Skip to content

April 19th, 2005 Trial Analysis: Janet Arvizo (Redirect & ReCross Examination), Victor Alvarez, Maria Ventura, William Caldwell, Rod Forney, Michael Davy, Janet Williams, Part 3 of 4

August 19, 2013

Finally, Sgt. Caldwell defined to the jury exactly what his responsibilities were regarding the evidence he seized:

7 Q. Now, as the person who we’ve described

 

8 previously was the scribe, what was your obligation

 

9 with regards to those items?

 

10 A. My obligation was to collect them from

 

11 Detective Forney, to note the location that he

 

12 seized the items from, to number the items, and to

 

13 log the items in on an evidence sheet and to place

 

14 them in those respective bags and seal them.

 

15 Q. And did you do that as to each one of those

 

16 items?

 

17 A. I did.

 

18 Q. The three photographs that I’ve handed you,

 

19 tell us again the court exhibit number of those.

 

20 A. 831 is a photograph depicting the cabinet

 

21 and the television, the VCR and the tapes on the top

 

22 shelf.

 

23 Exhibit No. 832 is a blow-up or an

 

24 enhancement of the audio cassette tapes.

 

25 And Court Exhibit 833 is a blow-up or

 

26 enhancement of the video, VHS tapes.

 

27 Q. The content of those three photographs, are

 

28 they accurately depicted in those photographs? 6877

 

1 A. Yes.

 

2 MR. ZONEN: I would move to introduce into

 

3 evidence 831, 832 and 833.

 

4 MR. SANGER: No objection.

 

5 THE COURT: They’re admitted.

 

6 MR. ZONEN: I have no further questions.

Under cross-examination, Sgt. Caldwell was questioned by Robert Sanger about his knowledge of Bradley Miller’s office, his relationship with Michael Jackson, and his duties during the search:

8 CROSS-EXAMINATION

 

9 BY MR. SANGER:

 

10 Q. Sergeant Caldwell.

 

11 A. Mr. Sanger.

 

12 Q. How are you?

 

13 A. Very well, sir. Thank you.

 

14 Q. Good. You’ve been a detective for how many

 

15 years total?

 

16 A. 16 or 17 years.

 

17 Q. So 27 years in the sheriff’s department,

 

18 correct?

 

19 A. Yes.

 

20 Q. 16 or 17 of those as a detective, correct?

 

21 A. Yes.

 

22 Q. Four years as the detective sergeant in

 

23 charge of the Carpinteria substation or what’s now

 

24 called the Coastal Station, correct?

 

25 A. Yes, sir.

 

26 Q. And Vic — Victor Alvarez is a detective who

 

27 works under your supervision; is that correct?

 

28 A. Yes, sir. 6878

 

1 Q. And your assignment in this case came from

 

2 whom?

 

3 A. Well, initially from Lieutenant Kitzmann and

 

4 Lieutenant Klapakis.

 

5 Q. All right. So the two lieutenants, Kitzmann

 

6 and Klapakis, assigned you, in essence, to be a

 

7 scribe on the search of Brad Miller’s office; is

 

8 that correct?

 

9 A. Well, they didn’t make that individual

 

10 assignment. I made that assignment to myself.

 

11 Q. All right. Let’s put it this way: They

 

12 assigned you to go do the Brad Miller search in this

 

13 case; is that correct?

 

14 A. Yes, sir.

 

15 Q. Did they assign you, with your background

 

16 and experience, to do anything else in this case

 

17 other than the Brad Miller search?

 

18 A. Yes.

 

19 Q. What else?

 

20 A. A search of a storage locker in West Los

 

21 Angeles.

 

22 Q. All right. That was related to the Brad

 

23 Miller search; is that correct?

 

24 A. Yes, sir.

 

25 Q. All right. So other than the Brad Miller

 

26 search and that spin-off, you were not assigned to

 

27 do anything else in this investigation relating to

 

28 Mr. Jackson; is that correct? 6879

 

1 A. Yes.

 

2 Q. Now, with regard to the location that you

 

3 searched, you understood that to be the office of a

 

4 private investigator; is that correct?

 

5 A. Yes.

 

6 Q. And you knew, before you went in, that

 

7 Bradley Miller was the owner of the premises or was

 

8 the person whose offices you were searching,

 

9 correct?

 

10 A. Yes.

 

11 Q. And you knew Bradley Miller was, in fact, a

 

12 licensed private investigator, correct?

 

13 A. I was told that, yes.

 

14 Q. And had somebody else done some background

 

15 work on that and presented you with it?

 

16 A. I believe that information was contained in

 

17 the search warrant affidavit, yes.

 

18 Q. All right. And at the time you searched,

 

19 did you know who Bradley Miller was working for?

 

20 Of your knowledge, did you know who he was working

 

21 for?

 

22 A. I — at one point I was told that he worked

 

23 for Mr. Jackson.

 

24 Q. Okay. And later you found out he worked for

 

25 Mr. Geragos, correct?

 

26 A. Yes.

 

27 Q. All right. Now, Mr. Geragos, at the time

 

28 and currently, was a prominent lawyer in Beverly 6880

 

1 Hills; is that correct?

 

2 A. Yes.

 

3 Q. All right. And Bradley Miller had an office

 

4 in Beverly Hills, correct?

 

5 A. Yes.

 

6 Q. During the course of the search, you

 

7 determined that there was a connection between Mr.

 

8 Geragos and Bradley Miller, correct?

 

9 A. When you say “connection” I’m not clear on

 

10 the question, sir.

 

11 Q. Well, let’s put it this way: In all your

 

12 experience in law enforcement, you’re aware that

 

13 private investigators often work for lawyers,

 

14 correct?

 

15 A. Yes.

Here is how and when Sgt. Caldwell realized that Miller worked for Jackson:

16 Q. All right. And in the course of your doing

 

17 your search, you ran across correspondence

 

18 indicating that there was a connection between Mark

 

19 Geragos and Bradley Miller, correct?

 

20 A. Yes.

 

21 Q. All right. Now, you mentioned that on one

 

22 of the tapes there, there was a reference — maybe

 

23 more than one, but at least one of the tapes there’s

 

24 a reference to, quote, “Michael Jackson” —

 

25 A. Yes.

 

26 Q. — correct?

 

27 You’re familiar with the manner in which

 

28 private investigators work, to a certain extent, 6881

 

1 correct?

 

2 A. To a certain extent, yes.

 

3 Q. You’ve never been one?

 

4 A. No, sir.

 

5 Q. All right. But you have certainly dealt

 

6 with a lot of private investigators during your

 

7 career, correct?

 

8 A. Yes.

 

9 Q. And a lot of your colleagues in years gone

 

10 by, who retired from law enforcement, have become

 

11 private investigators, correct?

 

12 A. Yes.

 

13 Q. All right. And private investigators, when

 

14 they’re working for a lawyer, are usually assigned

 

15 to work on a particular case; is that correct?

 

16 A. Yes.

 

17 Q. And often they will give the name of

 

18 their — the client of the lawyer — let me withdraw

 

19 that.

 

20 Often the name of the lawyer’s client will

 

21 be the designation that they will place on their

 

22 materials; is that correct?

 

23 A. My answer would be a guess. I don’t know

 

24 one way or the other.

 

25 Q. It’s not unusual for people on either side

 

26 of the — of the matter, either a private

 

27 investigator working for a defense lawyer or law

 

28 enforcement, to refer to, for instance, “the Smith 6882

 

1 case,” am I right?

 

2 A. That’s correct.

 

3 Q. So you’d refer to matters pertaining to an

 

4 investigation relating to Mr. Smith as being “the

 

5 Smith matter,” right?

 

6 A. Yes.

 

7 Q. Okay. That does not, in and of itself,

 

8 imply that Mr. Smith had any particular control or

 

9 direction over anything that —

 

10 MR. ZONEN: I would object to this as

 

11 speculative and beyond the scope of this witness’s

 

12 expertise.

 

13 MR. SANGER: I didn’t finish the question,

 

14 but the Court got the gist of it, I suppose.

 

15 THE COURT: Go ahead and finish.

 

16 MR. SANGER: All right. Let me try to start

 

17 it over.

 

18 Q. The fact that, for instance, hypothetically,

 

19 based on your training and experience, the name

 

20 “Smith” appeared on a file or a videotape, or

 

21 something of that sort, would not necessarily mean

 

22 that Mr. Smith had any control or direction with

 

23 regard to what the private investigator is doing; is

 

24 that correct?

 

25 THE COURT: I’ll sustain the objection.

 

26 MR. SANGER: All right. Very well. No

 

27 further questions.

 

28 // 6883

Under redirect-examination, Zonen asked Sgt. Caldwell to confirm that the affidavit was attached to the search warrant, and then both lawyers ended their questioning. After Sgt. Caldwell left the stand, Judge Melville addressed the court and notified them about proceedings that would be held outside the presence of the jury to discuss:

1 REDIRECT EXAMINATION

2 BY MR. ZONEN:

 

3 Q. You mentioned the presence of an affidavit.

 

4 Was that an affidavit to a search warrant?

 

5 A. Yes.

 

6 Q. And did you have that search warrant with

 

7 you?

 

8 A. I had the search warrant with me, yes, sir.

 

9 Q. And had you reviewed the affidavit prior to

 

10 the execution of the search?

 

11 A. I did.

 

12 Q. That was a search warrant authorized by a

 

13 judge in Santa Barbara County; is that correct?

 

14 A. Correct.

 

15 MR. ZONEN: No further questions.

 

16 MR. SANGER: I’m going to move to strike the

 

17 last question and answer, Your Honor, as beyond the

 

18 scope of direct and irrelevant.

 

19 THE COURT: It is beyond the scope, but I’ll

 

20 allow the question.

 

21 Do you want any examination on the issue?

 

22 MR. SANGER: No, Your Honor. That’s fine.

 

23 THE COURT: All right. Thank you. You may

 

24 step down.

 

25 MR. ZONEN: We’ll call Detective Rod Forney

 

26 to the stand.

 

27 THE COURT: You know, we’re just going to

 

28 start — in a couple minutes we’re going to start 6884

 

1 the in-camera hearing, so have the next witness

 

2 available at quarter to 12:00.

 

3 MR. ZONEN: Thank you.

 

4 THE COURT: We’ll excuse you a little early

 

5 for lunch; be in a few minutes.

 

6 The nature of the hearing that we’re going

 

7 to have is going to be in camera, in chambers, and

 

8 I’ll have the court reporter and an attorney from

 

9 each side come back. And Mr. Jackson may attend or

 

10 may not attend, as you deem — whatever you request,

 

11 Mr. Mesereau.

 

12 MR. MESEREAU: Okay.

 

13

 

14 (Whereupon, proceedings were held in

 

15 chambers and, having been ordered sealed by the

 

16 Court, are omitted herefrom.)

The first issue that Sneddon raised to the court was his estimation that the prosecution would rest their case by the end of the following week. The second issue was the fact that Jackson’s former bodyguard and star prosecution witness Chris Carter would invoke his Fifth Amendment rights in order to not testify about the armed robbery charges that he was in custody for at that time.  The third issue was the admission of an expert on domestic violence that the prosecution wanted to call to the witness stand and explain why Janet Arvizo acted the way she did during her testimony (the prosecution wanted to use her physical abuse as a scapegoat for her testimony).

18 (The following proceedings were held in

 

19 open court outside the presence and hearing of the

 

20 jury:)

 

21

 

22 THE COURT: Mr. Sneddon, you had indicated

 

23 you had a scheduling issue you wanted to raise

 

24 outside the presence of the jury?

 

25 MR. SNEDDON: I do.

 

26 THE COURT: Go ahead.

 

27 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, there are several

 

28 issues I want to address the Court on, and some of 6885

 

1 it is going to be some good news for the Court and

 

2 some of it is going to be bad news for the Court, or

 

3 end up being bad news for me, one or the other. But

 

4 in any case, I wanted to alert the Court to several

 

5 issues.

 

6 The first one that I want to alert the Court

 

7 to is, for scheduling purposes, that we believe,

 

8 under our estimation, that we will probably be

 

9 completing our evidence by the end of next week, so

 

10 that the defense is prepared to know that that’s —

 

11 we estimate we will be done by the end of next week.

 

12 The second issue involves — I wanted to

 

13 alert the Court, because I had a conversation with

 

14 the attorney from Las Vegas last night, that one of

 

15 the witnesses who you signed an order of

 

16 transportation on, Mr. Carter, who is scheduled to

 

17 be here either Thursday or Friday, that the lawyer

 

18 indicated to me that he was going to invoke his

 

19 Fifth Amendment rights with regard to the charges

 

20 which are currently pending against him in Nevada.

 

21 And that raises several issues to the Court, and to

 

22 us personally, with regard to his testimony.

 

23 And I thoroughly intended to have for the

 

24 Court this morning a memorandum of the issues

 

25 involved. And the reason I don’t is because Mr.

 

26 Franklin’s computer blew up, and playing around with

 

27 it trying to get the two documents that I had

 

28 prepared and should have been here this morning and 6886

 

1 filed by 8:30 didn’t — aren’t done yet. And my

 

2 last estimate is they’re working on the computer to

 

3 free up the stuff that’s in there. I don’t

 

4 understand it, but a 15-year-old teenager probably

 

5 does.

 

6 So in any case, those were issues I wanted

 

7 to bring to the Court’s attention that are issues

 

8 before Mr. Carter testifies. And that’s why I had

 

9 the order changed from Thursday to Friday.

 

10 In addition to that, there are several

 

11 outstanding issues that we’re going to ask — one of

 

12 the other things that we were going to file at 8:30

 

13 this morning was to calendar with the clerk a

 

14 hearing, like we did on the 1108, that it’s now

 

15 time, since Mrs. Arvizo has testified, to revisit

 

16 the issues the Court postponed on the testimony of

 

17 the domestic violence expert that we filed briefs on

 

18 and counsel for the defendant filed briefs on.

 

19 And so before we can go forward on that

 

20 front, we need to get some rulings from the Court on

 

21 that, as well as, the Court knows, the issue that I

 

22 filed and you asked that counsel for the defense did

 

23 a brief yesterday on Mr. Abdool.

 

24 So that’s a long way of saying that the good

 

25 news is, I believe that we’re about to the point

 

26 where we can close off our case next week.

 

27 The bad news, which I was saving for last,

 

28 is I don’t think we have enough witnesses to 6887

 

1 complete this week. And I’m very concerned about

 

2 our ability to bring anybody in on Friday

 

3 particularly. And the reason for that is that a lot

 

4 of the witnesses that are on for next week are

 

5 people who are coming from — involve telephone

 

6 records and things of that nature, which we had to

 

7 give advance warning and are not local people. And

 

8 we had to line it up in terms of their

 

9 transportation and in terms of their ability to stay

 

10 in order to try not to spend extra money having

 

11 people fly and cancel trips and pay penalties on

 

12 flights and stuff like that.

 

13 And we believe that we can put all of those

 

14 people on on Tuesday. We’ll have witnesses on

 

15 Monday. But I believe that — that also, like I

 

16 said, we can’t go forward on some of these until we

 

17 get some rulings.

 

18 And the last thing is that we want to look

 

19 at those disks, because that could impact what we do

 

20 in the future. And not having had an opportunity to

 

21 look at those and it’s not simply something that we

 

22 can simply turn over to investigators and say, “Look

 

23 at these things,” I think we, as the lawyers

 

24 involved in the case, are going to need an

 

25 opportunity to do that.

 

26 So I guess what I’m telling the Court is

 

27 that — that we will be able to go forward as the

 

28 Court has asked us to in the past, and that’s 6888

 

1 consecutively with witnesses, but I believe on

 

2 Friday that we will have a very difficult time

 

3 rustling up anybody for that date. We did not

 

4 anticipate certain things that have happened in this

 

5 courtroom today or yesterday, and so that’s where we

 

6 are. And that’s the status on everything.

 

7 And as you know, we’ve only — one time

 

8 since we started our case did we finish early. So I

 

9 think we’ve followed the spirit, if not the letter,

 

10 of the Court’s rulings. And I think we just have

 

11 reached a point where trying to get the caboose in

 

12 line for the finish has been a little more difficult

 

13 than keeping the train on track to this point.

 

14 THE COURT: Do you have enough witnesses for

 

15 tomorrow morning?

 

16 MR. SNEDDON: At this particular point in

 

17 time, we believe we do. It will be close, but I

 

18 think, you know, the Court wanted us to get that

 

19 three hours in, so — but it’s a local witness. So

 

20 if you were contemplating something else, I could

 

21 push that witness off to the next day or something.

 

22 THE COURT: Well, I think the jurors would be

 

23 happier with a three-day weekend than with an

 

24 interruption in the middle of the week. I don’t

 

25 know that, but I think so.

 

26 MR. SNEDDON: I agree with you.

 

27 THE COURT: So then the — so, Mr. Mesereau,

 

28 before I start saying anything, do you want to be 6889

 

1 heard?

Mesereau updated the judge on the status of his motions regarding the domestic violence expert, the sexual misconduct of Gavin and Star, and several other motions:

2 MR. MESEREAU: Your Honor, we plan to call a

3 lot of witnesses and we could run into some

 

4 scheduling problems and we may be asking for some

 

5 consideration, so I think the least we could do is

 

6 be considerate in this regard. Because I think

 

7 anytime you’re putting on a lengthy case, you can

 

8 run into scheduling difficulties. So —

 

9 THE COURT: Are you saying that you

 

10 sympathize with Mr. Sneddon?

 

11 (Laugher.)

 

12 MR. MESEREAU: I believe — I think we

 

13 should take Friday off, Your Honor.

 

14 THE COURT: How about the motions?

 

15 I think the domestic violence one, we have

 

16 all the material. I just needed to know where we

 

17 were. You may want to make some additional points

 

18 on that, each side, before I rule. But as far as

 

19 the written work done, it’s done, I think.

 

20 MR. MESEREAU: And there are some other

 

21 issues, Your Honor, I think, like the motion Miss Yu

 

22 filed, which is important to our case.

 

23 THE CLERK: Can’t hear, Judge.

 

24 THE COURT: They can’t hear you in the back.

 

25 MR. MESEREAU: The motion that Miss Yu filed

 

26 dealing with examination on sexual conduct —

 

27 THE COURT: Oh, yeah.

 

28 MR. MESEREAU: — is an important one to us. 6890

Sneddon told Judge Melville the prosecution would file two additional motions for various other issues, and then the next witness was called to the stand:

2 MR. MESEREAU: Your Honor, we plan to call a

 

3 lot of witnesses and we could run into some

 

4 scheduling problems and we may be asking for some

 

5 consideration, so I think the least we could do is

 

6 be considerate in this regard. Because I think

 

7 anytime you’re putting on a lengthy case, you can

 

8 run into scheduling difficulties. So —

 

9 THE COURT: Are you saying that you

 

10 sympathize with Mr. Sneddon?

 

11 (Laugher.)

 

12 MR. MESEREAU: I believe — I think we

 

13 should take Friday off, Your Honor.

 

14 THE COURT: How about the motions?

 

15 I think the domestic violence one, we have

 

16 all the material. I just needed to know where we

 

17 were. You may want to make some additional points

 

18 on that, each side, before I rule. But as far as

 

19 the written work done, it’s done, I think.

 

20 MR. MESEREAU: And there are some other

 

21 issues, Your Honor, I think, like the motion Miss Yu

 

22 filed, which is important to our case.

 

23 THE CLERK: Can’t hear, Judge.

 

24 THE COURT: They can’t hear you in the back.

 

25 MR. MESEREAU: The motion that Miss Yu filed

 

26 dealing with examination on sexual conduct —

 

27 THE COURT: Oh, yeah.

 

28 MR. MESEREAU: — is an important one to us. 6890

The next prosecution witness was Detective Rod Forney, an 11 year veteran of the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office. Det. Forney participated in the raid of Bradley Miller’s office on November 18th, 2003, and was called to testify about the photographs that he took and the items of evidence that he seized during the search.

6 DIRECT EXAMINATION

 

7 BY MR. ZONEN:

 

8 Q. Sir, what is your current occupation?

 

9 A. I’m a detective for the Santa Barbara County

 

10 Sheriff’s Office.

 

11 Q. You’ve been so employed for what period of

 

12 time?

 

13 A. For the sheriff’s department, approximately

 

14 11 years.

 

15 Q. And as a detective?

 

16 A. As a detective for approximately five years.

 

17 Q. And your current assignment is what?

 

18 A. As a detective in the Coastal Operations

 

19 Bureau, which is in Carpinteria.

 

20 Q. Were you called to assist on the execution

 

21 of a search warrant back on the 18th of November,

 

22 2003, at an office in Beverly Hills?

 

23 A. Yes, I was.

 

24 Q. Do you happen to remember the address?

 

25 A. It was 211 South Beverly Drive, and it was

 

26 Suite — or Room No. 108.

 

27 Q. Do you recall whose office it was?

 

28 A. Yes, sir, I do. 6893

 

1 Q. And whose office was it?

 

2 A. Bradley Miller’s.

 

3 Q. And your responsibilities that day were

 

4 what?

 

5 A. To seize evidence.

 

6 Q. All right. And did you, in fact, seize

 

7 evidence at that time?

 

8 A. Yes, I did.

 

9 Q. Now, there’s three photographs in front of

 

10 you. Go ahead and grab those and take a look at

 

11 those photographs.

 

12 Are those, in fact, Exhibit Nos. 831, 832

 

13 and 833?

 

14 A. Yes, they are.

 

15 Q. And can you tell us what those are, 831, 832

 

16 and 833?

 

17 A. They’re photographs of items I had seized

 

18 from Mr. Miller’s office.

 

19 Q. All right. And in front of you are a series

 

20 of objects.

 

21 May I approach the witness, Your Honor?

 

22 THE COURT: Yes.

 

23 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: I’d like to show you each of

 

24 these items, please, consecutively by number, and

 

25 tell me if you recognize these items. Starting with

 

26 Court Exhibit 823.

 

27 A. Yes, I recognize that.

 

28 Q. Is that an item that you seized? 6894

 

1 A. Yes, it is.

 

2 Q. And turned over to Sergeant Caldwell?

 

3 A. Yes, I did.

 

4 Q. And does that have a sheriff’s number

 

5 associated with it?

 

6 A. Yes, it does.

 

7 Q. And what is that number?

 

8 A. Which — there’s numerous numbers that are

 

9 associated with it. This is Item No. 811 and it’s

 

10 Tag No. 122980.

 

11 Q. Okay. Let’s — we’ll do the item numbers on

 

12 this case.

 

13 That was Item No. 811; is that right?

 

14 A. Yes, it is.

 

15 Q. In this case, the court number is 824. And

 

16 tell us what it is, please.

 

17 A. It’s Item No. 812, another videotape.

 

18 Q. It’s a videotape. And you seized that item

 

19 as well?

 

20 A. Yes, I did.

 

21 Q. And Item No. 825, and this is Court Exhibit

 

22 825, what is that?

 

23 A. This is actually Item No. 815, and it’s a

 

24 videotape.

 

25 Q. When you say “815,” do you mean Sheriff’s

 

26 No. 815?

 

27 A. That’s correct.

 

28 Q. And it’s a videotape as well? 6895

 

1 A. Yes.

 

2 Q. And the next one is Court Exhibit 826. Tell

 

3 us what this is.

 

4 A. It’s Sheriff’s Item No. 816. And it’s also

 

5 a videotape that I seized.

 

6 Q. All right. And the next one would be Court

 

7 Exhibit No. 827. What is that?

 

8 A. Okay. This is an audiotape that I seized.

 

9 It is item — Sheriff’s Item No. 817.

 

10 Q. And then the next one? Quick, before it

 

11 falls out of the bag.

 

12 Court Exhibit No. 828?

 

13 A. This is Sheriff’s Item No. 818. And it’s

 

14 another audiotape that I seized.

 

15 Q. All right. And then Court Exhibit No. 829,

 

16 what is this?

 

17 A. It’s item — Sheriff’s Item No. 819. And it

 

18 is a small videotape, digital videotape.

 

19 Q. And each of these items that you seized and

 

20 turned over to Sergeant Caldwell, from where did you

 

21 retrieve those items?

 

22 A. I retrieved them from like an entertainment

 

23 unit in the conference room of Bradley Miller’s

 

24 office.

 

25 MR. ZONEN: Your Honor, the three

 

26 photographs are currently in evidence. May I

 

27 publish them at this time?

 

28 THE COURT: Yes. 6896

 

1 MR. ZONEN: We have to switch over to

 

2 “Input” — is it “4”?

 

3 THE BAILIFF: I’ll get it.

 

4 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: The exhibit is 831 that we’re

 

5 looking at at this time. Tell us, please, in which

 

6 room in Mr. Miller’s office is this?

 

7 A. It would be what I would refer to as the

 

8 conference room.

 

9 Q. All right. And can you tell us what we’re

 

10 looking at in this photograph?

11 A. We’re looking at the videotapes and

 

12 audiotapes that I had seized.

 

13 Q. This is Item No. 833 currently on the board.

 

14 Can you tell us what this is?

 

15 A. Those are some of the tapes that I had

 

16 seized that were in the same location.

 

17 Q. And then finally 832?

 

18 A. Those are also tapes that I had seized from

 

19 the same location.

 

20 MR. ZONEN: Thank you. I have no further

 

21 questions.

 

  

Under cross-examination, Det. Forney was questioned about the piece of evidence that fell out of Det. Alvarez’s bag a few weeks ago, and how it was inconsistent with proper police chain of custody procedures, and the regularity of finding surveillance tapes in the possession of a licensed private investigator:

20 Q. All right. And you were assigned to work on

 

21 the case regarding Mr. Jackson; is that correct?

 

22 A. Yes, I was.

 

23 Q. And your assignment was to go to the

 

24 premises of Bradley Miller in Beverly Hills and

 

25 execute a search warrant; is that right?

 

26 A. That’s correct.

 

27 Q. Were you assigned to do anything other than

 

28 that? 6898

 

1 A. No.

 

2 Q. All right. You’re familiar — based on your

 

3 training, you’ve had training through a POST

 

4 academy, I take it, right?

 

5 A. That’s correct.

 

6 Q. And then you’ve had inservice training at

 

7 two different departments you work at, right?

 

8 A. Yes.

 

9 Q. And you would agree that chain of custody is

 

10 a pretty important aspect of handling evidence; is

 

11 that correct?

 

12 A. That’s correct.

 

13 Q. And that’s what we have all these bags for

 

14 with tape on them and initials and dates and all

 

15 that; is that correct?

 

16 A. That’s correct.

 

17 Q. Okay. Mr. Zonen made a remark about

 

18 something falling out of a bag. You want the

 

19 evidence to be in the bag that it was put in so that

 

20 you can show that there is a chain of custody,

 

21 correct?

 

22 A. That’s correct.

 

23 Q. And so you wouldn’t want to, for instance,

 

24 find a random piece of evidence at the bottom of a

 

25 box that fell out of its bag, would you?

 

26 A. No.

 

27 Q. All right. All right. Now, let me just ask

 

28 you a question or two about the pictures that were 6899

 

1 up on the board, and I won’t put them back up.

 

2 But basically, when you did this search, you

 

3 realized you were searching a private investigator’s

 

4 office; is that correct?

 

5 A. That’s correct.

 

6 Q. In the course of searching that office, you

 

7 found things that seemed to be consistent with this

 

8 being an office of a private investigator; is that

 

9 correct?

 

10 A. That’s correct.

 

11 Q. There were — there was office equipment and

 

12 computers, correct?

 

13 A. Yes.

 

14 Q. And there were — there were videotapes —

 

15 A. Yes.

 

16 Q. — is that correct?

 

17 There were audiotapes?

 

18 A. Yes.

 

19 Q. There were tapes other than the tapes that

 

20 you seized in this particular investigation; is that

 

21 correct?

 

22 A. That’s correct.

 

23 Q. And you would agree there’s nothing unusual

 

24 about investigators having surveillance tapes; is

 

25 that correct?

 

26 A. That’s correct. Yes.

 

27 MR. SANGER: All right. Okay. Thank you.

 

28 No further questions. 6900

Judge Melville then made an announcement to the jury that certainly brought smiles to their faces, and the next prosecution witness was called to the stand:

1 MR. ZONEN: Oh, I have no further questions.

 

2 THE COURT: Thank you. You may step down.

 

3 MR. SNEDDON: Michael Davy. He should be

 

4 outside.

 

5 THE COURT: For the jury, during our last

 

6 hearing you weren’t present for, we decided to not

 

7 have court on Friday. So we’ve worked long and

 

8 hard, a lot of days in a row, and the District

 

9 Attorney has told us that he expects to end his case

 

10 probably by the end of next week.

 

11 So, considering some issues that we have to

 

12 decide in your absence, we’re all going to take

 

13 Friday off, not just you. So, remember, there won’t

 

14 be court tomorrow afternoon, and there won’t be

 

15 court Friday now.

 

16 Come forward.

 

17 MR. ZONEN: Mr. Davy, go right up to the

 

18 front, please.

 

19 BAILIFF CORTEZ: Remain standing. Face the

 

20 clerk. Raise your right hand.

The next prosecution witness was Michael Davy, a retired teacher, counselor, and administrator who worked for the Los Angeles City School District for 32 years. In 2003, he was a counselor for the John Burroughs School, and Gavin denied any and all abuse to:

4 DIRECT EXAMINATION

 

5 BY MR. SNEDDON:

 

6 Q. Mr. Davy, we’re going to need you to scoot

 

7 up closer to that microphone, if you can. It’s been

 

8 a constant problem. But you have to lean into it so

 

9 everybody can hear what you have to say, okay?

 

10 A. Okay.

 

11 Q. You’re retired, are you not?

 

12 A. Yes.

 

13 Q. And what did you do before you were lucky

 

14 enough to retire?

 

15 A. I worked for the Los Angeles City School

 

16 District as a teacher, a counselor and an

 

17 administrator.

 

18 Q. For how long were you employed by the school

 

19 district?

 

20 A. 32 years.

 

21 Q. During the time that you worked for the

 

22 school district, were you at some point in time

 

23 assigned to John Burroughs?

 

24 A. Yes.

 

25 Q. And what grades does John Burroughs cover?

 

26 A. Sixth, seventh and eighth.

 

27 Q. So it’s three years, then?

 

28 A. Right. 6902

 

1 Q. And what is the size of the school,

 

2 approximately, when you were there?

 

3 A. When I was there it was about 2400.

 

4 Q. Now, during the year 2002 – okay? – the

 

5 school year 2002-2003 – all right? – what were your

 

6 assignments at John Burroughs?

 

7 A. I was a grade-level counselor.

 

8 Q. And for how long did you — were you

 

9 assigned that responsibility?

 

10 A. I worked there about — I worked there five

 

11 years, and I was in that assignment for about three

 

12 and a half years.

 

13 Q. At some point during the school year of

 

14 2002-2003, were you reassigned some other

 

15 responsibilities within John Burroughs?

 

16 A. Yes.

 

17 Q. And what were your — what was your new

 

18 assignment?

 

19 A. I became an administrator in charge of

 

20 attendance.

 

21 Q. All right. Now, let’s go back to the first

 

22 one. You were a counselor?

 

23 A. Right.

 

24 Q. Did you also have teaching responsibilities?

 

25 A. No.

 

26 Q. Full-time counselor?

 

27 A. Yes.

 

28 Q. And how many other counselors were there in 6903

 

1 the school; do you recall?

 

2 A. Yes. There’s one for each grade level, and

 

3 there was a special needs counselor, so there was

 

4 three — a total of four counselors.

 

5 Q. During the time that you were a counselor

 

6 and working at John Burroughs, did you meet two

 

7 students by the name of Gavin Arvizo and Star

 

8 Arvizo?

 

9 A. Yes.

 

10 Q. And did you meet their mother?

 

11 A. Yes.

 

12 Q. Do you recall her name?

 

13 A. Yes.

 

14 Q. What was that?

 

15 A. Janet Ventura.

 

16 Q. So she was known to you as “Janet Ventura”?

 

17 A. Right.

18 Q. And were the boys known to you as “Ventura”

 

19 or “Arvizo”?

 

20 A. Arvizo.

 

21 Q. Now, at some point in time you were assigned

 

22 as an administrator, correct?

 

23 A. Correct.

 

24 Q. What are the responsibilities or what were

 

25 those new responsibilities to you as administrator?

 

26 A. It was to process students during the

 

27 enrollment process, and to process them if they were

 

28 leaving the campus, leaving the school, transferring 6904

 

1 to another school or school district. And it was

 

2 also to make monthly reports to the district on our

 

3 status, our attendance status. And to find out

 

4 where kids were that were not coming to school.

 

5 Q. At some point during the school year of 2002

 

6 and 2003, you transitioned from counselor to

 

7 administrator, correct?

 

8 A. Correct.

 

9 Q. Can you tell us approximately when that

 

10 transition occurred?

 

11 A. Well, the person that I replaced went out on

 

12 leave, so I was just temporarily filling that

 

13 person’s job in the early parts of January,

 

14 February, and March. And at some point, that person

 

15 retired and I took the job permanently.

 

16 Q. So the earliest point would have been

 

17 January, February, March of 2003?

 

18 A. Right.

 

19 Q. Okay. Let me show you a photograph, if I

 

20 might. Just take a look at it for a second.

 

21 I’ve handed you a photograph that I believe

 

22 has the number “338” on the tag; is that correct?

 

23 A. Yes.

 

24 Q. All right. And in that photograph, do you

 

25 recognize anybody in the photograph?

 

26 A. I recognize Star and Gavin, and I assume the

 

27 third person is their sister, but I never met her.

 

28 Q. Okay. But the two males in the photograph 6905

 

1 are Star and Gavin?

 

2 A. Right.

 

3 Q. Okay. Now I’m going to ask you a few

 

4 questions about Star and Gavin, okay?

 

5 A. Okay.

 

6 Q. To your knowledge, were they attending John

 

7 Burroughs during some portion of the school year

 

8 during 2002-2003?

 

9 A. Yes.

 

10 Q. And during the time that they were at the

 

11 school, were you a counselor to them?

 

12 A. Yes.

 

13 Q. Or let’s take them one at a time. Were you

 

14 a counselor to Gavin?

 

15 A. Yes.

 

16 Q. Were you a counselor to Star?

 

17 A. Yes.

 

18 Q. So that would have been what grade?

 

19 A. Seventh. Seventh grade.

During the time that the Arvizos were at Neverland, Davy became concerned that Gavin and Star were no longer attending school, so he sent out a pupil services counselor to make a home visit and check on their whereabouts, but he was unable to make contact with the family:

20 Q. Seventh. Now, later, when you were in

 

21 charge of attendance, did it come to your attention

 

22 that Star and Gavin were not attending school?

 

23 A. Yes.

 

24 Q. And as a result of that information, what

 

25 did you do? What course of action did you take?

 

26 A. I notified our pupil services counselor that

 

27 I was unable to reach the house by phone, and I

 

28 asked him to go out there and make a home visit. 6906

 

1 Q. Does this gentleman — is this a male or a

 

2 female?

 

3 A. It’s a male.

 

4 Q. And what’s his name?

 

5 A. Stephen Coffman.

 

6 Q. Okay. And did you ever hear back from Mr.

 

7 Coffman as to whether or not he was able to make

 

8 contact with the family?

 

9 A. Yes, he reported back the same day that he

 

10 was unable to make contact, and that he had left his

 

11 card there, and that he had talked to neighbors, but

 

12 was unable to find out where they were.

After hearing back from Mr. Coffman, Davy received  a phone call from Janet Arvizo, and Davey stated to her that since Gavin and Star had been out of school for more than 10 days, they would have to be checked back in to school by a parent:

13 Q. At some point after this conversation that

 

14 you had with Mr. Coffman, did you receive a

 

15 telephone call from Janet Arvizo?

 

16 A. I did.

 

17 Q. Now, let’s go back just in point in time.

 

18 Prior to this telephone call – okay? —

 

19 A. Yes.

 

20 Q. — had you met Mrs. Arvizo personally?

 

21 A. Yes.

 

22 Q. Mrs. Ventura, I guess, as she was known to

 

23 you.

 

24 A. Yes.

 

25 Q. And on how many occasions did you meet Mrs.

 

26 Ventura?

 

27 A. Numerous. She came up to school regularly.

 

28 Q. And how would you describe her in terms of 6907

 

1 her cooperation with you and the school?

 

2 A. She was very supportive of our efforts.

 

3 Q. Now, at the time that you received a

 

4 telephone call from her after Mr. Coffman had gone

 

5 out to her house and been unable to locate her –

 

6 okay? —

 

7 A. Yes.

 

8 Q. — with regard to that telephone

 

9 conversation, did you find anything unusual or

 

10 different about that telephone call with Mrs.

 

11 Ventura than your previous contacts with her?

 

12 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Vague and

 

13 leading.

 

14 THE COURT: Sustained. Sustained.

 

15 MR. SNEDDON: On which ground, Your Honor?

 

16 Just so I know.

 

17 THE COURT: Vague.

 

18 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: During the course of your

 

19 conversation with Mrs. Ventura after Mr. Coffman

 

20 went out to the house, how would you describe her

 

21 demeanor?

 

22 A. It wasn’t forthcoming.

 

23 Q. Was that unusual, in your opinion?

 

24 A. Yes.

 

25 Q. And when the subject — would you tell us

 

26 what the subject matter of the conversation was?

 

27 A. Right, I —

 

28 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay. 6908

 

1 THE COURT: Sustained.

 

2 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: With regard to the

 

3 conversation that you had with Mrs. Ventura –

 

4 okay? – did it involve the attendance of the kids at

 

5 school?

 

6 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; leading.

 

7 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

8 THE WITNESS: Yes.

Janet claimed that she was unable to go to their school to check them out, so Davy gave her the instructions that she could give to someone else to check them out for her. Eventually, he met with Vincent Amen, who checked Star and Gavin out of school permanently, and paid for their lost textbooks:

9 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: And as a result of the

 

10 conversation with Mrs. Ventura, did you give her

 

11 some information that was necessary with regard to

 

12 the kids’ future attendance at school?

 

13 A. Yes.

 

14 Q. All right. What did you tell her?

 

15 A. I — they had been gone more than ten days,

 

16 and I said that I needed her to bring them back to

 

17 school or check them out. And she said to me

 

18 that —

 

19 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay.

 

20 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, it’s offered as

 

21 circumstantial evidence with regard to her state of

 

22 mind at this particular point in time.

 

23 THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

 

24 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: Okay. So without telling

 

25 us what she said, would you tell us what you said to

 

26 her, what instructions you gave her?

 

27 A. Right. I told her that I needed the

 

28 students to either return to school or to check out. 6909

 

1 And she said it was not —

 

2 Q. You can’t tell us what she said.

 

3 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay.

 

4 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: She said something in

 

5 response to that, correct?

 

6 A. Yes.

 

7 Q. And then did you say anything back to her?

 

8 A. I told her we cannot keep the kids in — on

 

9 our books as students at the school for any longer

 

10 than we already had. And that if it was going to be

 

11 an extended stay, they were going to be gone for a

 

12 while, they needed to be checked out. And when they

 

13 were available to come back to school, we would

 

14 check them back in.

 

15 Q. All right. And did you give Mrs. Ventura

 

16 some directions as to what was necessary to check

 

17 the children out of school?

18 A. Right.

 

19 Q. Tell us what you told her.

 

20 A. I asked her to come in and check the

 

21 students out. She said that wasn’t —

 

22 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay.

 

23 THE COURT: Sustained.

 

24 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: Okay. So you asked her to

 

25 personally come in and do it?

 

26 A. Yes.

 

27 Q. Okay. And she said something back to you?

 

28 A. Right. 6910

 

1 Q. And as a result of that, did you give her

 

2 further direction as to what procedurally would have

 

3 to be followed to get those children out of school?

 

4 A. Right.

 

5 Q. Tell us what you told her.

 

6 A. I indicated that if she was unable to come,

 

7 that we needed someone with a note from her, and her

 

8 driver’s license, and that person needed to be able

 

9 to have an I.D. also. And that we needed the

 

10 textbooks returned, and to do it quickly, to do it

 

11 soon.

 

12 Q. All right. At that point in time, did you

 

13 become aware of the fact that somebody came to check

 

14 the children out of school?

 

15 A. Yes. She said that somebody would come in a

 

16 day or two.

 

17 Q. And did you write a note to somebody to

 

18 expect this to happen?

 

19 A. I wrote a note to my secretary that a person

 

20 would be coming with her I.D. and his I.D. and pay

 

21 for the books, and to direct that person to the book

 

22 room to pay for any textbooks that weren’t there.

 

23 Q. Now, did you at some point actually meet

 

24 somebody who came to check the boys out of school?

 

25 A. I did.

 

26 Q. And do you remember the name of that person?

 

27 A. Yes. It was Mr. Amen. Vincent Amen.

 

28 Q. All right. And did you personally deal with 6911

 

1 him on the check-out procedure?

 

2 A. The secretary gave him the paperwork and

 

3 made copies of his I.D. and Miss Ventura’s driver’s

 

4 license, and she kept the note that was sent along

 

5 with him.

 

6 And, you know, I spoke to him briefly, but I

 

7 didn’t handle the nuts and bolts of it. The

 

8 secretary did.

 

9 Q. And were some books paid for on that

 

10 particular occasion?

 

11 A. Books were paid for, yes.

 

12 Q. By whom?

 

13 A. By Vincent Amen.

Next, Davy was asked about a conversation that he had in his office with Major Jay Jackson, Gavin and Star’s step-father.  Jay Jackson noticed that someone in a car was videotaping Star and Gavin outside of their school during dismissal time, so Jay Jackson told Davy, who subsequently approached the person and asked him to stop, and he did. Sneddon ended his direct examination after this line of questioning.

24 Q. All right. I’ll take that. Thank you.

 

25 During the time that — I want to make it

 

26 more particular, but — well, during the year — the

 

27 school year 2002 and 2003 – okay? – at John

 

28 Burroughs, was there an instructor there by the name 6914

 

1 of Mr. Geraldt?

 

2 A. Yes. Mr. Geraldt, yes.

 

3 Q. Geraldt. And how long have you known Mr.

 

4 Geraldt?

 

5 A. Five years.

 

6 Q. And had you worked at the same school with

 

7 him —

 

8 A. Yes.

 

9 Q. — during that five-year period?

 

10 A. Right.

 

11 Q. And what was Mr. Geraldt’s position with the

 

12 school?

 

13 A. He was a classroom teacher, and he also

 

14 handled the detention room. And in the mornings, he

 

15 didn’t have a home room. He processed students that

 

16 were late to school.

 

17 Q. Did the manner in which Mr. Geraldt

 

18 interacted with some of the students and parents at

 

19 the school cause problems?

 

20 A. Yes.

 

21 Q. In what respect?

 

22 A. He had a kind of paramilitary demeanor about

 

23 him. He was kind of a drill instructor, in your

 

24 face, you know. Kind of shouty, loud, and, you

 

25 know, “You need to do this” and — just aggressive.

 

26 Q. And did that cause problems with some of the

 

27 students?

 

28 A. It did. 6915

 

1 Q. Did it cause problems with some of the

 

2 parents?

 

3 A. It did.

 

4 Q. And did the school have to take actions

 

5 towards him to try to calm down his behavior?

 

6 A. Yes.

 

7 Q. Now, at some point — I didn’t ask you this,

 

8 but I should have. The documents that — 71 (sic)

 

9 and 72 (sic) that show that Gavin and Star were

 

10 checked out of the school, those were completed on

 

11 the day that the children were checked out?

 

12 A. Yes.

 

13 Q. That’s correct?

 

14 A. Yes.

 

15 Q. That would have been in March of 2003?

 

16 A. Right.

 

17 Q. Now, did Gavin and Star come back to John

 

18 Burroughs later?

 

19 A. Yes.

 

20 Q. Do you remember approximately when it was?

 

21 A. About three weeks later.

 

22 Q. Now, do you recall an incident in which a

 

23 person by the name of Major Jay Jackson came to

 

24 contact you?

 

25 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; leading.

 

26 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

27 You may answer.

 

28 THE WITNESS: Yes. 6916

 

1 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: And do you know who Major

 

2 Jay Jackson is?

 

3 A. I do.

 

4 Q. Where did you first meet Mr. Jay Jackson,

 

5 Major Jay Jackson?

 

6 A. I met him in my office when I was having a

 

7 conference with Gavin’s mother, and he attended with

 

8 her.

 

9 Q. Now, on the particular day when Major

 

10 Jackson approached you, do you remember

 

11 approximately when that was in relationship to the

 

12 kids coming back to school, Gavin and Star?

 

13 A. Yes.

 

14 Q. All right. Tell the jury —

 

15 A. It was — it was shortly thereafter. Within

 

16 a few days or a week.

 

17 Q. And where were you when Major Jackson

 

18 approached you?

 

19 A. I was in front of the school.

 

20 Q. I’m sorry?

 

21 A. In front of John Burroughs.

 

22 Q. And could you describe his demeanor at the

 

23 time that he approached you?

 

24 A. All right. He was agitated. He said that

 

25 there was a —

 

26 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay.

 

27 MR. SNEDDON: It’s offered to explain the

 

28 conduct of this witness in response to the 6917

 

1 information that was provided.

 

2 THE COURT: I’ll sustain the hearsay

 

3 objection.

 

4 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: All right. I don’t know if

 

5 we got an answer to the first part, so I’ll just

 

6 start over again. And don’t tell us what Major

 

7 Jackson told you, okay?

 

8 A. Okay.

 

9 Q. Would you describe his demeanor when he

 

10 first approached you?

 

11 A. He was agitated.

 

12 Q. All right. And without telling us what he

 

13 said, did he say something to you —

 

14 A. Yes.

 

15 Q. — that caused you to do something?

 

16 A. Yes.

 

17 Q. All right. As a result of the information

 

18 that you received from Major Jackson, what did you

 

19 do?

 

20 A. I went down to the street and approached a

 

21 car that had a gentleman in it that was videotaping

 

22 students.

 

23 Q. Did you actually see the camera?

 

24 A. Yes.

 

25 Q. And where was the camera at the first point

 

26 that you saw it?

 

27 A. In the driver’s hand.

 

28 Q. And in what direction was it pointed? 6918

 

1 A. Out the windshield.

 

2 Q. Now, let’s pause for just a second, if we

3 can, and go back.

 

4 At what point in the school day was it that

 

5 Major Jackson approached you?

 

6 A. It was dismissal time.

 

7 Q. Can you describe to the jury what it’s like

 

8 at John Burroughs at dismissal time in terms of the

 

9 traffic flow?

 

10 A. John Burroughs is situated in a residential

 

11 area between two major streets. And at dismissal

 

12 time, the only way out of the school is through the

 

13 front or the north and south end of the school. You

 

14 can’t exit the back of the school because there’s

 

15 houses back there. So the vast majority of these

 

16 2400 kids leave out the front or the side, but they

 

17 end up in front of school.

 

18 And there’s school buses out there, and

 

19 there are parents, a lot of parents there to pick up

 

20 their students. So you have a traffic jam for about

 

21 15 or 20 minutes where the traffic flow is very,

 

22 very slow. Only about five or six cars can go

 

23 through the light at a time, because the students

 

24 crossing the street hold up traffic. So it would

 

25 take you — it will take you 15 minutes to go from

 

26 one end of the block to the other at dismissal time.

 

27 Q. Now, at the time that you approached this

 

28 car, do you remember what kind of a car it was? 6919

 

1 A. Generally, yes.

 

2 Q. Tell us.

 

3 A. It was a Nissan sports car.

 

4 Q. And where was this car in terms of the

 

5 relationship with this traffic flow at the point?

 

6 A. It was in gridlock. It was in front of

 

7 school in the gridlock.

 

8 Q. Were you actually able to go up to the

 

9 driver of the car?

 

10 A. Yes. Yeah, that’s —

 

11 Q. Did you have a conversation with the driver

 

12 of the car?

 

13 A. I walked up to the driver and I told him

 

14 that he couldn’t videotape students. And he — I

 

15 said, “I need you to stop videotaping students.”

 

16 And he said, “Okay,” and set the camera down on the

 

17 seat or the floor of the car.

 

18 Q. Did you write down the license number of the

 

19 car?

 

20 A. I did not.

 

21 Q. Was there any school security available to

 

22 you on this particular day?

 

23 A. On that particular day, the school police

 

24 officer was not present. And I gave him a note the

 

25 next day describing the car and telling him the

 

26 situation.

 

27 MR. SNEDDON: No further questions.

 

28 6920

Under cross examination, Davy confessed to Mesereau that Gavin was consistently a disciplinary problem at school, which was a topic that the prosecution completely ignored, as you would expect from them:

1 CROSS-EXAMINATION

 

2 BY MR. MESEREAU:

 

3 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Davy.

 

4 A. Good afternoon.

 

5 Q. My name is Thomas Mesereau. I speak for Mr.

 

6 Jackson.

 

7 When did you first meet the Arvizo family?

 

8 A. Fall of 2002.

 

9 Q. Okay. And was that when Gavin and Star

 

10 entered your school?

 

11 A. Yes.

 

12 Q. And Gavin and Star entered your school

 

13 approximately November of 2002, right?

 

14 A. Yes.

 

15 Q. What grades were they in?

 

16 A. Seventh.

 

17 Q. Okay. They both were in seventh?

 

18 A. Yes.

 

19 Q. Okay.

 

20 A. I think Gavin had lost a year. He’s older,

 

21 but he had lost a year from his health problems.

 

22 Q. Okay. And had you known them before they

 

23 entered your school in November of 2002?

 

24 A. No.

 

25 Q. Had you known anyone else in the family

 

26 before they entered your school in 2002?

 

27 A. No.

 

28 Q. Gavin was consistently a disciplinary 6921

 

1 problem, correct?

 

2 A. Correct.

 

3 Q. His behavior was disruptive and challenging,

 

4 in your own words, correct?

 

5 A. Correct.

 

6 Q. Gavin would routinely act up in class,

 

7 right?

 

8 A. Correct.

 

9 Q. He would display poor cooperation with

 

10 students and teachers, right?

 

11 A. Right.

 

12 Q. He would create situations in which he had

 

13 an audience to view his poor behavior, right?

 

14 A. Yes.

 

15 Q. His grades were low throughout his

 

16 education, right?

 

17 A. They were at John Burroughs.

 

18 Q. Yes. Pardon me.

 

19 A. Yes.

 

20 Q. His grades at John Burroughs were

 

21 consistently low, correct?

 

22 A. Yes. Yes.

 

23 Q. And you felt he didn’t apply himself in a

 

24 constructive manner in school, right?

 

25 A. Yes.

 

26 Q. You had a number of parent meetings with

 

27 Gavin, Janet and Jay in which Gavin’s poor behavior

 

28 was discussed at length, correct? 6922

 

1 A. Correct.

 

2 Q. And you felt that Gavin was the kind of

 

3 young man who could handle himself with adults,

 

4 right?

 

5 A. He thought he was the kind of person.

 

6 Q. You felt he could handle himself with adults

 

7 also, didn’t you?

 

8 A. He was — he was pretty glib, yes.

 

9 Q. You did actually write a report — excuse

 

10 me, not “write a report.” You gave an interview

 

11 where you actually made that statement, did you not,

 

12 about Gavin; that he can handle himself with adults?

 

13 A. Yes.

 

14 Q. Okay. You looked at his school records at

 

15 one point, correct?

 

16 A. You know, I don’t recall that.

 

17 Q. Do you recall concluding that Gavin’s grades

 

18 at your school were very similar to his grades at

 

19 other schools he had attended?

 

20 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, I’m going to

 

21 object. It calls for hearsay.

 

22 THE COURT: Sustained.

 

23 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you yourself ever look

 

24 at Gavin’s grades from other schools and compare

 

25 them to the grades he got at your school?

 

26 A. You know, I don’t recall that.

To be continued: https://michaeljacksonvindication2.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/april-19th-2005-trial-analysis-janet-arvizo-redirect-recross-examination-victor-alvarez-maria-ventura-william-caldwell-rod-forney-michael-davy-janet-williams-part-4-of-4/

Advertisements
No comments yet

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: