Skip to content

Questions About Michael Jacksons trials

December 22, 2013

On January 2nd Tom Mesereau will be on King Jordan Blogtalk Radio. We would like our readers to submit any questions they might have about the 2005 trial, Wade Robson and others if you have them. I have already compiled a long list of about 15 questions that I would like to ask and would like to hear from you about what your questions might be.
Here is a list of my Questions:
Questions for Tom Mesereau on Jordan King blog talk.
1. Can you explain about any DNA evidence that was found? I understand that the police took parts of the mattress from Michael Jackson’s bedroom in the initial search of Neverland and what if anything was found? I read in one motion that the prosecution filed that they and the defense knew from the beginning that nothing from the bed was going to be used can you explain why?

2. The court was in the process of setting a date for the preliminary hearing can you tell us how that changed and how it went to the Grand Jury instead?

3. Can you tell us the difference between the first set of charges in December and the charges in April after the Grand Jury indictment?

4. How many times did the prosecution and the police interview the Arvizo family before the search of Neverland and how many times did they interview them after the search and arrest?

5. Was there a connection between the post search interviews and the changes in the charges? What was the connection?

6. Can you tell us what the Conspiracy charge would have meant if there had been a guilty verdict how serious was it because people overlook that charge all the time and focus on the molestation charges?

7. Was the conspiracy charge linked to the molestation charges in any way?

8. Does there have to be a connection between the two for them to charge him with conspiracy to commit false imprisonment, extortion and child abduction?

9. If he had been found guilty of conspiracy do you feel they would they have prosecuted the unindicted co- conspirators?

10. Were there unnamed unindicted co-conspirators? If so who were they if you can name them?

11. Can you explain the special circumstances that were attached to the molestation charges and what that meant to his bail and if found guilty what that might have meant to his sentencing?

12. There are claims in the public that there was a photo found in 1993 of a boy that certain “journalists” and others claim is Jonathan Spence. Can you explain where that photo originated if you know?

13. Was there ever a connection between Victor Gutierrez the author of a book he titled Michael Jackson Was My Lover and Blanca Francia? There is a photo of the two of them together ( I actually believe from what I can see of the background that it was taken at Neverland) in his book was a connection between them ever investigated?

14. The people known as the Neverland Five had a connection to Gutierrez can you explain that connection to us? They are quoted extensively in his book. Do you know when they first met with him?

15. Do you believe that they prosecution thought that they were going to get a conviction in the case?

16. When did the police get a DNA sample from Gavin and Star Arvizo? Was their DNA found anywhere?

17. In 1993 the police served a search warrant on Michael Jackson to photograph his body. What was the purpose of the search and photos? Was there a possibility that Michael Jackson could have been arrested and if so why wasn’t
he?

18. what kind of a problem did Marc Schaffel present to Michael before the allegations and after?

Advertisements
28 Comments leave one →
  1. Amélie permalink
    September 22, 2015 6:49 pm

    Hello this is not about King Jordan Radio I think this is a suitable section for my question.

    I am knowing this is quite old but another site says there were pictures of Jonathan Spence and I remember you had this on your Twitter line. https://twitter.com/Tige234/status/585239145108353024

    Can you be disclosing what the prosecuting side said in this exchange?

    Thank you and continue such good work for Michael. I am sorry for my bad English!

  2. Nan permalink
    December 31, 2013 11:08 am

    I am just curious if Mr Mesereau thinks the estate will attempt to settle with Wade , because just like last time, it would be cost effective and not drag out more salacious, tabloid garbage, which is what they were afraid of in 93..I believe Weitzman was involved in the 93 settlement also, so it concerns me,

  3. Sina permalink
    December 27, 2013 3:30 pm

    Thank you Lynande 51/ MJV 02 for the opportunity to ask questions to Mr Mesereau about the 05 case

    These are my questions

    1. Is he involved as a consultant for the MJEstate in the Wade Robson case ?

    2. Mr Mesereau always stated that settling of the 1993 case was a mistake. What would he have done differently. Does he think the case was handled properly from the start or was there a point of no return when settling was the only option.? Did Michael talk about the choice to settle and did he agree?

    3. Will he ever reveal who were the ‘friends’ who refused to be called to the stand as character witnesses for Michael when he asked them. There is one that we know of ( Bruce Swedien)who said he ‘could not vouch for Michaels character ‘
    Are there others who today are profiling as friends but then also refused ?
    What did Michael think or said of the people who refused to stand up for him?

    4. Does he still stand by his defense of Sullivans book? What exactly was it that he thought made this book worth reading, aside from the information about the trial?

    • Nan permalink
      December 27, 2013 7:34 pm

      Hi Sina, that is a good question about who wouldnt come in for MJ..I know Mesereau had said one time that if you watched Larry King Live, after MJ died , you would see some who refused to help MJ..so I thought of Corey Feldman, but I hadnt heard that about Bruce..Where did you hear that ? thanks

      • Sina permalink
        December 29, 2013 5:11 am

        Nan it was something Bruce had written on his website during the 2005 trial but later deleted when fans started asking him questions. This is what he said:
        “I don’t have any first-hand knowledge of Michael doing any of the things that he is accused of. But people that I trust implicitly claim that they have seen things. That’s why I couldn’t come forward in Michael’s defense when I was asked. When you are under oath you must tell the truth.
        ‘I can’t truly vouche for Michael’s character. No one can do that but Michael. I have worked with him closely since he was 17 years old. I have never personally seen him do any of the things that he is accused of. Have you?
        I have been told things that would curl your hair about Michael. I have not seen any of those things. Have you? By-the-way, when I was asked to come forward for Michael, I couldn’t do it! Not with any good conscience.’ ”

        This was very disappointing for a man who had known Michael for 25 years Here is a discussion about it.
        http://www.amazon.com/forum/michael%20jackson?cdForum=Fx11O5ZOFFEMUQ4&cdMessage=Mx2M417CLBE0SOO&cdPage=18&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=TxYLB2YRH58HVB

        • lynande51 permalink*
          December 29, 2013 8:02 am

          I don’t know if it has been confirmed that was written by Bruce Swedien. It appears on the fan forum King of Pop in 2005, But Bruce was never on the witness list to be called.
          Here is a link to the list of witnesses to be called.Personally I think it was Quincy Jones that refused and now he is also suing the Estate. Go figure.
          http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/121304motcompeldisc06.pdf

        • Sina permalink
          December 29, 2013 1:25 pm

          We could ask Mr Mesereau to clear it up.
          It is not about what we THINK but what is fact. I have always known this to be attributed to Bruce Swedien. I would think a character witness for the defense e.g. QJ, will only be on the witness list if he agrees to be called. What use is it for the defense to call a witness if you are not sure if he will support your case.

      • Nan permalink
        December 29, 2013 10:24 am

        Thank you for the info, Sina and Lynande51….Quincy, I think, is using the same lawyer as Wade…Go figure , is right..I think the lawyer is a contract lawyer , which would make since for Q, and since, imo, the problem with Wade , started with his being dumped by the estate, after bragging he would be doing the Vegas shows., his child was sick and he didnt have a contract , is what Branca had said , before Weitzman started doing the talking according to Harvey Levin….
        ..Seems between the Vegas situation and the AEG trial , it morphed into , Wade looking for a payout from the estate ..So that would make sense , he had a contract lawyer at the helm, at the start of this thing..
        ..
        I would like to ask Mr Mesereau if he happens to know, if Wade went looking for compensation, before he made these accusations, and if he threatened the estate with bad publicity , looking for settlement money , before he filed this suit.
        I would hope the estate is using Mr Mesereau expertise regarding these accusations..and the pattern they seem to follow.

  4. Susan M-S permalink
    December 27, 2013 8:01 am

    What is Mr. Mesereau’s opinion of Aprhrodite Jones’ changed opinion on the Chandler case.

    I believe that at first he wanted nothing to do with her as he knew she was part of the media gang who were convinced Michael was guilty. But when she approached him in the process of writing her book, he believed she sincerely felt Michael was innocent. What does he make of her now?

  5. Nan permalink
    December 26, 2013 10:13 pm

    Wade Robson is now saying he was brainwashed into testifying for Michael Jackson,
    However Mac and Brett also came in freely to defend MJ.
    My understanding is that Mr Mesereau ALSO called Ray Chandler ,who had been making tv appearances saying, he had evidence of proof of MJ committing a crime against Jordan..
    My understanding is that he refused , ,and hid behind the Ca shield law and his status as a publisher.
    I was wondering if that was true and if .so, were the prosecutors aware that this person was refusing to testify also?
    The prosecutors didnt call Evan or Ray Chandler to testify , and Evan had said he saw MJ spooning his son
    Would that lead you to believe they left these people off the witness list because they knew the Chandlers were lying ? . .

    I also had read in the FBI files that their was no child pornography found in any of MJ computers , and the DA and prosecutors did not share that info with the defense.
    If that is true , is there any way to censure Mr Sneddon at this late date for that or any of the other questionable things he did , playing with evidence in grand jury , changing charges and time lines ,, if not on a state level, a federal level for abuse of power?

  6. Lopsided Man permalink
    December 26, 2013 11:39 am

    Question to Tom Mesereau:

    1) Is there any information from Michael Jackson’s now declassified FBI files that you would’ve found useful in your defense case?

    2) Based on everything you witnessed and learned about Michael’s world during the time you represented him, do you feel it was more likely than not that a larger conspiracy was at work in the charges against him, as Michael himself believed – I’m specifically thinking of Sneddon shoehorning Michael’s finances into an alleged child abuse case, which seemed to serve no purpose other than to harm him financially.

  7. lynande51 permalink*
    December 24, 2013 10:21 am

    So to sum up some of the other questions we have in addition to mine.
    1. Was Michael ever offered a plea bargain? If so when did that occur?

    2. After the trial did Michael ever consider pursuing charges against Tom Sneddon for the prosecution?

    3. Sneddon attempted to paint the picture that only boys spent time in Michael’s bedroom, a notion we know to be false. There were several young women that could have blown holes in that theory. Why weren’t they called to testify in Michael’s defense?

    4. What was Michael’s impression of Janet Arvizo during the family’s first visit to Neverland?

    5. Why were the 5 alleged co-conspirators never prosecuted if Sneddon stronly believed they conspired to kidnap the Arvizo family?

    6. In the ’93 case does Mesereau think the relationship between L.Feldman and J.Cochran interfered with his representation of Michael?

    7.. Was it ever brought out during the trial that no DNA for either Gavin or Star was found on Michael’s Bed?

    8. Well, I would like to ask him if he knows anything definite about the settlement in 1993 [Was it Transamerica?/Michael’s personal role]. I know Carl Douglas presented the settlement to Michael, yet what work was involved in the formation of that settlement.

    10. I would also like to ask him if he personally found the case difficult in comparison to other cases he’s had in the past.

    11. Also, one final question, did Mesereau, at any time, ever talk to a member of the Robson family. Did he ever research Wade’s dad? What was his view of Ray Chandler and Jordan Chandler’s refusal to not appear in court? His views on Gil Garcetti and Tom Sneddon, specifically Sneddon.

    12. Does Mr.Mesereau think that the Estate should pursue legal action against Wade Robson if his case is proven to be false or the claim is denied by the judge?

    13 Have you or any of your investigators ever spoken to Jonathan Spence and Jimmy Safechuck about the charges in 1993?

    14. Was there a romantic relationship between June Chandler and Michael or did she hope to start one with him?

  8. lynande51 permalink*
    December 24, 2013 10:06 am

    I have updated the post to include my questions so we know where we are at.

  9. Lena permalink
    December 24, 2013 12:00 am

    1. I’m not sure if this question has been addressed but who has possession of photographs that the D.A. took of Michael?

    2. This question makes me sick to state but If these photos surfaced what legal action can be made?

    3. What can be done about Diane Dimond and her persistent slandering and lying about both cases in documentaries & on the internet. Now she has moved to also slandering and discrediting (you) Tom Messerue.

  10. ALTTampa permalink
    December 23, 2013 10:03 pm

    Lynande51
    I have several questions.
    1. Sneddon attempted to paint the picture that only boys spent time in Michael’s bedroom, a notion we know to be false. There were several young women that could have blown holes in that theory. Why weren’t they called to testify in Michael’s defense?
    2. What was Michael’s impression of Janet Arvizo during the family’s first visit to Neverland?
    3. Why were the 5 alleged co-conspirators never prosecuted if Sneddon stronly believed they conspired to kidnap the Arvizo family?
    4. In the ’93 case does Mesereau think the relationship between L.Feldman and J.Cochran interfered with his representation of Michael?
    5. Was it ever brought out during the trial that no DNA for either Gavin or Star was found on Michael’s Bed?

    • lynande51 permalink*
      December 23, 2013 11:16 pm

      The DNA I can answer. Tom Mesereau talked about the DNA evidence in the opening and closing statements.

  11. Susan M-S permalink
    December 23, 2013 5:49 pm

    Hello again, Lynande51, – I have a few more questions for Mr. Mesereau, if possible:

    Did Michael ever want to testify personally at the 2005 trial and did Mr. Mesereau advise against it and vice-versa; Did Mr. Mesereau want Michael to testify and Michael did not wish to do so.

    What does he think of the chummy relationship amongst Gavin Arvizo, D. Dimond and Ron Zonen – attending weddings and what not.

    Does Mr. Mesereau think if another huge superstar was similarly charged, (say someone like Elton John, Paul McCartney) they would be treated so unfairly by the media with the one-sided reporting or does he feel Michael was singled out because he was so private and vulnerable, people projected their fear and hatred towards him.

    Thank you, again.

  12. Nan permalink
    December 23, 2013 12:16 pm

    I would also like to know his opinion of Larry Feldman and Stanley katz.
    I would also like to know his opinion of Carl Douglas remarks at the Frozen in Time seminar, which appeared to be about how much money and PR Johnny Cochrane and his firm were going to make off MJ troubles,,instead of offering a defense of MJ side, ,his flippant remarks about his client and the photographs that were taken of his privates.
    I also had heard that right after the settlement , Feldman started representing Cochrane and if that was unusual in any way..

  13. Nan permalink
    December 23, 2013 12:07 pm

    I also would like to know what is was exactly Mr Mesereau was implying during his cross of June Chandler, mentioning the love bracelet , that seems to be a gift for a couple in love,given that it has a screwdriver that the man places the bracelet on the woman himself, and that he had given it to her, after she had said she couldnt trust men to stay in her life because of her 2 husbands, the fact that he had been invited over for dinner , at times when Junes children were not there and he was leaving jewelry on her bed , which would imply something intimate.Introducing June and her children to royalty etc..
    Inviting her family members to Neverland and then New York for a family wedding where all her relatives were..
    Was there something romantic between Mj and June ?I was also wondering how it would follow that MJ was supposedly so crazy about Jordan and yet somehow convinced June to sign custody of him over to Evan, so he wouldnt have been able to see Jordan.
    Seems strange to me that any mother would sign her son over , just because MJ told her to , unless they were in a relationship,, themselves, which may have gotten JC angry that she would chose mj over him..
    That isnt really a question for Tom, I just think is a strange thing for any mother to do

  14. December 23, 2013 8:39 am

    1. Well, I would like to ask him if he knows anything definite about the settlement in 1993 [Was it Transamerica?/Michael’s personal role]. I know Carl Douglas presented the settlement to Michael, yet what work was involved in the formation of that settlement.

    2. I would also like to ask him if he personally found the case difficult in comparison to other cases he’s had in the past.

    3. Also, one final question, did Mesereau, at any time, ever talk to a member of the Robson family. Did he ever research Wade’s dad? What was his view of Ray Chandler and Jordan Chandler’s refusal to not appear in court? His views on Gil Garcetti and Tom Sneddon, specifically Sneddon.

  15. Bloomfield NJ permalink
    December 22, 2013 11:46 pm

    Thanks Lynande51
    Some prosecutors have been known to stack charges , that would create a great deal of jail time in order to pressure and intimidate a defendant into a plea bargain , rather then risk a trial they probably cant afford , AND the possibility of a long jail sentence,if found guilty….which if, a plea is accepted ,would save money for the state or county and the prosecutors have a win , in their column., for next time the DA runs for office..
    I was wondering if Mj was ever offered a plea bargain , like others probably were, …MJ supposedly had no money , like most people dont , for a long drawn out trial, and they stacked charges on him too.
    Kind of the same intimidation tactics ..
    I think they offered the un indicted co conspirators something , if they turned on MJ
    So with this group of prosecutors , did they ever offer a plea bargain to MJ, ….. or do you think they stacked the charges , just to get one charge , and wanted to waste all that time and money just to show off in front of the reporters
    ., and totally destroy MJ image and life ?
    I have spent a lot of time looking into this case , and they should have realized they had no case , this family was a bunch of liars , and they should have had serious questions regarding the Chandlers , which , it would seem , they purposely left people like Evan Chandler off the stand, because that thing was shaky also.
    Evan said he saw MJ spooning his son , but they bring June who never said she saw anything, probably because Evan is a nut., and was demanding money,,and they didnt want to have him answer questions.
    So it would make sense for them , even late in the game to offer a plea, if only for them to save face ,because this case was so obviously trumped up., which is why Judge Melville , even put in the misdemeanors at the end ..
    .

  16. Ann permalink
    December 22, 2013 11:10 pm

    Regardless of his role in Michael’s death, Conrad Murray was one of the closest person to Michael Jackson in the last few months of his life. I was wondering what does Mr. Mesereau think about Conrad Murray implying in a recent interview that he’s seen things which lead him to believe that Michael Jackson was indeed a pedophile.

    Also, I would like to know if Mr. Mesereau is aware that Wade Robson is accusing Michael of sodomy, among other things.

    • lynande51 permalink*
      December 23, 2013 7:30 am

      Actually Ann Conrad Murray did not imply that Michael Jackson was a pedophile, so I won’t forward that part of your question to Mr. Mesereau.
      I don’t know about Mr. Mresereau knowing that Wade Robson charges sodomy but I am aware of that from reviewing the court documents. A medical examination of Wade will answer that question as when a child is sodomized by an adult there will be scar tissue involved that never goes away. There is nothing that would prevent this. So in order to prove his point Wade Robson may be asked to undergo a colonoscopy if he chooses to pursue this claim. That will be entirely up to the judge in the case. That would be my recommendation. But I have already submitted this question to Mr. Mesereau so I hope that he answers the question for both of us.
      This article about Conrad Murray shows me that Conrad Murray is interested in disseminating his story that Michael Jackson got up when he left the room and gave himself the lethal dosage. According to Murrays police statement he only left him for 2 minutes making this an impossible scenario because as he said himself Michael Jackson was sleeping when he left the room.
      According to the autopsy report Conrad Murray found Michael not breathing and non responsive. According to the autopsy what he says transpired is also impossible if he only left for 2 minutes. When a person stops breathing the heart continues to beat for 3-5 minutes. That is why CPR works so well on at scene drownings which is why it was “invented” in the first place.
      http://abcnewsradioonline.com/entertainment-news/conrad-murray-says-he-tried-to-wean-michael-jackson-off-prop.html

  17. December 22, 2013 9:46 pm

    I’d like to know if there was any discussion between Mr. Mesereau and Michael after the trial about going after Sneddon for prosecutorial misconduct, i.e., the planted fingerprints, changing alleged dates of molestation to fit his agenda, other violations, and if not, then why not.

    • lynande51 permalink*
      December 23, 2013 8:08 am

      Great question. That’s one that I did not think of.

  18. Susan M-S permalink
    December 22, 2013 9:30 pm

    Thank you, Lynande51, for providing this forum to ask Mr. Mesereau questions on the upcoming King Jordan show.

    I would like to know if Mr. Mesereau thinks that the Michael Jackson Estate should pursue Wade Robson legally, if and when, his false claims are dismissed. I am hoping that they do, to discourage any other opportunists who might have the same idea; and to show everyone that they are not going to allow anyone to hurt Michael Jackson’s children and legacy.

    Thank you.

    • lynande51 permalink*
      December 23, 2013 8:18 am

      Another good question. I don’t know if the Estate could but there may be some legal recourse in bringing a false lawsuit based on the trade libel laws..
      I think the trade libel would work because of the timing of the release of the documents, allegations and his interview. I know that there was something the Estate was releasing at the time that could have been effected by the negative press.I think it may have been the Cirque show that it interfered with.

      • Nan permalink
        December 23, 2013 11:48 am

        I remember watching some entertainment show with Billy Bush that started the show with Wades accusations and mentioned the estate promoting the Vegas shows in the same program, that Wade had said earlier , he would be in charge of, that Jamie King ended up with the job..It was the same time as the beginning of the AEG trial , but his accusations also intersected with the shows in Vegas, much like other accusations came out at the same time of tours or album releases,imo

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: