April 15th, 2005 Trial Analysis: Janet Arvizo (Direct and Cross Examination), Part 1 of 3
Zonen’s direct examination of Janet Arvizo continued today with testimony about the people who Janet suspected were surveilling her and her children after she left Neverland.
Additionally, Zonen played for the jury the four separate DVDs of surveillance footage and asked Janet to identify herself and others in the videos. Nothing remarkable or noteworthy came from this portion of the testimony, so I will skip it for the sake of brevity. Zonen’s direct examination ended after this portion of testimony.
16 DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)
17 BY MR. ZONEN:
18 Q. Miss Arvizo, good morning.
19 A. Good morning.
20 THE BAILIFF: Do you have your microphone
22 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Miss Arvizo, good morning.
23 A. Good morning.
24 Q. Yesterday I asked a few questions about your
25 testimony with regards to your being followed at
26 times. Did you ever see people actually filming
28 A. Yes. 6379
1 Q. Do you remember where and when you saw
2 people filming you?
3 A. At Jay’s home. My children’s school. At
4 church. Everywhere.
5 Q. And I had asked you if you recognized any of
6 those people. Did you recognize any of those
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. And could you tell us the names of any of
10 the people you saw?
11 A. One of them was Johnny, and I think one
12 other time was Asaf, and then there was one to three
13 people. And then after we left, permanently left
14 Neverland, that’s the first time I ever saw a
15 female, in addition to a group of males.
16 Q. Prior to coming into court today, on a
17 couple of different occasions did you have an
18 opportunity to view videotapes of different persons
19 being filmed out on the street and at other
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. Did you recognize the people who are the
23 subject of those films?
24 A. I sure did.
25 Q. And who were they?
26 A. My mom, my dad, my daughter.
27 Q. Davellin?
28 A. Davellin. My boys, Gavin and Star. And my 6380
1 now husband Jay Jackson.
2 MR. ZONEN: And, Your Honor, we’re prepared
3 to play it at this time.
4 THE WITNESS: And myself.
5 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: You were among them?
6 A. Yes.
7 THE COURT: All right.
8 MR. ZONEN: We need a moment. Excuse me.
9 Just one moment. Your Honor, I’m sorry, we need to
10 reboot the computer. It’s going to take a moment.
11 THE COURT: What’s the exhibit number on
13 MR. ZONEN: I’m going to withdraw the other
14 exhibit, the DVD, and we’re going to do this as
15 three separate DVDs.
16 THE COURT: Actually, I don’t think you can
17 withdraw it. There were objections made concerning
18 it. It will have to remain in evidence.
19 MR. ZONEN: That’s fine.
20 THE COURT: Not in evidence, but it will
21 have to remain as an exhibit. Not in evidence.
22 MR. ZONEN: All right. Then we’ll simply
23 give three new exhibit numbers to these three DVDs.
24 THE COURT: While that’s being done, could I
25 ask counsel to, each of you, file a response to the
26 special master’s report Monday so that I know what
27 your positions are on that?
28 MR. MESEREAU: Yes, Your Honor. 6381
1 THE COURT: And a response from the defense
2 to the supplemental motion that was served on me
3 today, probably due today.
4 MR. MESEREAU: I have not seen that, Your
6 MR. SANGER: We received a motion this
7 morning. Is that what you’re referring to?
8 THE COURT: Yes.
9 MR. SANGER: Is that what you’re referring
11 THE COURT: They can’t hear you.
12 MR. SANGER: We received a motion this
13 morning, if that’s what you’re referring to.
14 THE COURT: Yes. You might respond to that
15 by Monday also.
16 MR. SANGER: Monday at 3:00.
17 THE COURT: At what?
18 MR. SANGER: At 3:00. Or Monday morning at
20 THE COURT: Yes. That would be good.
21 MR. ZONEN: Your Honor —
22 THE COURT: You ready?
23 MR. ZONEN: Almost.
24 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Some technical
25 difficulties. I think what we’ll try to do, Your
26 Honor, is play it on the DVD player, so we’d ask you
27 to go to “Input 4.”
28 BAILIFF CORTEZ: Sir, your microphone’s off. 6382
1 MR. ZONEN: We also have the VCR here. We
2 can do it on that. Either way we’ll be able to do
3 it this morning, if the computer doesn’t work.
4 In the meantime, could I wrap up a little
5 bit of old business? Exhibits 809 and 810 that are
6 already in evidence are tapes in the form of a DVD
7 and a CD — CV — CD. And the Court was waiting for
8 transcripts from the People. We have those
9 transcripts and they are now numbered 809-A and
10 810-A, and a copy has been furnished to the defense.
11 I’ll submit that to the Court at this time.
12 THE COURT: All right. And you’re offering
13 809 at this time?
14 MR. ZONEN: 809 is not in evidence. We are
15 offering it into evidence. That’s right.
16 THE COURT: All right. That’s admitted.
17 And 814, did you mention that?
18 THE CLERK: 814 is the one that had writing
19 on the back. They were going to do it later.
20 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Can we go to “Input 1” —
21 or “Input 4,” Your Honor?
22 (Whereupon, a portion of a DVD, Plaintiff’s
23 Exhibit No. 815, was played for the Court and jury.).
Mesereau’s cross examination began with him attempting to play the audiotape of Janet’s conversations with Frank Casco to the jury, and asking questions about that discussion. As usual, there were some technical difficulties that arose before the tape could be played, and you would think that at this point during the trial everything would have been worked out! As the bailiff attempted to get everything working, Mesereau questioned Janet about statements that she made to Frank Cascio, and she denied ever asking for any security.
27 MR. ZONEN: Your Honor, I have no further
28 questions. 6397
1 THE COURT: Cross-examine?
2 MR. MESEREAU: Yes, please, Your Honor.
3 THE COURT: That was Exhibit 118.
4 THE CLERK: 818.
5 THE COURT: 818. Are you offering that,
6 or —
7 MR. ZONEN: I’m sorry, Your Honor?
8 THE COURT: Are those exhibits being
10 MR. ZONEN: Yes, they are, Your Honor. The
11 numbers are 815, 816, 817 and 818.
12 MR. MESEREAU: Thank you, Your Honor.
13 THE COURT: Are there any objections to those
15 MR. MESEREAU: No objection at all.
16 THE COURT: All right. They’re admitted.
17 MR. MESEREAU: Your Honor, Mr. Sanger is
18 obtaining the tape of the phone conversation between
19 Miss Arvizo and Frank Cascio, and I’m going to begin
20 with that.
21 And also, the prosecutor lodged a transcript
22 with the Court this morning of that phone
23 conversation, which, with the Court’s permission,
24 I’d like to hand to the witness as we play that
26 THE COURT: All right.
27 MR. MESEREAU: Thank you, Your Honor.
28 May I approach? 6398
1 THE COURT: Yes.
2 The tape should be 809.
5 BY MR. MESEREAU:
6 Q. Good morning, Miss Arvizo.
7 A. Good morning.
8 Q. Miss Arvizo, as you know, my name is Tom
9 Mesereau and I speak for Michael Jackson.
10 Now, you heard the prosecutor for the
11 government play a recorded phone conversation
12 between you and Mr. Frank Cascio, correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And you didn’t know that conversation was
15 being recorded, correct?
16 A. No.
17 Q. And to your knowledge, it was probably
18 recorded by Mr. Cascio, correct?
19 MR. ZONEN: Objection; speculative.
20 THE COURT: Sustained. Foundation.
21 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Before it was played in
22 court, when did you last hear that recorded phone
23 conversation between you and Mr. Cascio?
24 A. I think it was during the grand jury. I
25 think that’s when it was.
26 Q. And you have in front of you a transcript of
27 that phone conversation, correct?
28 A. Yes. 6399
1 Q. Have you read any transcript of that phone
2 conversation before today?
3 A. I think so.
4 Q. And who provided you with a transcript to
6 A. When I came — the D.A.’s Office.
7 Q. At this point, Miss Arvizo, I’d like to play
8 that recorded conversation for the jury, and at
9 various points I’m going to ask my co-counsel, Mr.
10 Sanger, to stop the recording, and I’m going to ask
11 you questions about what Mr. Cascio says and about
12 what you say. Okay?
13 A. Okay.
14 MR. MESEREAU: With the Court’s permission,
15 we’ll play the phone conversation, Your Honor.
16 THE COURT: And this is Exhibit —
17 MR. SANGER: 809, Your Honor.
18 THE COURT: Okay.
19 THE WITNESS: And this is more than one
20 conversation blended, put together.
21 MR. MESEREAU: I know your position.
22 THE WITNESS: Okay.
23 MR. MESEREAU: We’ll go through it.
24 THE WITNESS: Okay.
25 THE BAILIFF: Are you on “Input 1,” Your
27 Can you check that switch and make sure it’s
28 over, the audio switch? 6400
1 BAILIFF CORTEZ: I hear something.
2 THE BAILIFF: Is it where it was?
3 BAILIFF CORTEZ: No, it’s just a little
4 bit —
5 THE BAILIFF: It should work.
6 BAILIFF CORTEZ: I hear it.
7 MR. SANGER: Is it going through the
9 MR. MESEREAU: Start it again.
10 THE BAILIFF: I can turn it up here.
11 MR. SANGER: This happened last time. We
12 were told there was a switch up there, but….
13 One more try, Your Honor. I’m sorry.
14 THE BAILIFF: Did you plug it into the
16 MR. SANGER: It’s plugged into the defense.
17 Plugged into the back. That’s on. One, two, that’s
18 on. We can play it again with the speakers.
19 THE COURT: I think that’s the best thing to
21 THE BAILIFF: They’re coming right over.
22 MR. SANGER: Your Honor, I don’t know if the
23 Court’s willing to wait for just a moment. I hear
24 they’re coming right away.
25 THE COURT: Would you like me to?
26 MR. SANGER: It would be a lot better to
27 hear it through the system, I think.
28 THE COURT: All right. We’ll wait. 6401
1 MR. SANGER: Thank you.
2 THE BAILIFF: We check this every day. They
3 should be here any minute, Judge.
4 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: While we’re waiting, Miss
5 Arvizo, let me ask you a few questions about what’s
6 said in this conversation.
7 You’re telling the jury under oath, that you
8 never wanted any kind of security provided to you by
9 Frank, correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And you never made any statements to Frank
12 that you needed any kind of protection, correct?
13 A. Uh-huh. That’s correct.
14 Q. And when Frank offered you any type of
15 security at your home, you always declined; is that
17 A. That’s correct.
18 Q. Because you never felt you needed any
19 security of any kind from him, right?
20 A. No, what I said was I didn’t want my parents
21 to be scared.
22 Q. Are you telling the jury you didn’t want any
23 security from Frank?
24 A. That’s correct.
25 Q. And in no conversation with him did you ever
26 say anything to that effect, right?
27 A. That’s how I feel.
28 Q. And did you ever tell Frank that your home 6402
1 was being, in effect, bombarded by media people?
2 A. This was after a conversation with him.
3 Q. Did you ever tell Frank your home was, in
4 effect, being bombarded by media people?
5 A. Yes, because I believed them after they had
6 told me, and, yes, I saw it for my own self in my
7 parents’ home.
8 Q. So you saw media people bombarding your
10 A. Yes. With all the mail that was left on the
12 Q. And did you ever tell anything like that to
14 A. Yes, I did.
15 Q. Okay.
16 THE COURT: Would you pause so they can try
18 (Discussion held off the record.)
19 MR. SANGER: May I try it just to —
20 THE COURT: Yes.
21 MR. SANGER: Thank you very much.
22 MR. MESEREAU: I think we’re all set, Your
23 Honor. Thank you.
24 THE COURT: All right. Go ahead.
25 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Miss Arvizo, do you recall
26 telling Frank with respect to the rebuttal interview
27 with you and your family that the Germans only want
28 you to talk about one charitable act of Michael, but 6403
1 you want to talk about more than that?
2 A. What is your question?
3 Q. Do you recall telling Frank that you didn’t
4 like what the Germans were asking you to say on the
5 rebuttal video, because they only wanted you to talk
6 about one charitable act of Michael and you wanted
7 to talk about much more than that?
8 A. That’s incorrect.
9 MR MESEREAU: Okay. Could we play the —
10 THE WITNESS: There’s more than that.
11 MR. MESEREAU: I understand. You’ll have
12 your chance to talk about it.
13 MR. SANGER: Ready?
14 MR. MESEREAU: Yes.
15 THE WITNESS: Because they wanted me to do a
16 choreograph that me and Michael had done a charity
17 act to German orphans. And I wasn’t going to do
18 that, to say that that had happened.
19 MR. MESEREAU: At this time we’re going to
20 play the conversation, Your Honor. Thank you.
Next, Mesereau questioned Janet on the overly effusive “we’re family” statements that she repeatedly said to Frank Cascio during their conversation. Janet testified that people over 50 years old have “a tender spot” in her heart, and that is why she loved the Cascios without even knowing them. Seriously. There were other statements that Janet claimed the tape had manipulated.
21 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s
22 Exhibit 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
23 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, you’re telling Frank
24 that you love his family, correct?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. You’re telling Frank that, in effect, “We’re
27 all family,” right?
28 A. Yes. Because of Michael’s initial 6404
1 lovey-dovey meeting.
2 Q. Just please answer my question, Miss Arvizo.
3 The prosecutor will then ask you whatever he wants.
4 I just want direct answers to my questions, all
5 right? Is that all right with you?
6 A. If you could simplify the questions, that
7 would be easier for me.
8 Q. I will try to make them as clear as I can.
9 And if you don’t understand, don’t answer me. Just
10 ask me to try and restate it. Okay?
11 A. Okay. That’s fair enough.
12 Q. You told Frank Cascio in this conversation,
13 “We’re all family,” true?
14 A. I said, “It’s like we’re family.” True.
15 Q. Did that mean in your mind that your family,
16 Frank’s family, and Mr. Jackson’s family were all
18 A. Let me see. It says right here, “I love you
19 so much. You don’t know how much I love your little
20 sister and your little brother.” That’s what it
22 Q. And then later on, it says, “It’s like we’re
23 family, you know, Frank?”
24 A. Yeah.
25 Q. Okay.
26 A. “Like we’re family.”
27 Q. And when you said that you meant it, true?
28 A. Yes, I believed what he said in the initial 6405
1 meeting in Miami.
2 Q. I understand, it all comes from Miami,
4 A. Correct.
5 Q. Doesn’t come from your being at Neverland
6 with the Cascio family, does it?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Were you ever at Neverland with the Cascio
10 A. With the whole entire family? No.
11 Q. With the children?
12 A. With the children, no, never before at
13 Neverland, before Miami.
14 Q. So one trip to Miami and you’re calling
15 everyone family, correct?
16 A. Correct.
17 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Let’s keep going.
18 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s
19 Exhibit No. 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
20 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, you say to Frank,
21 “It’s like we’re family, you know, Frank?” And he
22 says, “I know. And you say, “You know. And people
23 don’t understand that,” correct?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. And when you said, “People don’t understand
26 that,” what did you mean?
27 A. Well, I thought they were honest people.
28 And, for example, people 50 and over have a tender 6406
1 spot in my heart, and so it’s loving someone without
2 knowing them. That’s what I mean.
3 Q. So what you’re saying is in your mind you
4 were family with the Cascios because you loved them
5 without knowing them; is that correct?
6 A. Correct.
7 MR. MESEREAU: Okay.
8 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s
9 Exhibit No. 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
10 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, you say, “It’s like
11 crazy here.” Do you see that?
12 A. I said, it goes, “Um, (inaudible), bleep,
13 are like crazy here,” so I really couldn’t tell you
14 what was before there.
15 Q. Let’s go two lines down.
16 A. Okay.
17 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s
18 Exhibit No. 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
19 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You say to Frank, “Are
20 like crazy here,” And he says, “Who?”
21 And you say, “The reporters and stuff.”
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. And please tell the jury what you’re talking
26 A. Well, in my mom’s table, when I arrived from
27 Neverland, from Jesus helping me, there was a table
28 filled with offers, many different offers requesting 6407
1 interviews, some people offering cars, to various
2 denominations, and just a variety of things. And
3 the phone ringing over and over and over.
4 Q. Okay. And people were coming to your house,
6 A. And some — some of the reporters just
7 wanted to talk. But it was all there.
8 Q. They were looking for you at times, correct?
9 A. Mostly my children. Mostly Gavin
11 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Let’s keep going.
12 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s
13 Exhibit No. 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
14 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, you’re talking to
15 Frank after you say Chris took you and, “Jesus
16 helped me leave,” correct?
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. So the things you’re saying to Frank on this
19 tape —
20 A. Has been manipulated.
21 Q. Oh, I understand your position, because
22 we’ll go through that.
23 A. Okay.
24 Q. And what you’re saying is you’ve had someone
25 look at this tape and decide it’s all been jumbled
26 up together; right? Is that your position?
27 A. My position is I had the conversation. I
28 know when I left, the first time I left with Jesus, 6408
1 the second time I left with Chris, two different
3 Q. Okay.
4 A. That’s why I know.
5 Q. But what you say is, Ya know, ya know,
6 Frank, when I asked to leave on Sunday night,” and
7 then Frank coughs, and then it’s inaudible, and it
8 says, “And, ah, Chris took me and, ah, Jesus helped
9 me leave.” Do you see that?
10 A. Yes, I do.
11 Q. And obviously this conversation is happening
12 after Jesus helps you leave?
13 A. Correct.
14 Q. And it’s after Chris helped you, correct?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Why did you say then, “Chris took me and
17 then Jesus helped me leave”?
18 A. Because Chris — this tape has been
19 manipulated. But also on that day — Chris was the
20 one who took me to go do the leg wax.
This excerpt contains one of the biggest and most explosive inconsistencies throughout the entire trial! I’m just astonished that Mesereau could make such a terrible mistake as this! He asked Janet if she had ever received a body wax during her stay at Neverland, and she corrected him by admitting to receiving a leg wax! How could Mesereau confuse a body wax with a leg wax?!!! (I’m being sarcastic, guys!)
21 Q. Okay. Now, Chris was part of Michael
22 Jackson’s personal security group at Neverland,
24 A. Correct. His personal bodyguard.
25 Q. Yes. He’s the one who took you for a body
26 wax, correct?
27 A. Incorrect.
28 Q. Who took you for a body wax? 6409
1 A. No one ever.
2 Q. Well, you went for a body wax when you were
3 at Neverland, did you not?
4 A. Inaccurate.
5 Q. Never did it?
6 A. Never did it.
7 Q. Never went to a salon in Los Olivos and met
8 someone there who treated you, correct?
9 A. I had a leg wax done.
10 Q. In Los Olivos?
11 A. In Los Olivos.
12 Q. And that was the day you claim Jesus helped
13 you escape from Neverland, true?
14 A. That was the day that the Germans said that
15 they wanted to do positive PR for Michael. And I
16 figured this is what they have and that’s it. I
17 could go now and it was still a no.
18 Q. The body wax you had in Los Olivos was the
19 day that you claim Jesus helped you escape from
20 Neverland, true?
21 A. His statement is inaccurate. He keeps
22 continuously saying “body wax.” There is no body
24 Q. What did you have at the salon in Los Olivos
25 on the day you claim you escaped from Neverland?
26 A. A leg wax.
27 Q. Okay. Okay. And how did you get to the
28 salon to have the leg wax? 6410
1 A. I didn’t get them to do anything. They had
2 already arranged it, the Germans, for their positive
3 PR for Michael. With the film crew following us.
4 Q. How did you get to the salon in Los Olivos
5 from Neverland to have your leg wax?
6 A. Chris took me.
7 Q. So when you say, “And, ah, Chris took me,
8 and, ah, Jesus helped me leave,” you’re talking
9 about Chris, who is part of Mr. Jackson’s security
10 detail, taking you to Los Olivos to the salon,
12 A. For Michael’s positive PR.
13 Q. I understand what your position is, but I’m
14 asking you a direct question.
15 On the day you claim Jesus helped you escape
16 from Neverland, that’s the same day Chris took you
17 to a salon in Los Olivos for a leg wax, correct?
18 A. Well, if he wants to get that technical, it
19 was the next day, because it was closer to 1 a.m.
20 Q. Well, how do you escape from Neverland with
21 Jesus and then have Chris take you for a leg wax?
22 A. Chris took me to have a leg wax in the
23 afternoon. After midnight, about 1 a.m., is when
24 Jesus helped me and my children leave.
25 Q. Okay. And to —
26 A. The next day.
27 Q. — to get back to my initial point, this
28 phone conversation is happening after you say Jesus 6411
1 helped you leave from Neverland, isn’t it?
2 A. These multiple conversations are happening
3 after Jesus helped me leave.
4 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. All right. Let’s keep
Next, Janet was asked about her contentious history with ex-husband David Arvizo, who was charged with numerous crimes against his family in 2001 and 2002. Janet admitted that she filed a report claiming that he had molested Davellin ten years prior, although she said it wasn’t an allegation, but merely “information” that she provided to police. Whatever.
6 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s
7 Exhibit No. 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
8 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, you’re telling Frank
9 Cascio —
10 A. Just a moment, Mr. Mesereau. Where are we?
11 I’m trying to —
12 Q. We’re on the third page.
13 A. Okay.
14 Q. Okay? There are no numbers on the lines,
15 but we’re on the third page. If you look about
16 midway through —
17 A. Okay.
18 Q. — you will see your comment, “And, ah,
19 Chris took me, and ah, Jesus helped me leave.” Do
20 you see that?
21 A. Okay. But we played the tape a little bit
23 Q. Yes, we did. Yes, we did. And we’ve
24 stopped two quotes down.
25 A. Okay.
26 Q. We stopped where it says, “And that’s how I
27 feel.” Do you see that?
28 A. Oh, goodness gracious. 6412
1 Q. Do you see it? Do you want me to point it
2 out to you?
3 A. Please.
4 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?
5 THE COURT: Yes.
6 THE WITNESS: Okay. Good. Thank you.
7 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You’re talking to Mr.
8 Cascio after Jesus helped you leave, and you’re
9 telling him, “My family, so as far as me and the
10 kids, we are family, and that’s how I feel.” Do you
11 see that?
12 A. Yes, it says, “My family” —
13 Q. Yes.
14 A. — “(inaudible),” and then it says, “So as
15 far as me and the kids, we are family, inaudible,
16 and that’s how I feel.”
17 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Let’s keep going.
18 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s
19 Exhibit No. 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
20 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, Frank says to you,
21 “People out there are so evil.” And you reply,
22 “Yes, yes, Frank, they are, they are.”
23 He says to you, “They’re so evil,” and you
24 go, “Yes, I know, I know.”
26 A. Correct.
27 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Let’s keep going.
28 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s 6413
1 Exhibit No. 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
2 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, you start to talk
3 about David, correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And you say, “They’ve been replaying over
6 and over the news over here and on the radio. The
7 father said making him so, so credible, you know,
8 even the father said. David — he was — there’s
9 nine criminal charges for what he did to that kid,
10 you know. And for what he did to me. He doesn’t
11 pay child support and, ah, he has a restraining
12 order to stay away from me and the kids.”
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. And you’re talking about your former husband
16 David Arvizo, right?
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. Okay. And you’re talking about a criminal
19 case against him, right?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. And that was a situation where the police
22 were notified, right?
23 A. Two different criminal cases that both he
24 pled guilty on 2001 and 2002.
25 Q. And one of them was an allegation that he
26 had molested Davellin, true?
27 A. Not an allegation. Information.
28 Q. Okay. But, I mean, he was — you know, you 6414
1 reported him to the police on a couple of occasions,
3 A. No. That was —
4 He’s incorrect. I was there. He was
5 arrested for domestic violence. In the process of
6 being investigated for that, that’s when they found
7 out that there’s more — that this man had caused
8 more harm not just on me, but also my children, and
9 so that sparked an investigation on what he had done
10 to my kids.
11 Q. And you did report him for having falsely
12 imprisoned your family, true?
13 A. It was — I give them the information and
14 they did whatever they did with it.
15 Q. And you did report him for having molested
16 Davellin, true?
17 A. They — he’s inaccurate. They asked a
18 history about David, and the event he’s referring to
19 is something that happened way over ten years ago.
20 Q. Okay. In answer to my question, there was a
21 report made that David had molested your daughter
22 Davellin, true?
23 A. It was a one-sentence statement, and they
24 were asking for the history of David.
25 Q. Was a report made that your former husband
26 David had molested your daughter Davellin? Yes or
28 A. That was in the midst of all the information 6415
1 that they were gathering about David, so, yes.
2 Q. Okay. Now, it mentions a restraining order,
4 A. On which particular restraining order are we
5 talking about?
6 Q. I’m going to ask you about that.
7 A. Okay.
8 Q. Did you get a number of restraining orders
9 against your former husband David?
10 A. Yes, that were issued through the Family
11 Court and the criminal courts.
12 Q. And how did you do that?
13 A. Well, when David was arrested for domestic
14 violence finally, the criminal courts issued
15 something that they do routinely, a restraining
17 Q. And at some point he was reported for having
18 violated a restraining order, correct?
19 A. That is correct.
20 Q. And how did that happen? Please tell the
21 jury how the case against him for violating a
22 restraining order came about.
23 A. Well, my daughter came home, told me
24 what happened. So then I called — I let them
25 know, the investigating officer, what had
27 THE COURT: Counsel?
28 MR. MESEREAU: Yes, Your Honor. 6416
1 THE COURT: Take our break.
2 (Recess taken.)
1 THE COURT: Counsel?
2 MR. MESEREAU: Thank you, Your Honor.
3 Q. Miss Arvizo, we were talking about the
4 domestic problems you had with David, okay? And you
5 said that you had obtained two restraining orders
6 against him at various times, right?
7 A. I didn’t obtain them. It was through the
8 court system that they were issued.
9 Q. One for the criminal court system, correct?
10 A. Which I think, as best I can remember, is
11 that they routinely issue them.
12 Q. And one through the Family Court system; is
13 that correct?
14 A. Correct. That my family attorney requested.
15 Q. And who was your family attorney at that
17 A. Mr. Michael Manning.
18 Q. Okay. And when the issue came up about
19 David Arvizo violating a restraining order, you went
20 to court, true?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Did you ever appear in court for any hearing
23 involving allegations that David had violated a
24 restraining order by talking to Davellin?
25 A. I think that was in the course of the —
26 they didn’t have a, what you’re trying to say, that
27 there was a separate issue. It wasn’t a separate
28 issue. It was — as best as I can recall, it was 6423
1 within the midst of the domestic violence that he
2 was arrested that he did upon me.
3 Q. And the violation of the restraining order
4 that was alleged against him had to do with his
5 showing up at school and talking to Davellin, true?
6 A. It had to do with the fact that he violated
7 the restraining order.
8 Q. The violation of the restraining order had
9 to do with David showing up at school and talking to
10 Davellin, right?
11 MR. ZONEN: Your Honor, I’ll object; lack of
13 THE COURT: Overruled.
14 You may answer.
15 THE WITNESS: David, a grown man, was given a
16 restraining order, and he violated it.
17 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Let me repeat the question
18 again. If it’s not clear, tell me.
19 A. It’s not clear.
20 Q. Okay. What was the nature of the violation?
21 A. What do you mean?
22 Q. Didn’t David go to Davellin’s school —
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. — see Davellin outside of school and ask
25 her to go into his car and talk to him?
26 A. He called — my understanding, because I
27 wasn’t there — the best who could explain it would
28 be Davellin. 6424
1 Q. You don’t know what happened?
2 A. I do know, but the best one who could
3 explain it would be Davellin.
4 Q. What do you know about it, Miss Arvizo?
5 A. Okay, my understanding is that David had
6 called her over into the car, and he wouldn’t let
7 her go until he finished his conversation with her
8 and until he was satisfied. Then he let her go.
9 That’s my understanding. But the best one who could
10 explain it is Davellin.
11 Q. You attended court with Davellin when there
12 was a hearing with a judge on whether or not David
13 had violated that restraining order, right?
14 A. Again, that was in the midst of the domestic
15 violence that he had done upon me.
16 Q. Did you attend court when there was a
17 hearing on whether or not David had violated the
18 restraining order?
19 A. I think I understand what you’re trying to
20 say, but if not, please make me aware.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. I feel that he is trying to say that I was
23 present when these proceedings were happening in the
24 midst of the domestic violence. That is inaccurate.
25 She went behind a closed door with a judge,
26 a court reporter, and a — David, Mr. Halpern, his
27 attorney. And that’s where they had the hearing,
28 some kind of hearing, understanding, talking. I 6425
1 don’t know what that process would be called.
2 Because he had violated the restraining order.
3 Q. And you were in court that day, right?
4 A. They did it behind closed doors, in the
5 judge’s chambers, and I was not allowed to be
7 Q. You were in court that day, true?
8 A. I was in the courthouse, in the courtroom.
9 But in the judge’s chambers when that took place,
10 I was not present. And there was a court reporter
11 reporting everything there.
12 Q. And who was with you in court that day?
13 A. On that day was just — it was me and
14 Davellin, I think.
15 Q. Was Carol Lamir ever in court with you?
16 A. With me? No. She’s my ex-husband’s, David
17 Arvizo’s, best buddy.
18 Q. Was she ever in court with you for any
19 proceeding involving domestic violence?
20 A. With me, never. But with David. David.
21 That’s his girlfriend.
Next, Janet testified that she “knew” that she was being held against her will by Jackson’s associates through the use of force and fear, and (not surprisingly) she didn’t know what the word extortion meant! You would think she would know, since that is exactly what she did to JC Penney! According to Janet, she was too intimated by Jackson’s people to try to get a restraining order against them.
22 Q. Okay. Now, you’ve told the jury about your
23 experience in obtaining restraining orders involving
24 David, right?
25 A. I don’t understand what you’re trying to
27 Q. You’ve just told the jury about your history
28 of getting restraining orders against David, right? 6426
1 A. Not history, not experience, but what
2 happened after he committed these crimes.
3 Q. You never went to any court at any time and
4 tried to get a restraining order against Mr. Jackson
5 or anyone you thought was associated with him,
7 A. I was hoping it will just go all away. And
8 Mr. Dickerman handled everything.
9 Q. You thought you were being falsely
10 imprisoned, right?
11 A. Correct.
12 Q. You thought —
13 A. I didn’t think it. I knew it.
14 Q. You thought you were being extorted, true?
15 A. What do you mean?
16 Q. Did you think you were the victim of
17 extortion by Mr. Jackson or any people associated
18 with him?
19 A. Please be more clear.
20 Q. Do you know what “extortion” means?
21 A. No, I don’t.
22 Q. Okay. Did you think you were being
23 restrained against your will by either Mr. Jackson
24 or anyone you thought was associated with him?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. Did you think you were being —
27 A. I didn’t think it. I knew it.
28 Q. Did you think you were being kidnapped by 6427
1 Mr. Jackson or anyone associated with him?
2 MR. ZONEN: Calls for a legal conclusion.
4 THE COURT: Sustained.
5 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you think you were
6 being held against your will by Mr. Jackson or
7 anyone associated with him?
8 A. Did I think it?
9 Q. Yes.
10 A. I knew it.
11 Q. And did you think you were the victim of
12 either force or fear created by anyone associated
13 with Mr. Jackson?
14 A. I knew it.
15 Q. Yet, you never went into court to get any
16 restraining order at any time regarding Mr. Jackson,
18 A. I was too scared of him.
19 Q. Okay. And at the time you claim you were
20 being held against your will, you had a number of
21 lawyers who had represented you at that point, true?
22 A. I don’t understand what you’re saying.
23 Q. Well, you had a lawyer who, you just told
24 the jury, had represented you in your domestic
25 dispute with David, correct?
26 A. Correct.
27 Q. At some point you visited Mr. Dickerman with
28 Jamie Masada, correct? 6428
1 A. Uh-huh.
2 Q. You had a number of meetings with Mr.
3 Dickerman and Jamie Masada, correct?
4 A. Correct.
5 Q. At some point, Mr. Dickerman referred you to
6 an attorney named Larry Feldman, correct?
7 A. This is after the fact.
8 Q. Is that true?
9 A. Correct.
10 Q. Never have you ever sought a restraining
11 order against Mr. Jackson or anyone associated with
12 him, right?
13 A. That’s correct.
Next, Janet was questioned about statements she made to Frank Cascio regarding a DCFS investigation into her and David Arvizo during one of their domestic disputes in 2000. Janet once again stated to Frank that Jackson was a father figure to her kids, and Mesereau challenged her whenever she veered off topic while giving an answer (a constant occurrence during her testimony). She used her connection to Jackson to defend herself during the DCFS investigation in 2001, after she had only met him once! Janet also stated that she still believed that the DSCF social workers were more concerned with possibly being sued by Jackson then the welfare of her children.
14 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s
15 Exhibit 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
16 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Frank Cascio says
17 to you, “Do you know everything that David is saying
18 is completely false.” Do you see this?
19 A. Yes, I do.
20 Q. And you say, “Oh, I know, I know. That’s
21 why I’m getting” — excuse me, “That’s why I’m —
22 I’m getting all those information. Oh, for example,
23 ah, there was like year and a half ago, a year and a
24 half ago, they did an investigation of me and David.
25 We understand that — that Michael Jackson, and
26 Chris Tucker are involved with you and the kids, and
27 they said — and the kids spoke up and they said,
28 ‘They’re family to us. If we didn’t have Michael, 6429
1 if we didn’t have Michael, we wouldn’t have a
2 father, a father figure in our life.’” And then the
3 social worker, (inaudible),” it says, “(possible
4 keys typing), okay, I’ll give the person here a call
5 named David Arvizo. And she documented it and
6 everything and so I’m returning the note paper so
7 you can have all these papers.”
8 Do you see that quote?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. All right. You’re referring to an
11 investigation of you and David, correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. What investigation are you talking about?
14 A. Okay. Remember how I told you about the
15 Child Protective Services, that there was different
16 people, not this group, the one that was in a
17 different building, which was a female. This is
18 how — my children’s state of mind at that point,
19 because Michael had been kind to them in the initial
20 meeting when we first met in August. That stood
21 with them. Yeah.
22 Q. Well, okay. So you met Michael Jackson in
23 August of what year?
24 A. Of 2000. And also Evvy, his personal
25 assistant, made sure that we — that the children
26 felt and saw everything as a family environment and
27 to see him as a father figure. This is Evvy
28 Tavasci, his personal assistant. 6430
1 Q. When you were involved in the investigation
2 you just described —
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. — how many times had you seen Michael
6 A. Me personally by this time, once.
7 Q. You had seen Michael Jackson one time, and
8 when you’re being investigated by the Department of
9 Children & Family Services, you tell them that
10 Michael is like a father to your kids and your
11 family, true?
12 A. No. Inaccurate. It says, “And the kids
13 spoke up and they said ‘They’re family to us.’” The
14 children continue speaking and say, “If we didn’t
15 have Michael — if we didn’t have Michael, we
16 wouldn’t have a father.”
17 My kids said that.
18 Q. “A father figure in our life,” correct?
19 A. Yes, that’s the children.
20 Q. Were you there when the kids said that to
21 the representatives of the Department of Children &
22 Family Services who were investigating you?
23 A. That’s correct.
24 Q. One meeting with Michael and —
25 A. Not me.
26 Q. — and you’re calling him “family” and “a
27 father figure,” right?
28 A. Yes, per Evvy Tavasci’s, his personal 6431
1 assistant, request. And also Michael had also
2 pointed that out to the children in August of 2000.
3 Q. I’m asking about you.
4 A. Okay, me?
5 Q. You’re being investigated by DCFS, true?
6 A. Yes. Me and David. Because when David was
7 arrested for domestic violence — remember how I
8 told you that this particular social worker, I was
9 very impressed, because she didn’t care about me.
10 All she was interested was in my children.
11 And that’s what I thought and was hoping
12 that these three, who were only solely concerned
13 about being sued by Michael Jackson, would have had
14 that same position. Then all this wouldn’t have
16 Q. Miss Arvizo, we’re talking about a DCFS
17 investigation, by your own words, that was a year
18 and a half before you’re quoted in the conversation,
20 A. This is correct.
21 Q. That has nothing to do with what you just
22 told the jury.
23 A. This has everything to do with it. This
24 is — this, 2003. The DCFS was about — about 2001.
25 So I’m giving a best estimate on this conversation.
26 Q. You’ve met Michael one time and you’re using
27 him to defend yourself in the investigation?
28 A. No. Incorrect. Inaccurate. We had — in 6432
1 my apartment, we had a series of different pictures.
2 And the social worker had pointed out, because the
3 pictures that they had taken out of my apartment
4 when they did that little move, they were there
5 displayed amongst many celebrities, many people.
6 People that even donated blood were up there.
7 Q. Now, you told the jury when the prosecutor
8 for the government was asking you questions that
9 you’d always had good relationships with the
10 Department of Children & Family Services, correct?
11 A. Who’s “the government”?
12 Q. These guys.
13 A. Okay.
14 Q. Okay?
15 Do you remember telling the jury that you
16 had always had good relations with the Department of
17 Children & Family Services?
18 A. That’s correct. Prior to this CPS meeting
19 which they were not concerned with my children, they
20 were just concerned about being sued by Michael
21 Jackson, it was a positive experience. Like I said,
22 they cared solely about my kids.
23 Q. And was it a positive experience with the
24 Department of Children & Family Services when you
25 were investigated a year and a half before this
26 conversation with Frank Cascio?
27 A. That’s what I’m talking about. In the year
28 2000, when David was arrested, they initiated a 6433
1 Child Family Services — I don’t know, one of
2 those — it’s the same people, I feel, had came out
3 to make sure that I was a good mom and make sure
4 that the children were in a safe environment.
5 Q. And you used the name “Michael Jackson” and
6 the name “Chris Tucker” in that investigation?
7 A. That’s incorrect.
8 Q. So, are you not telling the truth when you
9 say that to Frank?
10 A. No, no, you said if I used them. That’s
11 inaccurate. Like I said, there was pictures on my
12 walls of different people that had been kind to my
13 children. Amongst them was Michael, Chris,
14 celebrities, other people, and people that had
15 donated blood. And it was her question that she
16 asked that sparked my children to answer that. At
17 that moment was a time that — that was their
In addition to David Arvizo’s abuse of Davellin, Janet was also investigated by the DCFS for allegedly abusing Gavin! When he was in kindergarten, he accused Janet of abuse, but then changed his story.
19 Q. You were investigated by the Department of
20 Children & Family Services in the 1990s when Gavin
21 alleged you had abused him. Remember that?
22 A. Yes, I do.
23 Q. Okay. Did you have a good relationship with
24 the Department of Children & Family Services at that
26 A. Yes, I did.
27 Q. Okay. He accused you of abusing him and
28 then he changed his mind, right? 6434
1 A. No, that’s inaccurate.
2 Q. Why don’t you tell the jury what happened in
3 the investigation in the 1990s.
4 A. I feel — if I’m correct, I feel that what
5 he’s talking about, it was a time when Gavin was I
6 think in kindergarten. I think it was kindergarten.
7 I’m not sure. And the nurse, or something like
8 that, had said to Gavin — and this is the best I
9 can recall it, had said — about Gavin going home.
10 And then Gavin says, “No, I don’t want to go home,”
11 because he didn’t want to go home from school.
12 And so he had told them that — that if he
13 went home, he would get in trouble or something like
14 that. I don’t remember very clear.
15 And so the Department of Child Family
16 Services came out, verified that my son was in a
17 safe environment, and that was it. It was another
18 positive experience.
19 Q. He had accused you of abusing him and then
20 changed his story, didn’t he?
21 A. No, it’s inaccurate what you’re saying.
22 Q. You just said that to the jury, that he
23 accused you of abuse, right?
24 A. And it’s okay. He was a kindergartner. He
25 was a kindergartner. And the way — the nurse or
26 teacher, whoever it was – this is the best I can
27 recall – had communicated it that way to the
28 Department of Child Family Services. And that was 6435
1 it. This — it’s okay.
2 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Let’s keep going.
Next, Janet gave herself a very honest and accurate self-assessment! She testified that she misinterpreted Jackson’s attitude towards the media, and it was due to her incompetence!
4 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s
5 Exhibit 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
6 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Frank says to you,
7 “Janet, can you do me a favor? You see what’s going
8 with everything, and it seems like you’re, like,
9 hiding from everybody, right?” And you go, “Yes.”
10 See that?
11 A. Yes, I do.
12 Q. Who were you hiding from?
13 A. Well, from the people that they said that
14 were out to kill my children.
15 Q. You were also hiding from the media, weren’t
17 A. No, the media — I was — I was a little bit
18 unclear, because Michael had said that they’re all
19 bad people.
20 Q. You had said they were bad people.
21 A. Well, because Michael in the initial meeting
22 in Miami had said that, and so did the Germans.
23 Q. I see. Okay.
24 A. So I believed them. I — you know, I’m
25 incompetent. I don’t know — I don’t have
26 experience with this, so I believed him.
27 Q. I’m sorry. Do you remember making repeated
28 statements that the media were harassing your 6436
1 family, your parents, your children, and you?
2 A. I don’t see anywhere I say here “harassing.”
3 Q. Did you ever say that to anyone at any time,
4 Ms. Arvizo?
5 A. In this conversation I don’t think I said,
6 and prior to this I never did. This is per these
7 conversations, and this is multiple conversations.
8 Q. I understand your position. I’m asking you
9 a general question.
10 Did you at any time, while these events were
11 occurring, ever say to anybody, “The media is
12 harassing my family, my children, my parents, and
13 me”? Yes or no.
14 A. Well, like you said, it’s general, so I’m
15 going to generally answer. Prior to these
16 conversations, which are multiple conversations, no.
17 Q. I understand your position.
18 A. It’s no.
19 Q. So you never said — you never complained to
20 anyone about the media harassing you at any time,
21 other than in this conversation.
22 A. You know —
23 Q. Is that true?
24 A. No. That’s correct.
25 Q. Okay. This was the first and only time you
26 ever complained about the media harassing you and
27 your family?
28 A. And that was because, in the initial meeting 6437
1 in Miami, Michael had pointed out that the media
2 were bad people, which I come to find out different
3 now, and that the Germans had said they’re bad
4 people. I believed them.
5 When I got to my mom’s and I saw all those
6 offers and the constant phone calls, then it just
7 confirmed in my mind to what they had told me. And
8 that’s it. They’re just doing their job. And
9 that’s okay.
10 Q. Then why did you tell Frank they were
11 harassing you at your home?
12 A. I didn’t say they were harassing me.
13 Q. Never said anything like that in this
14 conversation, true?
15 A. No, I didn’t say “harassing.”
16 Q. Okay. All right.
In this excerpt, Mesereau got a little carried away with himself (which is certainly understandable; he was eagerly awaiting the chance to demolish Janet’s testimony) by sarcastically saying that he’ll get to the J.C. Penney case later on, and he had to withdraw that comment after Judge Melville sustained Zonen’s “gratuitous comment” objection!
Also, pay attention to the fact that Janet acknowledged that she referred to Jackson as “family” even AFTER her first “escape” with Jesus Salas in February 2003! Janet corrected Mesereau’s claim that she escaped from Neverland three times by including her final “escape” from Neverland as the fourth escape:
17 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Defendant’s
18 Exhibit No. 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
19 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, you tell Frank about
20 the offers you received, right?
21 A. Uh-huh.
22 Q. And you, in effect, tell him you’re not
23 going to accept any of them, right?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. And then you say —
26 A. Because that’s not in my nature.
27 Q. I understand that. We’ll get to the J.C.
28 Penney case and a few other things. 6438
1 MR. ZONEN: Objection; move to strike.
2 THE COURT: Stricken.
3 MR. ZONEN: It’s a gratuitous comment.
4 MR. MESEREAU: Withdrawn.
5 Q. You say here, “I know we’re family, Frank.
6 Me, you, me, my kids are family. You, Marie Nicole,
7 my kids, Baby Rubba are family. Michael, Marie
8 Nicole (inaudible), (Frank coughs). You, me, are
9 family and my parents. That’s all I got. So that’s
10 why when these German people…,” and then it’s
11 inaudible. Do you see that?
12 A. That’s correct.
13 Q. Now, this conversation is taking place after
14 you say you escaped from Neverland with Jesus, true?
15 A. Correct.
16 Q. You’re still calling Michael your family,
18 A. That’s correct, yes.
19 Q. You didn’t escape from Neverland at all, did
21 A. Oh, yes, I did.
22 Q. And how many times did you go back after
23 your first escape?
24 A. Be more specific, please.
25 Q. How many times did you return to Neverland
26 after your first escape?
27 A. After I was convinced by Frank, believing
28 that they were good people, I went back probably – 6439
1 well, they’ve broken it down for you guys in a
2 period of two days. So, let me see.
3 I went back with — with Chris immediately.
4 Came back that same day. And then when Vinnie took
5 me back, and that’s it. I think. I’m trying to be
6 summarizing those two days’ worth of information.
7 Q. Well, it’s a total of approximately three
8 escapes, isn’t it?
9 A. Are you including the one where I
10 permanently left and never went back?
11 Q. Yes, and maybe it’s four escapes. How many
12 times do you escape from Neverland?
13 A. I’m asking you. I’m asking you. Please.
14 Q. I’m asking you how many times, in your mind,
15 you escaped from that dungeon Neverland?
16 MR. ZONEN: I’m going to object as
18 THE COURT: Sustained.
19 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: How many times did you
20 escape from Neverland, Miss Arvizo?
21 MR. ZONEN: Objection; asked and answered.
22 THE COURT: Overruled.
23 You may answer.
24 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
25 With Jesus. With Chris. And then the last
26 time. And that’s the best I can remember.
27 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: And during the period of
28 these escapes, you’re constantly referring to 6440
1 Michael as family to you, right?
2 A. Prior?
3 MR. ZONEN: Objection; vague as to “during
4 the period of.”
5 MR. MESEREAU: I’ll rephrase it, Your Honor.
6 THE COURT: All right.
7 MR. MESEREAU: I’ll withdraw it.
8 Q. Between the first and the last escape from
9 Neverland, you were still referring to Michael as
10 your family, right?
11 A. Prior to Jesus taking me, my kids and me,
12 back to El Monte to my parents’ house, I thought he
13 was still a good guy. I was confused and I was sad
14 at that moment because I did not know the events or
15 what’s happened. Now I know a lot. But in that
16 period I only thought it was the Germans. That’s
18 Now, after, when Chris brought me back, I
19 knew now things are problematic, things that are
20 arising, so I’m still clueless. But as time
21 evolves, I’m finding out more and more things. Now
22 today, I know different.
Oh boy, here’s another excerpt that’ll have you fall out of your chair with laughter! When asked if she paid for the leg wax, brow treatment, lip treatment, face treatment, and bikini wax that she received on February 11th, 2003, Janet testified that she only received a leg wax, and was adamant that she paid for it herself! She refused to look at the receipt because it wouldn’t refresh her recollection, and she claimed it had been manipulated.
23 Q. Ms. Arvizo, getting back to the leg wax that
24 you had on February 11th, 2003, the day of your
25 escape, you had a full leg treatment, a brow
26 treatment, a lip treatment, a face treatment and a
27 bikini wax; is that correct?
28 A. That’s incorrect. 6441
1 Q. Would it refresh your recollection to look
2 at the receipt?
3 A. It wouldn’t refresh my recollection because
4 I know my recollection. It’s solely a leg wax. If
5 they’ve manipulated it, that’s what they have done.
6 Q. The total cost was $140, correct?
7 A. Like I say, it was only a leg wax.
8 Q. Would it refresh your recollection to just
9 look at the copy of the receipt?
10 A. I’m telling you, it was only a leg wax. He
11 has the ability to choreograph everything.
12 Q. How about you, Ms. Arvizo?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Okay. You don’t want to even look at the
16 A. No, because I’m telling you, it was only a
17 leg wax.
18 Q. And who paid for that?
19 A. I paid for it. The reason is, they deducted
20 it from the items they lost or stolen that were
21 taken from me from the Miami trip.
22 Q. Who paid for your treatment at the salon?
23 A. I did, because that was their effort in
24 replacing the items that were lost and stolen from
25 the bags that I had in Miami.
26 Q. Did you pay the person at the salon your own
28 A. Like I said, the condition here was that 6442
1 they were deducting it from the items that they had
2 lost or stolen from me.
3 Q. Did you pay the person at the salon any
5 A. I just answered that.
6 Q. Did you take money of your own and give it
7 to anyone at the salon on that day, Miss Arvizo?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Who did?
10 A. I don’t know. I don’t know. That was taken
11 care of by the Germans in the process of doing their
12 positive PR, which there was a film crew. It would
13 be good to show that.
14 Q. We’ll talk about that. Okay.
Next, Mesereau caught Janet in yet another lie by getting her to confirm that all of the nice things that she said about Jackson during her phone call with Frank Cascio were true, yet all of the nice things she said about Jackson during the rebuttal video a few weeks later were “scripted”!
15 (Whereupon, a portion of a DVD, Plaintiff’s
16 Exhibit 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
17 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, Frank asks you to be
18 interviewed for a documentary about Michael Jackson,
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. This is after your escape with Jesus,
23 A. Yes, it is.
24 Q. And he tells you he’d like to do a
25 documentary and would like you to say “nice
26 things” – actually, he used the word “beautiful” –
27 “about Michael,” right?
28 A. This is correct. 6443
1 Q. And you say, “Oh, I would. That’s all I
2 have to say.” Frank says, “You” — and then you
3 say, “Me and the kids, that’s all we have to say.”
5 A. This is correct. In this period, I only
6 thought it was the Germans that were problems.
7 Q. Are you still telling the jury that
8 everything you said nice about Michael on the
9 rebuttal tape was from a script?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And if it hadn’t been for that script, you
12 wouldn’t have said beautiful things about Michael,
14 A. Could you say that again?
15 Q. Are you telling the jury that when you did
16 the rebuttal video, you and the kids, and you said
17 nice things about Michael Jackson, you were doing it
18 all from a script? Yes or no, Miss Arvizo.
19 A. Well, you lost me now.
20 Q. I will rephrase it.
21 A. Okay.
22 Q. In this conversation that you didn’t know
23 was recorded —
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. — Frank’s asking you —
26 A. That was illegally recorded.
27 Q. Thank you.
28 In this conversation where you are 6444
1 recorded —
2 A. Illegally.
3 Q. I understand your position.
4 A. Okay.
5 Q. — you tell Frank that all you and your
6 family had to say in a documentary are beautiful
7 things about Michael Jackson, true?
8 A. Yes. That is correct.
9 Q. Yet, you’ve also told the jury that when you
10 did the documentary, all the good things you said
11 about Mr. Jackson were scripted, correct?
12 A. In the document — in the thing, the
13 rebuttal that they did, the whole entire thing —
14 I know I have a problem speaking. I’m trying to do
15 my best.
16 The whole thing, from the beginning to the
17 end, including outtakes, it was all scripted
18 material. All of it. You didn’t have to do that at
19 this point. I would have done it on my own.
20 But — prior to that, because I thought it was only
21 the Germans.
22 But from the period that they did this, now
23 this is scripted, now things have elevated. But in
24 this, at this moment in time, yes, I would have.
25 But now? Have another rebuttal, and I’ll
26 speak freely. Have another audiotape with Brad
27 Miller. I’ll speak freely now.
28 Q. I understand. But at this point in time 6445
1 after your first escape, you had nothing but nice
2 things to say about Michael Jackson?
3 A. That is correct. I only thought it was the
5 Q. And you were ready to do a documentary about
6 Michael Jackson where all you had were beautiful
7 things to say, correct?
8 A. And only if the things wouldn’t have been
9 dictated of exactly what to say. Only if. That’s
10 the only problem I had; that they want — they
11 wanted me to say things that were scripted, exactly
12 what they wanted to say. Because I — I felt what’s
13 wrong with telling the truth? And at that moment,
14 that was the truth.
15 Q. And everything you said —
16 A. And now I know different. It was happening
17 right underneath my nose.
18 Q. Miss Arvizo, everything you said on that
19 rebuttal tape was scripted; is that what you’re
21 A. Every single thing.
22 Q. We will get to the rebuttal.
23 A. Even the outtakes.
24 MR. SANGER: Ready?
25 MR. MESEREAU: Yeah.
In this excerpt, Mesereau was admonished by Judge Melville for telling Janet that she was a “good actress”, after she stated that she was a poor actor. I’m sure that all of us can thoroughly understand Mesereau’s demeanor at this point in the trial, as he wouldn’t normally act in such an unprofessional manner, but then again he needed to relieve some stress and bring some levity into the courtroom! Janet was also admonished for not properly answering Mesereau’s questions.
26 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s
27 Exhibit 809, was played for the Court and jury.)
28 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, you complained to 6446
1 Frank that the Germans are trying to dictate to you
2 what to say, right?
3 A. I didn’t complain. I expressed myself.
4 Q. Is that what you expressed to him?
5 A. Yes. Because they were trying to dictate to
6 me exactly what to say. For example, also the
7 charitable act. They wanted me to say that me,
8 Michael, my children had went to Germany and gave to
9 German orphans. That’s what they said.
10 I’m not going to do that. What’s wrong with
11 the truth at that point? I thought he was a good
12 guy. Now I know different.
13 Q. Miss Arvizo, at any time in that rebuttal
14 tape, did you talk about going to Germany and
15 dealing with orphans, per the script?
16 A. No. Obviously they eliminated that.
17 Q. Okay.
18 A. Or maybe I forgot. I don’t know.
19 Q. I understand.
20 A. I was — like I told you, I got in trouble
21 for not doing exactly what they said, so that’s why
22 the process of leaving out of the country had to
24 Q. Right. I understand.
25 A. You’re correct, I did an inadequate job.
26 I’m a poor actress. You’re right.
27 Q. I think you’re a good one.
28 MR. ZONEN: I’m going to move to object. 6447
1 Ask the Court to admonish counsel.
2 THE COURT: I’ll admonish counsel not to make
3 those remarks.
4 MR. MESEREAU: I will —
5 THE COURT: Admonish the jury to disregard
6 such a remark.
7 I expect more professional behavior from
9 MR. MESEREAU: I apologize, Your Honor.
10 I withdraw it.
11 THE COURT: (To the witness) And you must
12 only answer his questions. You’re not to get into
13 arguments with him. It’s as much your fault. Do
14 you understand that?
15 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
16 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You said that to Frank,
17 that what you say in the documentary has to come
18 from the heart, right?
19 A. Yes. I said — yes, I did. I said, “Think
20 with your heart, not your head.” Because our heart
21 has a lot of pure things in there.
22 Q. And when you said the things you said about
23 Michael Jackson on that rebuttal video, you were, in
24 fact, speaking from the heart, right?
25 A. It was all scripted.
26 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Let’s keep going.
At this point in the trial, Janet’s medications must have worn off, because her answers just went completely off the deep end! In this excerpt, when answering questions about her relationship with Brett Ratner (the director of the movie Rush Hour), she told Mesereau that she has a “lot of thoughts in her heart about him”. Seriously! And on top of that, she added some of her own opinions to her answers by stating that Neverland was all about booze, porn, and sex with boys, and Mesereau requested that her comments be stricken from the record (and of course Judge Melville approved his request).
27 (Whereupon, a portion of a CD, Plaintiff’s
28 Exhibit 809, was played for the Court and jury.) 6448
1 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, you said you didn’t
2 like someone named Mark Ratner, right?
3 A. Uh-huh.
4 Q. Mark Ratner was a director on the Rush Hour
5 movie, true?
6 A. Incorrect.
7 Q. Who was Mark Ratner?
8 A. I came to find out afterwards that it was
9 Marc Schaffel.
10 Q. Well, you talked about Mark Ratner.
11 A. There is no Mark Ratner. There’s only Brett
13 Q. And —
14 A. And I hadn’t —
15 Q. And who is Brett Ratner?
16 A. And I haven’t spoke to Brett Ratner since my
17 children were with Chris, since 2001. I think —
18 wait, 2000 — I think it was January of 2001.
19 Q. Brett Ratner was the director on the Rush
20 Hour movie, right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And where did you first meet him?
23 A. I met him for about — Chris had taken the
24 children to — that’s when he was doing the filming
25 for Rush Hour 2. It was on the set.
26 Q. Did you ever see him at Neverland?
27 A. I never saw him at Neverland.
28 Q. Did you ever learn that Gavin had seen him 6449
1 at Neverland?
2 A. Yes, I came to find out that afterwards.
3 Q. And did you learn that Gavin had asked him
4 to take Gavin to Florida to see Michael? Did you
5 ever learn that?
6 A. You are — you are — I have a lot of
7 thoughts in my heart about you.
8 But he’s incorrect.
9 Q. Did you ever learn such a thing? Yes or no.
10 A. What I learned afterwards is that Brett
11 Ratner, while I was over here in Los Angeles, and
12 Dieter had cornered my son, including with Michael,
13 to have him sign a piece of paper. That’s what I
14 learned while I was over here in Los Angeles.
15 Q. Did you ever learn that Gavin wanted to go
16 to Florida to see Michael, and Brett Ratner wouldn’t
17 permit it?
18 A. That’s incorrect.
19 Q. Okay.
20 A. Because Brett Ratner, Dieter and Michael
21 were all there in Michael’s house.
22 Q. Were you there?
23 A. My children were there.
24 Q. Were you there?
25 A. I wasn’t there.
26 Q. Now, you talk about the Germans keep trying
27 to push Michael Jackson to drink. Do you see that?
28 A. Yes. How foolish I was. I thought he 6450
1 didn’t drink. And they choreographed the little
2 scene in front of me where they were pretending like
3 he doesn’t drink, and he doesn’t even drink Pepsi,
4 and I fell for that. I did. Now I know a lot of
6 Q. You complained that the Germans are trying
7 to get Michael Jackson to drink alcohol, right?
8 A. Yes. Like I said, I fell for it, their
9 little choreography. I thought he didn’t drink.
10 They pointed out he didn’t drink an ounce of
11 alcohol, not even Pepsi, and I fell for it. Yes, I
13 Q. When you fell for this, how many times had
14 you stayed at Neverland?
15 A. This is the period before I left with Jesus.
16 This is this period.
17 Q. When you fell for this, how many times had
18 you stayed at Neverland?
19 A. This is the period before I left with Jesus.
20 Q. Okay. And did you watch the people you
21 refer to as the Germans trying to get Michael to
23 A. Yes. Michael was part of this choreography.
24 Michael had pointed out that he doesn’t drink, and
25 the Germans said he doesn’t drink and that he
26 doesn’t even drink Pepsi. He was going, “No, no.”
27 And now I know different. Now I know that
28 Neverland’s all about booze, pornography and sex 6451
1 with boys.
2 MR. MESEREAU: Move to strike her comments
3 as self-serving.
4 THE COURT: They’re stricken. The jury is
5 admonished to disregard those remarks.
To be continued….