Skip to content

April 12th, 2005 Trial Analysis: Jay Jackson (Direct and Cross Examination), Part 3 of 3

January 29, 2013

Jay Jackson believed that the kids were being tutored at Neverland (after they returned from Miami), based on the fact that he was told by Frank Cascio that there wouldn’t be a need for him (Jay) to enroll the kids in school again because they were going back to Neverland. Jay Jackson never tried to confirm if they were really being tutored or not.

3 Q. Okay. Okay. Now, you said words to the

 

4 effect that the kids were hardly in school at one

 

5 point, right?

 

6 A. During the period that they were at

 

7 Neverland.

 

8 Q. Okay. Were they in school during the period

 

9 they were spending part of their time at your place?

 

10 A. Yes, sir.

 

11 Q. All right. Were they in school on February

 

12 16th, 2003?

 

13 A. I don’t believe so, sir.

 

14 Q. They were living at your place at least the

 

15 night of the 15th and the 16th, correct?

 

16 A. I would say so.

 

17 Q. But they weren’t going to school, correct?

 

18 A. That would be correct.

 

19 Q. To your knowledge, were they going to school

 

20 earlier that month?

 

21 A. Prior to leaving for Miami, they were going

 

22 to school.

 

23 Q. Okay. So at some point they’re going back

 

24 and forth to Neverland, right?

 

25 A. They came back once or twice.

 

26 Q. They were living at your place when they

 

27 come back, correct?

 

28 A. Okay. Right. 5869

 

1 Q. Sometimes they’re living at their

 

2 grandparents’ place, right?

 

3 A. I don’t think you’re saying this properly.

 

4 Q. Okay. Tell me — correct me, if you will.

 

5 A. They left for Neverland — they left for

 

6 Miami.

 

7 Q. Yes.

 

8 A. Basically they came back one time. And then

 

9 when — in March something, the whole family came

 

10 back. So during that period of time, Mr. Jackson —

 

11 according to what Frank was saying and what Janet

 

12 was saying is they were going to have a tutor.

 

13 There would not be a reason for me to put them back

 

14 into school for one day when in fact they may be —

 

15 it looks like they were leaving to go back to

 

16 Neverland.

 

17 Q. Okay. So on the 16th and the 15th when they

 

18 were staying at your place, you assumed they were

 

19 being tutored?

 

20 A. I believe that they were.

 

21 Q. Did you ask Janet —

 

22 A. Or that they were going to be, yes.

 

23 Q. Did you ask Janet if they were being

 

24 tutored?

 

25 A. I don’t think I did ask Janet.

 

26 Q. At some point they were back at your place

 

27 within a few days, because the rebuttal video was on

 

28 the 20th, right? 5870

 

1 A. The rebuttal video, and then they showed up

 

2 that night — or, excuse me, the next morning, and

 

3 then they were gone by the time I got home from work

 

4 that night.

 

5 Q. Okay. And are you asking Janet at this

 

6 point in time, “Janet, are the kids being tutored?”

 

7 A. No, I was not.

 

8 Q. Did you ever ask Frank to pay for tutoring?

 

9 A. No.

 

10 Q. And you never spoke to Mr. Jackson, so you

 

11 never asked him, right?

 

12 A. That would be correct.

 

13 Q. Okay. And you had already been to

 

14 Neverland, so you knew there was an amusement park

 

15 and a zoo and a lot of things that appealed to kids,

 

16 right?

 

17 A. Sure.

 

18 Q. And you must have assumed that when the kids

 

19 went to Neverland, they were having a fun time,

 

20 right? Given the amusement park and the way

 

21 Neverland’s portrayed, right?

 

22 A. That would be an assumption.

 

23 Q. Okay. But you personally never tried to

 

24 find out if they were being tutored at all at

 

25 Neverland, true?

 

26 A. That would be true.

Interestingly, Star and Gavin were forced to switch schools in November 2002 because they were being pressured into joining a street gang:

27 Q. Now, you mentioned at some point there was

 

28 an effort to get Gavin out of his local school 5871

 

1 because he was being pressured to join a gang, true?

 

2 A. Correct. Janet dealt with that.

 

3 Q. And when was that change of — excuse me.

 

4 When did that change of schools occur?

 

5 A. Probably around the time that I moved into

 

6 the St. Andrews apartment.

 

7 Q. And when was that?

 

8 A. In November of ‘02. Let’s see. Yeah.

 

9 Q. So in November of ‘02, Gavin’s pulled out of

 

10 a school because he is in some way being pressured

 

11 to join gangs, correct?

 

12 A. Both boys.

 

13 Q. Both boys in November of 2002 are taken out

 

14 of their school because of gang influence, right?

 

15 A. Actually, that would be — let me see, I got

 

16 to get my timeline, because I met Janet in ‘02. It

 

17 would have been November — November of ‘02. I

 

18 guess that’s correct.

 

19 Q. Okay. That’s November of ‘02 —

 

20 A. Yeah, that would have been correct.

 

21 Q. — before the trip to Miami in ‘03, right?

 

22 A. That’s correct.

 

23 Q. And when do you remember the trip to Miami

 

24 being?

 

25 A. February of ‘03.

Mesereau moved on from that incident to the beauty parlor rendezvous that Janet had with Jay Jackson in early March 2003. This is where Jay Jackson claimed that he first noticed the change in Gavin’s behavior. The beauty parlor was only a few blocks away from where Jay Jackson worked, so it raises the question as to why Janet and Gavin didn’t attempt to get help and leave with Jay Jackson if they were truly being “held against their will”. Mesereau wanted the jury to think about this, and he continued to pound the message home by asking Jay Jackson about Janet’s appearance at Family Court the next day, where she was surrounded by law enforcement that she could have reported her situation to, but didn’t:

26 Q. Okay. And approximately when did you tell

 

27 the jury you suddenly noticed that Gavin was not

 

28 acting like a nice kid? 5872

 

1 A. When I — when he showed up at the beauty

 

2 parlor or what they call the nail salon.

 

3 Q. Okay. And that’s approximately when?

 

4 A. Sometime in early March.

 

5 Q. Where was the beauty parlor or nail salon?

 

6 A. On Wilshire Boulevard.

 

7 Q. Is that near where you work?

 

8 A. Within about five minutes.

 

9 Q. You work at Wilshire and Federal, correct?

 

10 A. I did, yes, sir.

 

11 Q. Federal is the cross street to Wilshire,

 

12 true?

 

13 A. That is correct.

 

14 Q. And there is a federal building at Wilshire

 

15 and Federal, correct?

 

16 A. That’s incorrect.

 

17 Q. Is there a federal building nearby?

 

18 A. No, sir. There’s one nearby.

 

19 Q. Where is it?

20 A. The next couple blocks down.

 

21 Q. It’s a large federal building, true?

 

22 A. That is correct.

 

23 Q. And it’s a building that has the FBI office

 

24 in it, true?

 

25 A. A federal building. FBI sounds good.

 

26 Q. Ever been in that building?

 

27 A. No, I haven’t.

 

28 Q. Okay. But it’s two blocks from where you 5873

 

1 work?

 

2 A. Yes, sir.

 

3 Q. Okay.

 

4 A. Past the V.A.

 

5 Q. And Wilshire and Federal is not far from the

 

6 405 freeway, correct?

 

7 A. That would be true.

 

8 Q. How long — do you still work there?

 

9 A. I don’t work in that location, no, sir.

 

10 Q. How long did you work in that location?

 

11 A. Three years.

 

12 Q. And what were the years we’re talking about?

 

13 A. October of ‘01 through August of ‘04.

 

14 Q. Okay. So during the entire period that you

 

15 testified about this morning, you’re working at that

 

16 location, right?

 

17 A. That’s correct.

 

18 Q. And did you work there five days a week?

 

19 A. No, probably about 17 days straight without

 

20 a day off.

 

21 Q. Okay. And where was the salon again? A few

 

22 blocks away from where you worked?

 

23 A. Probably about five or six blocks down

 

24 Wilshire Boulevard.

 

25 Q. And where on Wilshire, if you remember?

 

26 A. By the McDonald’s. I’m not sure. There was

 

27 an Italian restaurant right there. I don’t have a

 

28 street crossing. 5874

 

1 Q. So would it be accurate to say that the

 

2 salon is a couple of blocks from your military base,

 

3 right?

 

4 A. Five or six blocks.

 

5 Q. And it’s a few blocks away from the federal

 

6 building, right?

 

7 A. That would be correct.

 

8 Q. Which you agree houses the FBI and other

 

9 federal agents, correct?

 

10 A. About three miles away, four miles away.

 

11 Q. All right. To your knowledge, how long was

 

12 Janet in the beauty salon on that particular

 

13 occasion?

 

14 A. I’m really not sure. I would speculate an

 

15 hour or two hours.

 

16 Q. And you went and visited the salon yourself,

 

17 true?

 

18 A. I did.

 

19 Q. Did you drive there?

 

20 A. I did.

 

21 Q. Parked your car, right?

 

22 A. I did.

 

23 Q. Walked into the salon, correct?

 

24 A. That is correct.

 

25 Q. And saw Janet when you walked in?

 

26 A. Janet was sitting there, right.

 

27 Q. Was Janet getting a treatment of sorts?

 

28 A. Nothing that I saw at that point. 5875

 

1 Q. Do you know if she already had some

 

2 attention there?

 

3 A. You know what? I really don’t know. I

 

4 really don’t know. I assume she did based on the

 

5 fact that she was there, but I don’t know.

 

6 Q. You spoke to Janet, right?

 

7 A. Yes, I did.

 

8 Q. You then saw Gavin and Vinnie come in,

 

9 right?

 

10 A. Correct.

 

11 Q. You spoke to Gavin, right?

 

12 A. I spoke to — yeah, I spoke to Gavin.

 

13 Q. To your knowledge, was that salon in the

 

14 Brentwood area of Los Angeles?

 

15 A. I believe that’s what they call the

 

16 Brentwood area.

 

17 Q. Was this near a cross street called

 

18 Barrington?

 

19 A. I would think that Barrington is close, yes.

 

20 Q. Okay. Now, that’s a very — Barrington and

 

21 Wilshire is a very commercial-type area, isn’t it?

 

22 You have store after store after store?

 

23 A. Yes, sir, that’s correct.

 

24 Q. And Wilshire, for anyone who doesn’t know,

 

25 is a main thoroughfare through Los Angeles, true?

 

26 A. That is correct.

 

27 Q. And if you keep going west for a few miles,

 

28 you end up in Santa Monica, right? 5876

 

1 A. That would be correct.

 

2 Q. And that’s Santa Monica at the ocean, right?

 

3 A. That’s correct.

 

4 Q. Okay. And do you think Janet was at the

 

5 salon for a couple hours?

 

6 A. You know what? That’s speculation. I

 

7 really don’t know how long she was there. She

 

8 called me from the salon.

 

9 Q. And how long were you at the salon?

 

10 A. Probably 25 minutes at the most.

 

11 Q. And then did you go back to work?

 

12 A. No. I went home.

 

13 Q. Where did you go?

 

14 A. I went back home.

 

15 Q. Okay. Anyone go back home with you?

 

16 A. Janet.

 

17 Q. Okay. Do you know approximately when that

 

18 was?

 

19 A. Six o’clock in the evening. I’m guessing.

 

20 Q. And did Janet spend the evening at your

 

21 apartment?

 

22 A. She did.

 

23 Q. What did she do the next day, to your

 

24 knowledge?

 

25 A. The next day I believe she had a Family

 

26 Court appearance.

 

27 Q. Okay. And did you go to Family Court with

 

28 her? 5877

 

1 A. No, sir, I went to work.

 

2 Q. Do you know if anybody went to Family Court

 

3 with her that day?

 

4 A. I understand Vinnie did, but I don’t know

 

5 that to be a fact.

 

6 Q. Now, Family Court, to your knowledge, was in

 

7 downtown Los Angeles, correct?

 

8 A. I believe so.

 

9 Q. And it goes without saying that in Family

 

10 Court, you have bailiffs and police and state

 

11 employees, true?

 

12 A. Sir — yes, sir.

 

13 Q. Do you know how long Janet was in Family

 

14 Court that day?

 

15 A. Sir, I don’t.

 

16 Q. Okay. Did she talk to you that day?

 

17 BAILIFF CORTEZ: Sir, I’m sorry, I need you

18 to speak into the microphone.

 

19 THE WITNESS: Okay.

 

20 Yes, sir, she got home before I did, I

 

21 believe.

 

22 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did she stay at your home

 

23 that evening, to your knowledge?

 

24 A. She did, yes, sir.

 

25 Q. And you saw her that evening?

 

26 A. I did.

 

27 Q. Approximately what time did you see her

 

28 after she returned from Family Court? 5878

 

1 A. Yes, I got home a little early because we

 

2 called the Department of Child & Family Services.

 

3 Q. Okay. All right. And the next day, was

 

4 Janet with you?

 

5 A. I was at work.

 

6 Q. Where was Janet the next day, to your

 

7 knowledge?

 

8 A. I’m not sure where she was. I assume she

 

9 was at home.

 

10 Q. Okay. Do you recall Janet ever going back

 

11 to Neverland after that day?

 

12 A. No, sir, I don’t.

 

13 Q. Okay. Do you know if she did?

 

14 A. No, sir, I don’t think she did.

 

15 Q. Okay. Do you know if the children ever left

 

16 Neverland after that date?

 

17 A. After the day that they were brought to

 

18 their grandmother’s house?

 

19 Q. Yes.

 

20 A. No, they did not.

 

21 Q. Okay. Were they brought to their

 

22 grandmother’s house before or after you saw Janet at

 

23 the salon, if you know?

 

24 A. No, it was after.

 

25 Q. Okay. So, you meet Janet at the salon. She

 

26 goes home with you, right?

 

27 A. Correct.

 

28 Q. The next day she goes to court in downtown 5879

 

1 Los Angeles, correct?

 

2 A. That is correct.

 

3 Q. She comes back that night and is with you?

 

4 A. Right.

 

5 Q. And approximately when do you think the

 

6 children are returned to the grandparents?

 

7 A. I believe the next day.

 

8 Q. Do you know how they got to the

 

9 grandparents?

 

10 A. I don’t know. Somebody from Jackson’s

 

11 entourage gave them a ride, I believe.

 

12 Q. Okay. Is that something you just heard from

 

13 somewhere?

 

14 A. I believe so. I didn’t see it.

 

15 Q. Okay. All right. And to your knowledge,

 

16 there never was any trip to Brazil, right?

 

17 A. To my knowledge, no, but there was a claim

 

18 that they were going to be taken to Brazil.

 

19 Q. I understand your point, but nobody ever

 

20 went to Brazil, true?

 

21 A. That would be true.

Next, Mesereau questioned Jay Jackson about his conversations with Frank Cascio, who he spoke to over the telephone twice. Cascio asked Jay Jackson if the Arvizos were trying to blackmail Michael Jackson, and of course Jay Jackson denied it vehemently. He claimed that he only wanted the Arvizo family to be properly compensated for their participation in the rebuttal video, especially in light of the fact that they were not compensated for their inclusion in Bashir’s documentary.

Pay attention to how Mesereau sarcastically asked Jay Jackson about his thoughts about how, in the middle of all of the media scrutiny of Michael Jackson following the airing of Bashir’s documentary, all of a sudden the Arvizos claim that Gavin was molested during this period of time! And try to keep a straight face as Jay Jackson states that he hasn’t talked about the current case with any of the Arvizos!

22 Q. All right. How many times do you think you

 

23 talked to Frank Tyson?

 

24 A. I spoke to Frank Tyson two times.

 

25 Q. And where did you speak — excuse me. Where

 

26 were you when you spoke to Frank Tyson?

 

27 A. In my apartment.

 

28 Q. Okay. And Frank would call your apartment? 5880

 

1 A. Continuously.

 

2 Q. Okay. Did you know where Frank was when he

 

3 called your apartment continuously?

 

4 A. No, sir, I didn’t.

 

5 Q. Okay. Did he — did you speak to Frank in

 

6 person or on the phone when you were talking about

 

7 the family not getting anything financial out of the

 

8 rebuttal video?

 

9 A. Right, I’ve never met Frank, so it was on

 

10 the telephone.

 

11 Q. Do you know approximately when that

 

12 discussion took place?

 

13 A. After Janet returned by herself from

 

14 Neverland.

 

15 Q. And if you know, approximately when is that?

 

16 A. Mid February. Probably within a week after

 

17 she left.

 

18 Q. So was this discussion before or after you

 

19 meet her at the salon in Brentwood?

 

20 A. With Frank?

 

21 Q. Yes.

 

22 A. Prior to.

 

23 Q. Prior to?

 

24 A. Yes, sir.

 

25 Q. Okay. All right. And you indicated that

 

26 Frank asked you if you were trying to blackmail

 

27 them, correct?

 

28 A. That is correct. 5881

 

1 Q. Okay. And you certainly said, “We’re not,”

 

2 right?

 

3 A. That’s correct.

 

4 Q. You just thought the family should be

 

5 properly compensated, right?

 

6 A. That would be correct.

 

7 Q. Okay. Did you ever threaten that the family

 

8 won’t be available to be filmed unless they’re paid

 

9 properly?

 

10 A. No, sir, I didn’t.

 

11 Q. All right. How did you determine that

 

12 somebody was going to make five million dollars on

 

13 that rebuttal video?

 

14 A. I believe it was on television. They were

 

15 talking about it, that the family was going to be on

 

16 there and that Jackson was making so many millions

 

17 of dollars. I’m not sure of the specific dollar

 

18 amount. It was a large sum of money.

 

19 Q. You did tell one of the sheriffs that you

 

20 had learned about that on the Internet at one time,

 

21 correct?

 

22 A. That may have been. That may have been the

 

23 way I heard it. I’m not sure.

 

24 Q. Would it refresh your recollection just to

 

25 show you a transcript of your police interview?

 

26 A. Please.

 

27 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?

 

28 THE COURT: Yes. 5882

 

1 THE WITNESS: Yeah. Correct.

 

2 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to

 

3 look at that page of transcript?

 

4 A. Yes, sir, I have.

 

5 Q. Does it refresh your recollection about

 

6 where you said you learned that somebody was going

 

7 to make millions of dollars on that documentary?

 

8 A. Correct.

 

9 Q. You said the Internet, correct?

 

10 A. I did.

 

11 Q. Now, were you following issues related to

12 Mr. Jackson and the Bashir documentary on the

 

13 Internet?

 

14 A. Not that I’m aware of. I did later, but I

 

15 don’t think I did at the time. I may have just seen

 

16 it on one of the Internet sites, CNN or MS-NBC.

 

17 Q. Okay. And in that interview with Paul

 

18 Zelis, you said that Frank said, “We’re planning on

 

19 giving them a house. We’re planning on giving the

 

20 boys a college education,” right?

 

21 A. Correct.

 

22 Q. And you told Mr. Zelis you were concerned

 

23 that these things were not going to be in any kind

 

24 of a contract, right?

 

25 A. That is correct.

 

26 Q. And you asked Frank to include this stuff in

 

27 a contract, right?

 

28 A. I don’t know that — no, I didn’t ask him to 5883

 

1 put it in a contract. I said I would like to see

 

2 the contract.

 

3 Then it went from protection, to tutor, to

 

4 house, to all of these things that I wasn’t asking

 

5 him about.

 

6 Q. Well, you were asking him about a contract

 

7 because you wanted the family to be properly

 

8 compensated in a contract, correct?

 

9 A. I asked him if I could see the contract. I

 

10 asked him if he could e-mail it to me.

 

11 Q. And he didn’t respond?

 

12 A. He never did. He didn’t respond.

 

13 Q. All right. Did you discuss with Janet at

 

14 any time, “We want to see if we’re going to be

 

15 properly compensated in a contract”?

 

16 A. I did not.

 

17 Q. Never even discussed the subject with her?

 

18 A. No, sir, I didn’t.

 

19 Q. Did you ever discuss that subject with any

 

20 of the children at any time?

 

21 A. No, sir.

 

22 Q. Did you ever tell Janet or the children,

 

23 “Don’t let them film you. We haven’t had an

 

24 appropriate contract signed”?

 

25 A. Oh, no, sir. The phone was passed to Janet.

 

26 She ended up talking to them on the phone, him on

 

27 the telephone, and they ended up going and doing it.

 

28 There was no contract that I’m aware of – 5884

 

1 Q. Okay.

 

2 A. — at all.

 

3 Q. While you were talking to Frank about proper

 

4 family compensation in a contract, were you also

 

5 talking to these reporters for the British tabloids?

 

6 A. No, sir.

 

7 Q. Did it ever cross your mind that if you or

 

8 Janet entered into some deal with a tabloid, it

 

9 might destroy your ability to get compensated in the

 

10 rebuttal video?

 

11 A. No, sir, that was never an issue.

 

12 Q. Do you know if Janet ever spoke to Mr.

 

13 Jackson about all of these media sources contacting

 

14 her to make a deal?

 

15 A. I don’t know.

 

16 Q. All right. You heard her voice on the Brad

 

17 Miller interview tape —

 

18 A. Correct.

 

19 Q. — a few minutes ago. You heard her saying

 

20 that she was essentially under siege by media

 

21 people, correct?

 

22 A. Her mother was, actually.

 

23 Q. Well, she said she was and her parents were,

 

24 correct?

 

25 A. Okay.

 

26 Q. She talked about Celebrity Justice and Extra

 

27 and other shows, true?

 

28 A. They may have been showing up. 5885

 

1 Q. Okay.

 

2 A. I just heard them calling.

 

3 Q. To your knowledge, did she attempt to

 

4 discuss any of this with Mr. Jackson?

 

5 A. I don’t know what she talked to with Mr.

 

6 Jackson.

 

7 Q. Now, she says on that tape that she and the

 

8 family are being besieged by media, right?

 

9 A. Okay.

 

10 Q. And that is February 16th, 2003, correct?

 

11 A. Okay.

 

12 Q. And within certainly the next couple of

 

13 days, you’re in a discussion with Frank about proper

 

14 compensation and a contract, true?

 

15 A. Okay.

 

16 Q. That doesn’t happen, to your knowledge,

 

17 right?

 

18 A. That is correct.

 

19 Q. They’re filmed on the 20th, right?

 

20 A. Okay.

 

21 Q. The next day they’re at your home to be

 

22 interviewed by Child Protective Services, right?

 

23 A. Correct.

 

24 Q. And to your knowledge, in the middle of all

 

25 this turmoil, there now is a claim that molestation

 

26 began sometime on the 20th. Is that your knowledge?

 

27 MR. ZONEN: Objection. Speculative. Lack

 

28 of foundation. No personal knowledge. 5886

 

1 THE COURT: Foundation; sustained.

 

2 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you discussed this

 

3 case with Janet at all?

 

4 A. No, sir.

 

5 Q. How long have you lived with Janet?

 

6 A. Since — for sure, since March of ‘03.

 

7 Q. Have you discussed this case with Gavin at

 

8 all?

 

9 A. No, sir.

 

10 Q. Have you discussed this case with Davellin

 

11 at all?

 

12 A. No, sir.

 

13 Q. And have you discussed this case with Star

 

14 at all?

 

15 A. No, sir.

 

16 Q. Have you ever seen the rebuttal videotape

 

17 that appeared on television?

 

18 A. That appeared? What do you mean?

 

19 Q. The one that was on television. You saw

 

20 that, didn’t you?

 

21 A. The Take 2?

 

22 Q. Yes.

 

23 A. I did see it, but I really don’t remember a

 

24 whole lot of it.

 

25 Q. Was that a Maury Povich —

 

26 A. That’s right. That was the Maury Povich

 

27 one.

 

28 Q. To your knowledge, has Janet ever seen the 5887

 

1 Bashir documentary?

 

2 A. No, not to my knowledge.

 

3 Q. To your knowledge, has Janet ever seen the

 

4 Maury Povich rebuttal?

 

5 A. Not to my knowledge.

 

6 Q. Okay. Have you ever discussed with Janet

 

7 why she and the children don’t appear in the

 

8 rebuttal T.V. show with Mr. Povich?

 

9 A. No, sir.

10 Q. Never even broached the subject with her?

 

11 A. No, sir. No, sir.

 

12 Q. How long have the children lived with you?

 

13 A. Same period.

 

14 Q. Same period you just gave for Janet?

 

15 A. That’s correct.

 

16 Q. Okay. Now, at some point you moved to West

 

17 Los Angeles, right?

 

18 A. That would be correct.

 

19 Q. And when was that?

 

20 A. In November of ‘03.

 

21 Q. And how long did you live there?

 

22 A. Till about July of ‘04.

 

23 Q. And just to — excuse me. Let me rephrase

 

24 that question.

 

25 Do you know how long Janet kept an address

 

26 on Soto Street in East Los Angeles?

 

27 A. I believe that she did away with the address

 

28 once the people took her stuff away from her 5888

 

1 apartment.

 

2 Q. I’m asking you how long she lived —

 

3 A. That would have been in March of ‘03, yeah.

 

4 Q. March? Okay. Have you ever been present in

 

5 any meeting that Janet has ever had with an

 

6 attorney?

 

7 A. Yes, sir.

 

8 Q. And —

 

9 A. Yes, sir.

 

10 Q. And how many meetings where Janet met with a

 

11 lawyer have you been present at?

 

12 A. The only one that I can remember is the one

 

13 with Bill Dickerman.

 

14 Q. And do you know when that was?

 

15 A. Sometime in April. ‘03.

 

16 Q. Is that April of ‘03?

 

17 A. It was either — yeah, it was late March or

 

18 April of ‘03, I believe.

 

19 Q. Where did that meeting take place, if you

 

20 know?

 

21 A. At his office.

 

22 Q. Okay. Did you drive Janet to the office?

 

23 A. I believe I did.

 

24 Q. Was someone named Jamie Masada present?

 

25 A. No, sir.

 

26 Q. Do you know who Jamie Masada is?

 

27 A. I know who Jamie is, yes.

 

28 Q. Do you know him personally? 5889

 

1 A. Yes, I do.

 

2 Q. When did you last talk to him?

 

3 A. It’s been quite a while. I really don’t

 

4 have a specific date.

 

5 Q. How many times have you met with him?

 

6 A. I have met Jamie and have had a couple of

 

7 social occasions at my house. Maybe four or five

 

8 total.

 

9 Q. Okay. Is that the house in West Los

 

10 Angeles?

 

11 A. That would be the house in West Los Angeles.

 

12 Q. So that would be between November of 2003

 

13 and July of 2004?

 

14 A. It would have been from the time that I met

 

15 Janet in July of ‘02 through present day.

 

16 Q. Okay.

 

17 THE COURT: Counsel?

 

18 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: So the last time you saw —

 

19 THE COURT: Counsel? Are you ready to quit?

 

20 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Yes, Your Honor.

 

21 THE COURT: All right.

 

22 Tomorrow morning at 8:30. Remember the

 

23 admonitions I gave you.

 

24 (The proceedings adjourned at 11:30 a.m.)

To be continued: https://michaeljacksonvindication2.wordpress.com/2013/02/02/april-13th-2005-trial-analysis-jay-jackson-cross-examination-and-janet-arvizo-direct-examination-part-1-of-5/

Advertisements
4 Comments leave one →
  1. stacy permalink
    January 31, 2013 8:03 am

    It seems to me that Jay Jackson was in on the scam too. At first I thought he genuinely believed that his stepson was molested and decided to support him and his wife, but his testimony indicates to me that he knew the allegations were bogus and was trying to cash in too by destroying michael jackson.

    • nannorris permalink
      January 31, 2013 2:20 pm

      I agree, he knew this was BS.
      He thought they should have been compensated and when they werent , this garbage materialized.
      I love also, as David , pointed out, that Jay said I havent see a house YET.
      But I think they way she weasels her way into peoples lives is amazing., even Jay Jacksons….
      George Lopez
      Jamie Masada
      Fritz the weatherman
      the editor of the local newspaper
      Chris Tucker \
      MJ
      Local police officers helping her
      dance studio people
      Louise Palanker
      Azja Prior
      countless others., who felt pity for her.., and her sick child BS
      they all seem to feel protective of her, and her children, and she pulls people in

      Its amazing that the only one who seemed to catch on immediately was Jay leno

  2. nannorris permalink
    January 31, 2013 1:31 am

    this part here
    —-
    nterestingly, Star and Gavin were forced to switch schools in November 2002 because they were being pressured into joining a street gang:

    27 Q. Now, you mentioned at some point there was

    28 an effort to get Gavin out of his local school 5871

    1 because he was being pressured to join a gang, true?

    2 A. Correct. Janet dealt with that.

    3 Q. And when was that change of — excuse me.

    4 When did that change of schools occur?

    5 A. Probably around the time that I moved into

    6 the St. Andrews apartment.
    ————-
    actually there are times in this guys testimony where it sounds like He started off as Janets prey also.
    She sought him out, not the other way around…
    Now he just happens to be moving into a new apartment and BOTH Janets sons are being pressured to join gangs at precisely the same time, and Janet is the one dealing with it, not Jay Jackson., so he is getting this information solely from her..
    Then they end up living at his apartment..
    I think she was conned her way into this guys life too
    I cant believe a major in the service , fell for this woman..

    .

  3. nannorris permalink
    January 30, 2013 9:56 pm

    These people are incredible..They share an apartment for years, bring this case that gets world wide attn , and yet , they never discuss anything.
    It is maddening that Sneddon brought this thing to trial

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: