to deal with the heat that's gonna come his way. No mercy should be shown. He may be a boy but once in Court, he is the ACCUSER. I hope every one remembers that.
6 - Stately Wayne Manor
By your "logic" Sandra, because MJ is an
artist he is a great man? Jim Morrison
was a great showman,singer and writer.
He was also a very violent,misogynistic
& drunken A hole. Was he a great artist?
Yeah sure,Great man??? hardly.It's very
easy to draw a line between the two w/o
detracting from artistic accomplishment.
7 - Sandra Smallson
Stately wayne, dear boy..how do you deduce that interpretation of "my logic" from my post? I don't imply that in any part of my post. What is it you do not understand in the sentences that seem to have confused you, my pet?
8 - Stately Wayne Manor
From your statement:"..MJ is a great man
to me.He is a man that is an artist.You
cannot split the two."
That's where Sandra,my dear. If this is not what was implied,then your ambiguity
& general lack of communicative skill is
forgiven.
9 - Sandra Smallson
Dear oh dear! Summary and compehension. Read that whole paragraph where you have extracted those sentences from. Is it at all possible in that head of yours that I was saying MJ is a man 1st before an Artist? Thus, the 2 can't be split? Infact, as I continue, I believe I write out why I think he's a great man...
Please, do me no favours. Forgive me nothing. It was my mistake. I should be punished for not realising that your teflon brain would encounter difficulties.
10 - CC
MJ needs to be away from kids. Bottom line!!!
11 - TDavid
The courts will decide of course, but if you take out the "non" then he got the plea correct, I think.
12 - JB
I would like to say, that if you all think MJ is great, your crazy as he is
look at the facts, Brought off one child
and he couldn,t buy out the second child
and if it was your child you would be doing the same thing, so you all need to
get your head out of your a__ and start
thinking about what his problems are.
13 - Nick Jones
Jackson's problem is that, at one time he had more money than he knew what to do with; was coddled by an entourage that would never say "no" to him and give him a reality check when he needed it; and fell into to a delusional state where his behavior, whether inappropriate, criminal or not, could be perceived as such by everyone but him.
It wouldn't be the first time it's happened.
14 - Sandra Smallson
JB:........look at the facts, Brought off one child and he couldn,t buy out the second child and if it was your child you would be doing the same thing, so you all need to get your head out of your a__ and start thinking about what his problems are.
Sandra: and if it was your child that was molested, would you have taken money for compensation rather than make sure the alleged pedophile was punished? And if it was your child would you have allowed your cancer stricken young boy to live in a house with a man who had previously been accused of child molestation and as you all show, the whole world thinks is a freak?
I think you need to get YOUR head out of your ass and being to realise what the motivations and issues of the parents of these children are. It wouldn't be the 1st time a rich person is being taken advantage of, either.
As an afterthought, nobody is yet to explain why it was okay for Woody allen to sleep with his adopted child and eventually marry her and still be respected by a majority of Hollywood. Is it because Mj's alleged victims are boys? Where are the gay rights people when you need them? A child is adopted by your wife and brought into your marital home and you start sleeping with her? Where was all this righteous indignation then? What has happened to Woody allen now? What about good old Mr Polanski? Where is the outrage? I speak as he received a standing ovation in absentia at the Oscars last year.
Is it because their victims were girls? Or is it because they are both white? Don't crack passe jokes about Mj's skin colour. The point is, he is still a powerful black man and if Sneddon is what he looks like he is, that could easily be a motivation. I am not saying it is, but I rule nothing out. So don't talk utter nonsense about MJ and his problems when similar case scenarios have been overlooked and even somewhat accepted. Here, we haven't even had a trial yet and conclusions are being drawn.
I don't know what the legal field is going to do. With potential jurors who make up their minds before they have heard a shred of evidence, therefore throwing doubt on the jury system or with cases tried by just a Judge who could become corrupt. How to get a fair trial or try a case in the world today is becoming nigh impossible.
15 - Eric Olsen
Sandra, "powerful black man" - not if he has anything to say about it.
"Motives" - I agree there appear to be suspect motives of the accusers here. But that doesn't mean he didn't do it anymore than it means he did do it.
Sneddon racially motivated? Why on earth would he be? Where does this come from other than wishful thinking by a Jackson fan?
And the most screaming fallacy of all, the Allen and Polanski comparisons: Polanski can't enter the fucking country. He was charged with statutory rape. In what way was his behavior with a 13 year-old girl condoned?
Allen was vilified and his career has never been the same. His relationship with a girl toward whom he was a father figure is deplorable and disgusting. Who is cutting him slack? But there is also an enormous difference between 17 and 13, and Allen at least committed to the relationship - he married the girl.
I don't know what Jackson did or didn't do, but neither do you. What exactly are you defending here, Jackson's right to prey upon young boys?
16 - Sandra Smallson
What I am defending, Eric, since you ask, is Jackson's right to the presumption of innocence. It is a shame taht I should even have to defend it. None of you have given him that chance for a whole host of reasons you all claim points to guilt. I have said, I am not convinced. For several reasons that I have written in the posts above.
Neither you nor I know that Jackson "preys" on little boys. MJ may not want to be classified as a powerful black man but that is what he is. His lack of desire to be seen as such does not suddenly make him something else. I like MJ but I am not an avid fan as such. I shan't shed any tears if he were to be found guilty. So, bringing up the race issue has nothing to do with my being a fan. The same way those who believe in his guilt are bringing up all sorts of things, that's the same way I, who believes in his innocence will bring up any possible scenario. I do not see what you find outlandish about that suggestion.
You question it because you have already made up your mind on MJ. Were it not MJ and there was a D.A who tried to take a man down 10 years ago and due to civil settlement had his case blwon out of the water, and then 10 years later same DA talks to another supposed victim and a week later the supposed victim suddenly accuses a black man of child molestation. again, the D.A holds a press conference practically gloating and talking about not listening to "that type of music". Then there is Diana (Court TV woman) who has an "inside" source and seems to know everything before anybody. The only woman to interview this D.A who any sensible person knows is the inside source. We come to arraignment. Trumped up charges of conspiracy are added. Infact, from the get go, pleas for any "past" victims were sent out...D.A white, accuser..black. In the American climate, I do not see why it has to be a fan of the black man that would come up with such reasoning. It's a perfectly decent point to raise because of the behaviour and history of the D.A. It might be complete rubbish but there is nothing so unreasonable about mentioning it.
Like I mentioned, Polanski was given a standing ovation by the audience at the Oscars. Woody allen is a free man and is still "respected". Are you telling me that Soon-Yi was 17 when Woody started touching her? Are you absolutely sure?
17 - Eric Olsen
Okay, I don't really want to fight about it - I just don't understand why you are so sure he is innocent. I'm not talking about the official legal "presumption of innocence," which is appropriate, I'm talking about why do you think this huge amount of "smoke" that has accumulated over the last 10 years+ is all without merit. It amazes me and seems delusional.
18 - Sandra Smallson
Eric, because of reasons I have given in comments 1,5 and 14. Plus, the fact that this "smoke" apparently accumulated "over 10 years" seem to be originating from just one chimney. Mr Sneddon and his recommended "hypnotists" and recommended "psychiatrists" and "work colleagues". Other Law offices and enforcers that have carried out investigations have found nothing. Our friend , Mr sneddon, obviously Einstein's love child, always seems to find smoke. It will take some serious evidence in the trial to convince me of MJ's guilt. I don't care how wierd the idiot is.
19 - Jon
Micheal Jackson is a great man! Ok! He is admired and loved all over the world! However he is a very odd man, he looks really odd and sometimes speaks odd but this is a general thing, he loves his children and other children in a good way, he is too loving to ever hurt a child! He has slept in the same bed as children, yes but this is one of his odd things! The world looks at this is bad/wrong, to him it is all love, and he loves everyone and everything! He's a very loving person!
These allegations are by stupid americans who are only interested in money, compensation for something that never happened! There is no raw proof and there never will be.
Jon
20 - Eric Olsen
Jon, how do you know there isn't any proof. How do you know he hasn't done any of the things he is accused of. How do you know that what jackson defines as "love" may not also be pedophilia? How do you know?
21 - Sandra Smallson
He doesn't, Eric. However, the same way you think MJ is guilty is the same way Jon thinks MJ is innocent. How do you know what you know, Eric? Why do you think he is guilty? The very reasons you think all those things, that's how Jon here has his own reasons for thinking MJ is innocent. Simple.
22 - Eric Olsen
Sandra, the difference is I don't pretend to know whether he is or is not guilty of these specific crimes - how could I? I think he is guilty of gross misjudgment, of being an egomaniac, of exceptionalism, of narcissism, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if he did the things he has been accused of, but I don't KNOW whether he did or he didn't. I am just always amazed by people who claim to KNOW he is innocent because he simply would not do something like that. Why do these people think they know him?
23 - Sandra Smallson
The reason they think they know him is because YOU don't know him yet you think he is an egomaniac & a narcissist amongst other things. You know him from the public persona we have come to know as MJ. From that same public profile, Jon has concluded that he is a nice guy who might be odd/disturbed but loves children and wouldn't do anything to hurt them. Meanwhile, NEITHER of you know the fellow.
Don't get me wrong, I understand where you are coming from but where you are coming from is the very same place Jon is coming from. You just have diff opinions.
We'll never know till the trial when Mr Sneddon gets to present what I hope is irrefutable evidence of MJ's guilt. The mere thought that this whole circus has been carried out for us to end up with a he said/she said/he said and some circumstantial nonsense that could mean a hundred different things is enough to drive even MJ's worst enemy to the streets marching in support of the man. At that point, MJ would be fully entitled to and had better sue Sneddon, the boy and his family, the whole Santa Monica Police department and Court TV for defamation, slander, libel and many more. We await.
24 - Sandra Smallson
When I said "I hope" I meant to add for Sneddon's sake. Personally, I hope MJ is not guilty.
25 - jack e. jett
Diane Dimond is by far the worst journalist in the world. She host her own newsgroup on yahoo and only allows compliments to flow through. TV careers are made and broken by scandals like this.
Look for the Don Sneedon Variety Special this Christmas. His back up dancers the Pervy Police.
jack