Skip to content

April 20th, 2005 Trial Analysis: Brian Barron (Direct & Cross Examination), Part 2 of 3

August 31, 2013

Next, Barron was asked to describe the directive that was on the gate log on February 19th, 2003; Auchincloss told Barron that the directive was written on the grease board, when in fact it was on the gate log. Barron testified that it was general policy of the Ranch to not allow children to go off property without permission:

1 Q. All right. Now, I realize — or let me ask


2 you this: You had previously told law enforcement


3 that you believed that this — what you called or


4 what Mr. Auchincloss called a directive, that this


5 note about Gavin Arvizo was on the grease board?


6 A. Yes.


7 Q. And are you aware that none of the other


8 officers recall seeing it on the grease board?


9 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. That assumes


10 facts not in evidence.


11 THE COURT: Sustained.


12 Q. BY MR. SANGER: Are you aware of any other


13 officer who claims to have seen that on the grease


14 board?


15 A. Yes.


16 Q. Okay. Is it possible that this particular


17 notation was, in fact, on a gate log instead of the


18 grease board?


19 A. I’m sure it was on a gate log.


20 Q. Okay. And in fact, it’s on the gate log for


21 February the 19th; is that right?


22 A. I don’t know the date that it’s on there.


23 Q. You remember seeing it on the gate log; is


24 that correct?


25 A. No.


26 Q. Okay. You said it was on the gate log?


27 A. I now know that it was on the gate log.


28 Q. Okay. All right. Do you have the book up 7036


1 there, the —


2 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It’s right here.


3 MR. SANGER: This is the official book. All


4 right.


5 Q. Now, you say you’re aware it’s on the gate


6 log. Did somebody show it to you?


7 A. I was told.


8 Q. By the prosecution?


9 A. Yes.


10 Q. Okay. And who told you that?


11 A. The District Attorney.


12 Q. Which one?


13 A. Auchincloss.


14 Q. Mr. Auchincloss.


15 A. Thank you. Sorry.


16 MR. SANGER: Okay. Your Honor, what I’d


17 like to do, I’m going to take this page out of the


18 book, the entire book has been admitted, and there


19 are exhibit tabs, official court exhibit tabs on the


20 first page of each exhibit. So I am taking a page


21 out of 334. And at the bottom, this page says “MJ


22 00154.” And I’d ask permission to put this up on


23 the screen, if I may.


24 THE COURT: You may.


25 MR. SANGER: Thank you.


26 Q. I’ll back up, first of all. I’ll represent


27 to you I just took that — as I said to the Court, I


28 took that out of the book here. That’s one of the 7037


1 various pages. Does that appear to be a gate


2 activity log?


3 A. Yes.


4 Q. And there’s a number up on the top which


5 we’ll focus in on a little more. It says 2-19-03.


6 It’s a little fuzzy there, but —


7 A. Correct.


8 Q. And the purpose of this gate activity log


9 would be to record pretty much contemporaneously


10 activities that occurred during the security shift;


11 is that true?


12 A. That’s correct.


13 Q. And it’s also for the purpose of recording


14 information that should be communicated to other


15 officers on other shifts; is that correct?


16 A. Yes.


17 Q. All right. Now, I’m going to, with any


18 luck, focus in so we can read it, but we’ll see


19 about that.


20 Okay. Do you see there, it says — three


21 lines up from the bottom, on the middle of the page,


22 it says 1752.


23 A. Yes.


24 Q. What does 1752 represent?


25 A. 5:52 p.m.


26 Q. Military time. So it’s 5:52 in the


27 afternoon, correct?


28 A. Correct. 7038


1 Q. That would be the time that somebody


2 recorded the information on that, on that line


3 adjacent to it; is that correct?


4 A. Correct.


5 Q. And the line adjacent to it says, “The kids


6 are not to leave per Joe.” “Kids” meaning like


7 Gavin, Star, et cetera, correct?


8 A. Correct.


9 Q. All right. Were you aware that that


10 particular evening was the evening that these


11 children were to go down to Los Angeles?


12 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; assumes facts.


13 MR. SANGER: That’s —


14 THE COURT: Foundation; sustained.


15 MR. SANGER: Well, I asked if he was aware.


16 Should I rephrase it? Let me do it this way, Your


17 Honor. I won’t make that request.


18 THE COURT: The foundation’s a little


19 different, too. Go ahead and rephrase it.


20 Q. BY MR. SANGER: All right. Let’s do it this


21 way: A couple of questions. Just in general, if


22 children are on the ranch, are guests at the ranch


23 and they’re staying there and there’s not a parent


24 present, would it be the policy of the ranch not to


25 allow those children to go off of the ranch property


26 without supervision?


27 A. Correct.


28 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I’ll object as vague as to 7039


1 “children.”


2 THE COURT: Overruled.


3 You may answer.


4 THE WITNESS: Yes, we would not let them go


5 off the property by themself.


6 Q. BY MR. SANGER: So at this time do you know


7 whether or not there was a parent at the ranch with


8 Gavin, Star — well, it was “Gavin, Star, et


9 cetera.” So we’ll say with Gavin and Star.


10 A. I don’t know for sure. I don’t believe


11 there was.


12 Q. All right. So that would be a reasonable


13 instruction for security in general, correct?


14 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Argumentative;


15 calls for a conclusion.


16 THE COURT: Sustained on argumentative.


17 Q. BY MR. SANGER: It would not be out of the


18 ordinary, then, to not let children such as Gavin


19 and Star leave the ranch without approval or without


20 supervision, correct?


21 A. Correct.


22 Q. And based on your experience, if children or


23 any guests were scheduled to leave as a group, would


24 it be appropriate for security to be alerted so that


25 the people would be there to leave in the vehicle


26 that was assigned to take them? Does that make


27 sense? It was a long question.


28 A. Would it be appropriate to have security 7040


1 notified —


2 Q. Yeah.


3 A. — if they were going to be leaving?


4 Q. Yes.

5 A. It would have been appropriate. It didn’t


6 happen very often, but —


7 Q. So if there was a bus or a limousine that


8 was going to leave and certain kids were going to be


9 on it, that’s something that security could well be


10 advised of, correct?


11 A. Should well be advised of. We weren’t


12 always advised.


13 Q. Weren’t always advised. But if you were


14 advised, you’d feel that was appropriate, right?


15 A. Yes.

Barron then testified that Frank Cascio’s family also spent a lot of time at Neverland; Sanger questioned him about this in order to show the jury that it was very common for the families of Jackson’s young friends to spend time at Neverland:

16 Q. Okay. I’m going to put that page back where


17 I found it. Close the book so I don’t mix things


18 up, and we’ll come back to it in a moment.


19 All right. Now let’s work backwards just a


20 little bit here. You were asked about Frank Cascio,


21 correct?


22 A. Correct.


23 Q. And was he also known by another name?


24 A. Frank Tyson.


25 Q. Frank Tyson. Okay. Frank?


26 A. Frank.


27 Q. As far as Frank Cascio, Frank Tyson was


28 concerned, was he there — you said he stayed over, 7041


1 as far as you could tell, quite a number of times,


2 right?


3 A. Right.


4 Q. And the District Attorney asked you if this


5 was logged in the logs when he might be staying


6 over.


7 A. Correct.


8 Q. Did you go back and look at the logs and add


9 up the times?


10 A. No.


11 Q. All right. So you’re really not answering


12 that question based on reviewing the logs; is that


13 right?


14 A. I reviewed the logs, but did not write down


15 or memorize how many times he’d been there.


16 Q. All right. So your general impression was


17 that he stayed overnight quite a number of times,


18 correct?


19 A. Yes.


20 Q. And did Frank Cascio have any other family


21 members who you were aware of?


22 A. Yes.


23 Q. And did they often stay over?


24 A. Yes.


25 Q. Did his father come out and visit from time


26 to time?


27 A. Yes.


28 Q. Did his brother and sister visit from time 7042


1 to time?


2 A. Yes.


3 Q. Any other family members you can recall?


4 A. His mother had been there.


5 Q. Okay.


6 A. I think he had two brothers.


7 Q. All right.


8 A. I believe.


9 Q. Very good. So his brothers, his sister, and


10 both of his parents would stay over from time to


11 time; is that correct?


12 A. Yes.


13 Q. All right. Now, were there times during


14 your — your span there, when Frank Cascio or his


15 family might be there, and then there would be a


16 period of time where he wouldn’t be around and he or


17 his family would come back at some later time?


18 A. Meaning that —


19 Q. That was a bad question.


20 A. I’m sorry, I don’t understand the question.


21 Q. Fair enough. Just tell me.


22 In other words, you say he was there — from


23 the time that you were employed to the time that you


24 left the ranch, you said he was there many times,


25 maybe you saw him 75 to 100 times with Michael


26 Jackson, he stayed over many times, right?


27 A. Yes.


28 Q. Was this continuously or were there periods 7043


1 of time where the Cascios might be visiting, and


2 then months might go by before they’d come back?


3 A. Yes, that’s correct.


4 Q. And did — you were yourself gone for


5 periods of time; is that correct?


6 A. Yes.


7 Q. You next had somebody named Vinnie. Did you


8 know his last name?


9 A. No, I don’t know it.


10 Q. You said, well, he spent the night


11 occasionally, I think. Do you know when that was?


12 A. The actual dates of when? Or —


13 Q. If you know them.


14 A. No, I don’t know the actual dates of when.


15 Q. In general, when did you see Vinnie?


16 A. Generally I saw Vinnie when Frank was there.


17 Q. And when did you start seeing Vinnie?


18 A. Probably in 2002, right around there. I


19 don’t know the exact time frame.


20 Q. Maybe late 2002?


21 A. Could have been, yes.


22 Q. All right. So you didn’t really see him the


23 entire time that you were working there?


24 A. No.


25 Q. He was a more recent visitor?


26 A. Yes.


27 Q. Same with Marc Schaffel. You said he was


28 not there — or he did not spend the night very 7044


1 often. You recall seeing him every once in a while?


2 A. Every once in a while. Granted I worked


3 two, three days a week, so I wasn’t there all during


4 the week.


5 Q. I understand.


6 A. But occasionally he was there, yes.


7 Q. And was he there continuously during a


8 period of time or off and on, or two different


9 distinct periods of time?


10 A. I remember him being there just off and on,


11 odd times. He would just come out and — he may


12 stay the night, he may leave that day.

Here is Barron’s testimony about Ronald Konitzer and Dieter Weisner:

13 Q. You mentioned Ronald Konitzer and you said


14 you recognized the name, but you couldn’t really put


15 a face to that name; is that correct?


16 A. I don’t believe I could, no.


17 Q. You remember Mr. Konitzer being listed as a


18 guest; is that correct?


19 A. Yes.


20 Q. You remember seeing the name anyway —


21 A. Yes.


22 Q. — in the context of being a guest.


23 Do you remember Mr. Konitzer’s wife and


24 children being listed as guests?


25 A. I don’t remember that, no.


26 Q. All right. Now, if they were guests,


27 there’s a good chance they would be in the guest


28 logs; is that correct? 7045


1 A. That’s correct.


2 Q. And then you mentioned Dieter Weizner. You


3 said you saw him visiting several times; is that


4 correct?


5 A. That’s correct.


6 Q. And do you know when this period of time


7 was? Was this the entire time from 1998?


8 A. No, it would have been later into when I


9 worked there, probably around, again, late — mid,


10 late ‘02, end of 2002, into 2003.

Sanger pivoted to Jackson’s security concerns, and Barron confirmed that guests were required to sign confidentiality agreements before entering the ranch. He also described the general atmosphere and work conditions of the ranch, and these questions were asked by the defense to give the jurors an accurate depiction of what life at Neverland was really like:

11 Q. Into 2003. Okay. Now, in general, besides


12 intruders, which we talked about, actual trespassers


13 and people who intrude, were there other concerns


14 for security on the ranch?


15 A. Meaning —


16 Q. Well, for instance, was one of the concerns


17 that this was Michael Jackson’s home and that his


18 privacy should be preserved?


19 A. Yes.


20 Q. So there were confidentiality agreements


21 that new visitors would sign when they came to the


22 gate; is that correct?


23 A. Correct. Correct. I’m sorry, yes.


24 Q. I didn’t know if the court reporter got it.


25 A. I’m sorry.


26 Q. And one of the reasons for the


27 confidentiality agreements was — or one of the


28 provisions was that people not take pictures when 7046


1 they’re at the ranch; is that correct?


2 A. That’s correct.


3 Q. And you understood the reason for that to be


4 that people would sell pictures if they could; is


5 that right?


6 A. I understood the reason to be we were told

7 not to let them do it. What they did with them


8 is —


9 Q. You understand that — there was a concern


10 about people getting cameras on the ranch to take


11 pictures to sell them to the tabloids?


12 A. I’m sure that there was.


13 Q. And some of the intruders that you caught


14 had cameras with them; is that correct?


15 A. Yes.


16 Q. Did you — were you aware of an armed


17 intruder getting onto the ranch?


18 A. Armed with what?


19 Q. With a gun.


20 A. No.


21 Q. The ranch itself you understood to be Mr.


22 Jackson’s home, right?


23 A. Yes.


24 Q. And one of the things that security was


25 instructed to do was to accord Mr. Jackson respect


26 as a person who is trying to live in his home,


27 correct?


28 A. Absolutely. 7047


1 Q. So the idea was to not unduly approach him


2 or burden him, or take up his time while he’s trying


3 to — while he’s trying to be at home, correct?


4 A. That’s correct.


5 Q. And have you ever worked for any other


6 celebrities or people of that sort?


7 A. No.


8 Q. But that made sense to you, didn’t it?


9 A. Absolutely.


10 Q. All right. When you say that when Mr.


11 Jackson was there people were on pins and needles,


12 did you mean by that to suggest that Mr. Jackson was


13 a harsh or mean boss of some sort?


14 A. No.


15 Q. Just — the structure of the people there,


16 through the various commands and different


17 departments, made everybody aware that when Mr.


18 Jackson’s on property that you need to be on your


19 best behavior, right?


20 A. Yes.


21 Q. And you didn’t see anything wrong with that,


22 did you?


23 A. No. Not necessarily, no.


24 Q. Okay. And you felt personally that — I


25 suppose you probably felt you should be on your best


26 behavior at all times; is that right?


27 A. Yes.


28 Q. But you didn’t have any objection to 7048


1 everybody being, you know, particularly careful to


2 be prepared and ready to perform their duties when


3 the owner is on the property, right?


4 A. I had no objection to that. No.


5 Q. Now, you said people worked harder when Mr.


6 Jackson was there, right?


7 A. They worked more, for sure.


8 Q. Okay. Now, there’s sometimes Mr. Jackson


9 was not there when there were big events that were


10 scheduled; is that right?


11 A. That’s correct.


12 Q. There were family days?


13 A. Yes.


14 Q. And you’ve gone to family days, have you


15 not?


16 A. Several of them.


17 Q. Do you have family? I won’t go into


18 details. But did you bring family members with you?


19 A. Yes.


20 Q. And this is something that Mr. Jackson did


21 for his employees; is that right?


22 A. That’s right.


23 Q. Basically opened up the whole property, the


24 employees could bring their children, their friends


25 or their close friends or relatives certainly, and


26 could enjoy the rides and all the other amenities at


27 Neverland; is that right?


28 A. That’s right. 7049


1 Q. Mr. Jackson would sometimes be there and


2 sometimes not; is that right?


3 A. That’s right.


4 Q. And then there were other days when he would


5 have large groups of either, for instance,


6 disadvantaged children or children who were sick or


7 just children in general who would come to be his


8 guest at the ranch; is that correct?


9 A. That’s correct.


10 Q. During those times, Mr. Jackson was often


11 not on the property; is that right?


12 A. Often not on the property?


13 Q. Yes.


14 A. That’s right.


15 Q. And he was sometimes on the property; is


16 that correct?


17 A. Yes.


18 Q. Whether he was on the property or not, the


19 entire staff was instructed to treat all of the


20 people, adults and children, as guests, as if they


21 were guests at somebody’s private home; is that


22 correct?


23 A. That’s correct.


24 Q. The only difference is that there would be


25 certain boundaries, you can’t go into certain parts


26 of the house and that sort of thing; is that


27 correct?


28 A. That’s correct. 7050


1 Q. But other than that, if the kids want


2 something, if the adults want something, everybody


3 is there to serve; is that right?


4 A. That’s right.


5 Q. Now, you mentioned that the security guards


6 often did the job of other — let me withdraw that.


7 You mentioned the security guards worked with the


8 fire department from time to time; is that correct?


9 A. Basically they were the same department.


10 Q. All right. And you had at least one fire


11 truck there?


12 A. Yes.


13 Q. Was there a time when you had more than one?


14 A. Well, there was a time when there was —


15 when I was there, there was a time that there was


16 more than one, one was not working.


17 Q. Okay.


18 A. But there were two. And then prior to me


19 being there, yes, there was, I believe, more than


20 one.


21 Q. Eventually they turned one of those fire


22 trucks into a water truck, I think.


23 A. Water tender, yes.


24 Q. There you go. But they have one operating


25 professional fire truck there; is that correct?


26 A. Not in the sense — fire rescue, like a


27 brush truck. It would be not like a large city fire


28 truck. But, yes, a working — held water, medical 7051


1 equipment.


2 Q. All right. Not a hook and ladder, but


3 something that was an emergency vehicle —


4 A. Yes.


5 Q. — that could be used to tend to emergencies


6 on this ranch, correct?


7 A. Correct.


8 Q. And anywhere from somebody being injured,


9 to having a brush fire, to anything else that was


10 needed on an emergency basis; is that right?


11 A. Yes.


12 Q. And both the people who were assigned as


13 security officers and those assigned as firemen were


14 somewhat interchangeable in these tasks. If it


15 needed to be done, you all would respond and do it;


16 is that correct?


17 A. That is correct.


18 Q. Now, there were a number of people who were


19 in the fire department from time to time who


20 eventually became employed in other fire


21 departments; is that correct?


22 A. Yes.


23 Q. All right. So this was an area where people


24 could work, gain additional experience in order to


25 go work someplace else; is that right?


26 A. Yes.


27 Q. And did you feel — as a professional law


28 enforcement officer, did you feel that the — that 7052


1 the operation was run professionally?


2 A. Yes.


3 Q. All right. Now, the duties of security and


4 fire you said were pretty much merged. But in


5 addition to those duties, you also had duties to


6 attend to the needs of guests and Mr. Jackson, or


7 anybody else who required some assistance on the


8 ranch; is that correct?


9 A. Yes.


10 Q. And they were not always law enforcement

11 duties or fire duties, correct?


12 A. Generally, no.


13 Q. Generally not.


14 So, if somebody needed something, you or


15 anybody else that worked there — say a guest needed


16 something, you or anybody else that worked there was


17 expected to respond as favorably as possible; is


18 that right?


19 A. Yes.


20 Q. All right.


21 THE COURT: Counsel? Take our break.


22 MR. SANGER: Okay. Thank you.


23 (Recess taken.)

After the break, Barron was asked to go into further detail about his job duties:

1 THE COURT: Go ahead.


2 MR. SANGER: Thank you.


3 Q. All right. Mr. Barron —


4 A. Uh-huh.


5 Q. — or Officer Barron, across the street


6 from —


7 THE BAILIFF: Can you turn your microphone


8 on?


9 MR. SANGER: Oh, sorry. There you go.


10 Q. Across the street from Neverland on Figueroa


11 Mountain Road, there are two schools; is that


12 correct?


13 A. That’s correct.


14 Q. What kind of schools are they?


15 A. One is a boarding school, and one is like


16 a — an elementary school, I believe.


17 Q. Okay. And are these private schools?


18 A. Yes.


19 Q. People are there during the day?


20 A. Yes.


21 Q. So there’s activity, at least during the


22 school year; is that correct?


23 A. Correct.


24 Q. All right. February and March of 2003,


25 those schools would have been open; people would


26 have been there?


27 A. Yes.


28 Q. Parents coming and going? 7058


1 A. Yes.


2 Q. Teachers?


3 A. Yes.


4 Q. Administrators?


5 A. Yes.


6 Q. Now, you told us about the security staff


7 that you were a member of, correct?


8 A. Correct.


9 Q. And you told us about the fire department?


10 A. Correct.


11 Q. Did Mr. Jackson also have personal security


12 or personal bodyguards?


13 A. Yes.


14 Q. And are these people who traveled with him?


15 A. Yes.


16 Q. You did not travel with Mr. Jackson; is that


17 correct?


18 A. No.


19 Q. So your duties were pretty much restricted


20 to the ranch. I shouldn’t say restricted. It’s a


21 big ranch, but you were there at the ranch, correct?


22 A. Yes.


23 Q. If he went to Los Angeles or Miami or went


24 on tour or anything else, you would not go with him;


25 is that correct?


26 A. No.


27 Q. And who would go with him?


28 A. Whomever was his personal security at the 7059


1 time. It did change.


2 Q. All right. So he did have people who were


3 generally experienced in going on the road and


4 protecting a celebrity under those circumstances; is


5 that correct?


6 A. There were times when he did, yes.


7 Q. Okay. There were some times when you


8 thought his personal security may not have been —


9 A. Yes.


10 Q. — quite as — okay. All right.

Sanger finally got to the heart of the matter and questioned Barron about his knowledge of Janet Arvizo, who he didn’t remember until he was shown a photo of her. Other than a few brief conversations over the telephone, he didn’t have any contact with her. She appeared to want to be at Neverland, and there was no indication that she or her family didn’t want to be at Neverland, according to Barron. During the grand jury proceedings, Barron testified that Janet had full and complete access to all of Neverland, and wasn’t restricted at all.

11 Now, do you remember Janet Arvizo?


12 A. I know she was there. I do not remember her


13 face until yesterday.


14 Q. All right. But you remember her being there


15 and you remember having some contact with her; is


16 that correct?


17 A. Yes.


18 Q. And you remember Gavin Arvizo?


19 A. Yes.


20 Q. You remember Star Arvizo?


21 A. Yes.


22 Q. And in general, did Janet Arvizo ever appear


23 to not want to be at the ranch?


24 A. In general, I couldn’t answer.


25 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. I’m going to


26 object on the basis of foundation.


27 THE COURT: Sustained.


28 Q. BY MR. SANGER: All right. Would it be your 7060


1 opinion, based on your seeing her there at the


2 ranch, that what stood out in your mind was that


3 Mrs. Arvizo appeared that she wanted to be there?


4 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Same


5 objection.


6 THE COURT: Sustained.


7 Q. BY MR. SANGER: All right. What kind of


8 contact did you have with Janet Arvizo?


9 A. Probably talked to her on the phone once or


10 twice. Other than that, relatively none.


11 Q. When you talked to her on the phone, did it


12 appear that she wanted to be there at the ranch?


13 A. Yes.


14 Q. And Janet Arvizo had access to the house,


15 full access to the house; is that correct?


16 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Foundation.


17 THE COURT: Overruled.


18 You may answer.


19 THE WITNESS: I don’t know.


20 Q. BY MR. SANGER: Okay. Do you recall


21 testifying before the Santa Barbara Grand Jury on


22 April the 12th, 2004?


23 A. Yes.


24 Q. Do you recall telling the grand jury that


25 Janet Arvizo was one of the people who had access;


26 she would have access to the house?


27 A. Yes.


28 Q. And when you were — when the District 7061


1 Attorney said, “Okay,” you said, “No question.”


2 A. Yes.


3 Q. Is that correct? And she had full access to


4 the house because her children were there; is that


5 correct?


6 A. Yes.


7 Q. All right. Now, did you have any personal


8 observations about the behavior of Gavin and Star?


9 A. No.


10 Q. They appeared — from what you could see,


11 they appeared to want to be at the ranch; is that


12 correct?


13 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Foundation.


14 THE COURT: Sustained.


15 Q. BY MR. SANGER: Did you see them from time


16 to time at the ranch?


17 A. Seldom.


18 Q. Was there any indication — from the seldom


19 times that you saw them, was there any indication


20 that they did not want to be at the ranch?


21 A. No.

Here are more discussions on his duties:

22 Q. You indicated that part of the security —


23 part of security’s job was to monitor who was coming


24 onto the property, correct?


25 A. Correct.


26 Q. And that was recorded, to a large extent, in


27 the gate logs; is that correct?


28 A. Yes. 7062


1 Q. Were you aware that in addition to just


2 plain interlopers, that there would be people who


3 would try to gain some kind of introduction to Mr.


4 Jackson to get into his favor?


5 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Ambiguous;


6 foundation.


7 THE COURT: Overruled.


8 You may answer.


9 THE WITNESS: How do you mean?


10 Q. BY MR. SANGER: Well, were there people who


11 seemed to be trying to get close to Mr. Jackson?


12 A. Yes.


13 Q. And sometimes Mr. Jackson really wouldn’t


14 want those people to be around him, correct?


15 A. Correct.


16 Q. So if they were allowed on the ranch, they


17 were to be treated courteously?

18 A. Yes, yes.


19 Q. But nevertheless, you were to try to help


20 Mr. Jackson not be bothered by people; is that


21 right?


22 A. That’s right.


23 Q. And Mr. Jackson, of course, during the time


24 you were there, and now, for that matter, is an


25 international celebrity, an artist, a very well-


26 known person, correct?


27 A. Yes.


28 Q. And there would be people who would 7063


1 basically be trying to get into his good graces; is


2 that right?


3 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Foundation.


4 THE COURT: It’s argumentative. Sustained.

Here’s a bombshell piece of information that is truly indicative of Sneddon’s vendetta against Jackson: in an interview with Det. Bonner from the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department, Barron was asked to become a paid informan for Sneddont, but he refused the offer. Why would Sneddon want to have an informant infiltrate Neverland? I believe that, at best, he wanted a spy to report to him any possible dirt on Jackson, and at worst, he wanted someone there to plant evidence that could have been used on a subsequent raid! It’s not as farfetched as you may think, especially when you consider all of the other sleazy actions that Sneddon took to bring this case to trial, including (but not limited to) changing the dates of the alleged molestation once he realized Jackson had an alibi, adding the ridiculous conspiracy charge, allowing Gavin to handle the adult magazines without wearing gloves, using the 1108 witnesses to bolster his flimsy case, etc. (Be sure to read this post and this post for information on dirty linen that was mysteriously planted at Neverland in an unusual location.)

5 Q. BY MR. SANGER: All right. Now, let me ask


6 you one other thing before we get to the gate logs


7 and some of the other documents you identified.


8 You were actually asked — let me put it a


9 different way. You were contacted by the Santa


10 Barbara County Sheriff’s Office in December of 2003;


11 is that correct?


12 A. That’s correct.


13 Q. And in particular, Detective Bonner of the


14 Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department contacted you; is


15 that correct?


16 A. Correct.


17 Q. And he did an interview of you to determine


18 if you’d seen anything unlawful and so on; is that


19 correct?


20 A. That’s correct.


21 Q. But then he asked that you work as an


22 informant; is that correct?


23 A. Yes.


24 Q. And you were at that time a sworn peace


25 officer of the Guadalupe Police Department, correct?


26 A. That’s correct.


27 Q. And he basically wanted you to go back to


28 work for Mr. Jackson in December of 2003 to be an 7064


1 informant, correct?


2 A. That’s correct.


3 Q. And at that time, you know that the raid had


4 already occurred on Mr. Jackson’s house, correct?


5 A. Correct.


6 Q. You knew Mr. Jackson had a lawyer, had


7 counsel, right?


8 A. Yes.


9 Q. And you were being asked to go in as a law


10 enforcement informant into his ranch, at his home,


11 and inform for the sheriff; is that correct?


12 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Asked and


13 answered.


14 THE COURT: Overruled.


15 You may answer.




17 Q. BY MR. SANGER: And you refused to do that;


18 is that right?


19 A. Yes.

In this excerpt, Sanger questioned Barron about the accident report that was written after Gavin crashed his golf cart into a theater fountain due to his reckless driving on June 21st, 2002. Gavin was warned to be careful and drive the car slowly, but he ignored those requests:

20 Q. What I’d like to do now is go through some


21 of the exhibits that you’ve identified and ask you,


22 based on your training and experience, to interpret


23 the documents, okay?


24 To the extent you were there, you made an


25 entry, and then you can contribute that as well and


26 say, “Yes, I actually wrote that.”


27 A. Yes.


28 Q. But to the extent that you introduced these 7065


1 documents, you said they were kept in the ordinary


2 course of business, I’d like you to explain what


3 they mean, if you could.


4 A. Okay.


5 MR. SANGER: So I’m going to start with


6 Exhibit 300, and, Your Honor, if this procedure is


7 acceptable, I’d like to do this without asking each


8 time — or I can. Whatever the Court wants me to


9 do.


10 What I propose to do is identify the


11 document by exhibit number. If there is more than


12 one page to the exhibit, I’ll indicate which page of


13 the exhibit. If — in the Exhibits 334 and 335,


14 there are hundreds of pages, so I’ll refer to the


15 Bates stamp number on the bottom of the page for


16 that purpose.


17 And if that procedure is acceptable, what


18 I’d like to do then is put each of these up on


19 the — not all of them, but each of the ones I want


20 to point out on the overhead projector, and I’ll


21 just make reference to it at the time.


22 THE COURT: That’s a fine procedure.


23 MR. SANGER: Okay. Thank you. In other


24 words, I won’t ask leave each time. I’ll just do


25 it.


26 THE COURT: That’s good.


27 MR. SANGER: Thank you. Okay. In that


28 case, with the Court’s permission in advance, I’ll 7066


1 put Exhibit 300 up.


2 THE BAILIFF: Can you put “Input 4”?


3 MR. SANGER: Or we’ll put up Mr.


4 Auchincloss’s….


5 THE COURT: That was “Input 4.”


6 Q. BY MR. SANGER: What I’m going to do, I


7 hope, is put it up in a way so we can show the


8 exhibit tag number, if such exists, and then I’ll


9 give you an opportunity here to see what the


10 document is, best we can.


11 If you want me to — this was printed pretty


12 large, so we can do it this way, if you want me to


13 scroll it up or down. If you’d like me to approach


14 and give it to you, if you can’t read it, I’ll just


15 walk up and show it to you. So just let me know.


16 A. Okay.


17 Q. This is Exhibit 300. And it appears at the


18 top to be an accident damage report, okay?


19 A. Okay.


20 Q. And I think you told us that was kept in the


21 ordinary course of business; is that correct?


22 A. Correct.


23 Q. And the accident damage report appears to


24 have been generated on a computer; is that right?


25 A. Correct.


26 Q. In other words, it’s not just a form that’s


27 handwritten in, but somebody generated the whole


28 thing on a computer, correct? 7067


1 A. Yes.


2 Q. And the format is such that it appears to be


3 a standard format, and then you put in particular


4 information based on the particular incident; is


5 that correct?


6 A. That’s correct.


7 Q. All right. Now, what would be the purpose


8 of this particular accident damage report? Let me


9 rephrase that. What does this accident damage


10 report refer to?


11 A. One of the golf carts.


12 Q. All right. And from that report and from


13 the records, and based on your training and


14 experience, can you explain what happened and why


15 this report was written?


16 A. I can read it.


17 Q. Okay. Well, let’s do it this way, because


18 we’ll start this way and then the other ones will


19 speak for themselves.


20 There’s a date up there at the very top,


21 right?


22 A. Yes.


23 Q. 6-21-02.


24 A. Yes.


25 Q. Would that be the date of the incident?


26 A. Yes.


27 Q. And then you have a date at the bottom.


28 Would that be the date the report was written? 7068


1 A. Yes.


2 Q. And there’s a time, 1610, so 4:10 in the


3 afternoon, correct?


4 A. Correct.


5 Q. And the time at the top would be 1530, which


6 would be 3:30 in the afternoon, correct?


7 A. Correct.


8 Q. All right. So this report is designed to


9 document the fact that Gavin Arvizo was involved in


10 crashing a golf cart into the theater fountain; is


11 that correct?


12 A. That’s correct.


13 Q. And the cause of the accident was recorded


14 as reckless driving; is that correct?


15 A. That’s correct.


16 Q. All right. Now, you told us that you’re

17 supposed to be very courteous to the guests, no


18 matter who they are, where they’re from or whatever.


19 Is it appropriate, however, for security officers to


20 warn guests, particularly children, if they’re


21 involved in unsafe behavior?


22 A. Yes.


23 Q. And based on this report, does it appear


24 that there was a warning given to Gavin Arvizo about


25 driving the golf cart?


26 A. Yes.


27 Q. And the warning was to slow down or the golf


28 cart would be taken away; is that correct? 7069


1 A. Correct.


2 Q. So based on your experience in these


3 records, that would indicate that an officer gave


4 that warning to Gavin Arvizo?


5 A. Yes.


6 Q. All right. Were you aware of other


7 incidents involving Gavin or Star Arvizo that


8 involves destruction of property or accidents or


9 that sort of thing?


10 A. No.


11 Q. Okay. Did you review these records to see


12 if you could find such evidence?


13 A. Not for that purpose, no.


14 Q. Okay. That’s fair enough. Actually, I


15 didn’t see that. I don’t think it was on my copy.


16 Maybe it was.


17 On the back of 300 is a photograph. Does


18 that appear to be a Polaroid-type photograph?


19 A. Yes.


20 Q. Is that the front of a golf cart?


21 A. Yes.


22 Q. And it kind of looks like a car.


23 A. Well, you couldn’t hold golf clubs on them.


24 They’re more of a car.


25 Q. It’s essentially the frame of a golf cart


26 and it’s got a little fiberglass car body on it?


27 A. Correct.


28 Q. And this one, I think, is the Batmobile one; 7070


1 is that —


2 A. We call it “the Batman cart.”


3 Q. “The Batman cart,” okay. In any event, this


4 photograph is taken to show damage that was


5 associated with that report; is that correct?


6 A. That’s correct.

To be continued: 

2 Comments leave one →
  1. Jan permalink
    October 15, 2013 11:16 am

    have you seen this rubbish by stacy brown:

    • sanemjfan permalink
      October 15, 2013 10:24 pm

      Thank you! Some people just never change……………

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: