Skip to content

April 26th, 2005 Trial Analysis: Cynthia Montgomery, Jeff Klapakis, and Hamid Moslehi, Part 4 of 4

January 9, 2014

Moslehi was told by Schaffel that the rebuttal video wouldn’t be shot at Neverland, but rather at Moslehi’s home. Moslehi responded by asking if it could be shot at Scheffel’s home, but he didn’t want the Arvizos to remember his address (smart man!)

25 Q. Okay. Who informed you of that?

 

26 A. I believe it was Marc Schaffel.

 

27 Q. You believe?

 

28 A. Well, Marc Schaffel, I think. It was Marc 7686

 

1 Schaffel.

 

2 Q. And how did you hear from Marc Schaffel that

 

3 that was not going to take place at Neverland that

 

4 night?

 

5 A. I believe it was a phone conversation.

 

6 Q. So you had — was this the first phone

 

7 conversation? Second? You tell me.

 

8 A. I believe could be second.

 

9 Q. And did you receive some instructions from

 

10 Mr. Schaffel regarding the filming on that second

 

11 phone conversation?

 

12 A. If I remember correctly, he informed me that

 

13 Janet, the mom, is going to — is going to be in

 

14 L.A. She’s in L.A. Therefore, we’re going to shoot

 

15 this in L.A. He asked me if I can shoot that in my

 

16 house. I respond to him that if we can shoot it at

 

17 his house, but then he said he doesn’t want them to

 

18 remember where he lives. So we ended up shooting at

 

19 my house.

 

20 Q. Mr. Schaffel said he didn’t want who to know

 

21 where he lived?

 

22 A. I believe the family.

 

23 Q. So what did you do then?

 

24 A. I informed my crew that this production will

 

25 not take — this shoot will not take place at

 

26 Neverland. I let them know that they should pack

 

27 the equipment. And then I got the three kids and we

 

28 drove back to my house. 7687

 

1 Q. After you spoke to Mr. Schaffel and learned

 

2 that the shoot was going to take place at your

 

3 house, did you have a conversation with Joe Marcus,

 

4 the Neverland Ranch manager?

 

5 A. If I remember correctly, I — when I arrived

 

6 at Neverland, I let him know why I’m there, to shoot

 

7 this interview. Then later, I informed him that

 

8 it’s not going to happen here at Neverland, it’s

 

9 going to be at my house, and I’m taking the kids

 

10 with me.

 

11 Q. Did you tell him that you were going to do

 

12 the shoot with the mother and the kids?

 

13 A. I believe so.

 

14 Q. What was Mr. Marcus’s reaction when you told

 

15 him that you wanted to take the kids off of

 

16 Neverland?

 

17 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay.

 

18 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Offered in furtherance.

 

19 THE COURT: All right. I’m going to admit it

 

20 for the limited purposes previously discussed on the

 

21 conspiracy issue.

 

22 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: What did Mr. Marcus

 

23 tell you when you informed him that — of your

 

24 intent to take the children —

 

25 A. I believe he said —

 

26 Q. — to your home?

 

27 A. I believe he said, “They’re not allowed to

 

28 leave the property.” 7688

1 Q. You believe that or did —

 

2 A. I did —

 

3 Q. Do you remember what he said?

 

4 A. I remember he said, “They’re not allowed to

 

5 leave the property.”

 

6 Q. At some point did you confront him with the

 

7 intent or did you confront him with the necessity to

 

8 have the children go down to your home to complete

 

9 the video shoot?

 

10 A. Well, at one point I believe I informed him

 

11 that the video that we were supposed to shoot at

 

12 Neverland, it’s not going to take place, and it’s

 

13 going to be at my house.

 

14 Q. Uh-huh.

 

15 A. So the kids are coming with me.

 

16 Q. Did he agree to anything at that time during

 

17 that first conversation with you in terms of letting

 

18 the kids off the property?

 

19 A. He agreed?

 

20 Q. Yes. Did he agree with you about anything

 

21 during that first conversation you had with Joe

 

22 Marcus where he told you that the kids are not

 

23 allowed off of the property?

 

24 A. What do you mean, did he agree? Do you mean

 

25 letting them go with me, or —

 

26 Q. Yes.

 

27 A. I don’t remember hearing anything from him.

 

28 Q. Okay. What did you do then? 7689

 

1 A. Then I let the kids know that within, like,

 

2 15 minutes we’re going to take off, “So get your

 

3 stuff ready.”

 

4 Q. What did you do in the next 15 minutes?

 

5 A. If I remember correctly, I went to help my

 

6 crew so we can pack the car, the equipment back to

 

7 the car, and take off.

 

8 Q. Did you see Joe Marcus again before you left

 

9 Neverland?

 

10 A. I believe I did.

 

11 Q. Did you talk to him about getting the kids

 

12 off the property?

 

13 A. I’m not sure if I had a conversation with

 

14 him about that, but he saw me leaving.

 

15 Q. All right. So you were allowed to leave

 

16 Neverland when you drove off the property, when you

 

17 wanted to leave the property?

 

18 A. Yeah, that’s right.

 

19 Q. And how much time went by between the time

 

20 that you first told Joe Marcus — or when Joe Marcus

 

21 first told you the kids are not allowed off

 

22 Neverland and the time that you actually drove off

 

23 of Neverland?

 

24 A. I would say approximately half an hour.

 

25 Q. When you went down to the theater to collect

 

26 your equipment, where was — where did Joe Marcus

 

27 go, or where was he?

 

28 A. I don’t know. 7690

 

1 Q. Did he come with you?

 

2 A. No.

 

3 Q. Do you know if he had any conversations with

 

4 anybody during that meantime?

 

5 A. I’m not sure.

 

6 Q. All right. So you took the kids, personally

 

7 you loaded them up in one of the vehicles?

 

8 A. That’s correct.

 

9 Q. How many vehicles?

 

10 A. I took two vehicles of mine to Neverland.

 

11 Q. Okay. And which vehicle did the kids go in?

 

12 A. I had a Suburban for the equipment and the

 

13 crew, and a BMW for myself, basically.

 

14 Q. Okay. Which one did the kids go in?

 

15 A. The BMW.

 

16 Q. And you drove that?

 

17 A. That’s correct.

 

18 Q. And did you drive straight to your home?

 

19 A. That’s correct.

 

20 Q. About what time was it when you ultimately

 

21 arrived at your home?

 

22 A. Approximately 11:00-ish.

 

23 Q. And what did the children do during the

 

24 drive down from Santa Barbara?

 

25 A. We had some little conversations, and they

 

26 went to sleep.

 

27 Q. Your home is in Calabasas?

 

28 A. West Hills. 7691

 

1 Q. West Hills. So you arrived at your home

 

2 about 11:00. What did you do then?

 

3 A. I immediately started loading equipment to

 

4 the area that I was going to shoot, and let the kids

 

5 play with video games and things like that.

 

6 Q. Do you have some video games at your home?

 

7 A. Yeah.

 

8 Q. Some fancy ones?

 

9 A. Not really.

 

10 Q. Okay. So they played video games?

 

11 A. That’s right.

 

12 Q. All three of them?

 

13 A. I guess the guys. She was — I don’t know

 

14 what she was doing. I don’t remember exactly. But

 

15 she was there, too.

 

16 Q. Did they stay in one area of the house

 

17 during that period?

 

18 A. Yeah.

 

19 Q. And were your two assistants still with you?

 

20 A. Yes, they were.

 

21 Q. Was there anybody else at the house when you

 

22 first arrived, other than you, your assistants and

 

23 the Arvizo kids?

 

24 A. No. Just us.

 

25 Q. Did someone arrive at the house shortly

 

26 thereafter?

 

27 A. Yes.

 

28 Q. Who was that? Who was the first person to 7692

 

1 arrive?

 

2 A. I believe was Christian Robinson, and

 

3 another gentleman by the name of Paul, which is an

 

4 associate of Marc Schaffel.

 

5 Q. Had you met Paul before?

 

6 A. Yes.

 

7 Q. On what occasion?

 

8 A. In the year 2001, Mr. Jackson did the

 

9 project “What More Can I Give?” And Paul was

 

10 involved somehow with that production helping

 

11 Schaffel.

 

12 Q. Did you set up your equipment for the shoot?

 

13 A. At my house, yeah.

Auchincloss focused on the presence of Brad Miller as a sign that something nefarious was going on during the shooting of the rebuttal video; he tried to sway the jury into believing that he was there to intimidate the Arvizos into cooperating, especially since he had already interviewed them a few weeks prior, Moslehi testified that he didn’t feel “comfortable” about Miller being at his house:

14 Q. During that period, did anybody else show up

 

15 at the house after Christian and Paul arrived?

 

16 A. Another gentleman; I believe was Brad

 

17 Miller.

 

18 Q. Did he arrive by himself?

 

19 A. I believe so, yes.

 

20 Q. Had you ever seen Brad Miller before?

 

21 A. No.

 

22 Q. Have you ever seen him since that night?

 

23 A. No. On T.V., I guess, once.

 

24 Q. And he arrived by himself?

 

25 A. I believe so.

 

26 Q. Did you have any understanding of what Brad

 

27 Miller was doing at your home that night?

 

28 A. No. And I remember asking Christian who 7693

 

1 this guy is, and they said, “Don’t worry about it.

 

2 It’s just a private detective.”

 

3 Q. Have you ever done any video shoots where

 

4 there was a private detective invited to watch at a

 

5 home that the shoot occurred at?

 

6 A. No.

 

7 Q. Did you ever see Brad Miller do anything

 

8 that evening?

 

9 A. He was walking around my house.

 

10 Q. Did anybody else arrive at your home?

 

11 A. Vinnie and the mother.

 

12 Q. Janet Arvizo?

 

13 A. That’s correct.

 

14 Q. Do you know about what time they arrived?

 

15 A. I would say towards midnight.

 

16 Q. All right. So how was the preparation going

 

17 at this point for the video shoot?

 

18 A. Well, me and my crew were setting up the

 

19 lighting. Mainly I’m doing the lighting,

 

20 background, sound and that kind of stuff. They’re

 

21 bringing the equipment in.

 

22 Sorry.

 

23 And Janet was getting her makeup done. And

 

24 the kids were just, you know, playing with games and

 

25 stuff like that.

 

26 Q. Did anybody do Janet’s makeup for her?

 

27 A. I don’t believe — she did her own makeup.

 

28 Q. And how did you feel at this point about 7694

 

1 this scene, if you can characterize it in terms of

 

2 the time, the people? Was there anything unusual

 

3 about this?

 

4 A. Well, timing was a little — you know, kind

 

5 of getting late. Also having Brad Miller in my

 

6 house, I didn’t really feel comfortable.

 

7 Q. Had you met Vinnie before?

 

8 A. Yes.

 

9 Q. And prior to the shooting of the video, did

 

10 you become aware of any problems that Janet had, any

 

11 additional problems that Janet expressed concerning

 

12 the shooting of the video?

 

13 A. I think there was a problem with the

 

14 contract or the release that they were asking her to

 

15 sign.

 

16 Q. Okay.

 

17 A. And if I remember correctly, Vinnie asked me

 

18 to use my fax machine and that kind of things.

 

19 Q. And you say “they” were having a problem

 

20 with her?

 

21 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; misstates the

 

22 evidence.

 

23 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Well, I believe you

 

24 said, “…They were asking her to sign.” Who were

 

25 “they”?

 

26 A. I believe it was Paul and Vinnie and

 

27 potentially Christian Robinson.

 

28 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Okay. So if I could have 7695

 

1 the Elmo briefly, Your Honor.

 

2 Q. I’m showing you again Exhibit No. 194 which

 

3 you previously identified as your home. Can you

 

4 identify that perspective for me?

 

5 A. Yeah, this is a view of my living room.

 

6 Q. And does this area — does this photograph

 

7 depict any area of the part of your home that was

 

8 used in the video shoot?

 

9 A. That’s correct.

 

10 Q. Which area? Explain it to me.

 

11 A. This is where I set up the background.

 

12 Q. Uh-huh.

 

13 A. I believe the family were sitting

 

14 approximately in this area. And my camera was

 

15 like — it’s off of this frame, but about this area.

 

16 Q. You’ve indicated the background was in the

 

17 center of the carpeting, the carpet, or I should say

 

18 rug?

 

19 A. Right about there.

 

20 Q. And then the seating area was at the

 

21 front, between the two carpets?

 

22 A. About there.

 

23 Q. The two rugs. And then your camera was down

 

24 outside the frame of the picture?

 

25 A. Outside this frame.

 

26 Q. Below it.

 

27 Okay. And where were the boys and Davellin

 

28 during the period of the downtime when you were 7696

 

1 preparing the video shoot?

 

2 A. That’s my T.V. set-up, so that’s where they

 

3 were sitting. It’s like a little coffee table and a

 

4 little video game stuff.

 

5 Q. Where was the discussion that was taking

 

6 place between Janet, Paul, Vinnie and possibly

 

7 Christian?

 

8 A. In the other room, which is out of this

 

9 frame.

Here are more details about the day of the shoot:

26 So how much time passed between the time

 

27 that Janet arrived at your home and the time that

 

28 you started shooting the video? 7697

 

1 A. I would say a couple of hours,

 

2 approximately.

 

3 Q. How much time went by in which Janet was —

 

4 how long did this discussion take place between

 

5 Janet, Vinnie, Paul and possibly Christian?

 

6 A. I would say half an hour.

 

7 Q. How much time did it take for you to set up

 

8 the video equipment?

 

9 A. I would say hour to hour and a half.

 

10 Q. Did you hear any of the conversation between

 

11 Janet and these other parties about the consent

 

12 form?

 

13 A. Did I hear any conversation?

 

14 Q. Yeah. You told us the general context of

 

15 the conversation. Did you hear any specifics about

 

16 what the issue was about signing this consent?

 

17 A. No, I did not.

 

18 Q. Can you tell me what Janet’s demeanor was?

 

19 What was her — what was her mood like? How did she

 

20 act about this?

 

21 A. About the —

 

22 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; foundation.

 

23 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Well, that’s fine. I can

 

24 lay a better foundation.

 

25 Q. You mentioned that Janet had a problem with

 

26 signing the consent form.

 

27 A. That’s correct.

 

28 Q. Why do you say that? What do you base that 7698

 

1 on?

 

2 A. Because I observed that they’re looking at

 

3 the contract, and she was going through it, and

 

4 there was some, I guess, words that she was not

 

5 happy with or the content of this contract. And

 

6 then at one point Vinnie asked me to use my fax

 

7 machine, I guess to get faxed in or out, to redraft

 

8 that contract, some sort.

 

9 Q. During that period of time that you were

 

10 observing Janet and these individuals, did you have

 

11 a chance to see what her demeanor was like? Do you

 

12 know what I mean by “demeanor”?

 

13 A. Yeah, like an attitude?

 

14 Q. Yeah. What was her attitude like?

 

15 A. Um —

 

16 Q. Did you have a chance to notice that?

 

17 A. I was very busy setting up equipment, so I

 

18 didn’t really pay attention to each individual’s,

 

19 you know —

 

20 Q. Right.

 

21 A. — attitude or whatever. She was, I guess,

 

22 normal. I guess. I don’t know.

 

23 Q. Did she seem happy about it?

 

24 A. Um —

 

25 Q. About this thing they wanted her to sign?

 

26 A. She wasn’t happy about the assignment, or I

 

27 mean the contract that she wanted to sign, as I

 

28 understood. 7699

 

1 Q. So ultimately you do the video shoot?

 

2 A. Yes.

 

3 Q. Do you know if she signed anything that

 

4 night?

 

5 A. I believe she did.

 

6 Q. Did you see her sign something?

 

7 A. No, I did not.

 

8 Q. Okay. Why do you say you think she did?

 

9 A. Because it looks like Marc’s people were

 

10 happy.

 

11 Q. Okay.

 

12 A. So –

The rebuttal video was around one hour long, and after it was shot everyone left the residence. However, just prior to leaving, Janet had a private meeting with Moslehi, who offered to loan her $2,000 dollars on his own volition, and of course Auchincloss was sure to ask him to confirm that Janet never asked him for money.

Later on, Schaffel’s associate asked for the tape, but Moslehi refused to return it because he wanted to make himself a copy, and he wanted to resolve his aforementioned financial dispute with Jackson.

13 Q. So you do the video shoot. Was it a

 

14 continuous shoot or were there segments?

 

15 A. I believe we shot one-hour interview, and

 

16 each of these professional tapes are 30 minutes. I

 

17 don’t believe there were so many cuts in it, so we

 

18 continued rolling camera, basically. Maybe one or

 

19 two cuts in between, if any.

 

20 Q. So how much video footage did you shoot

 

21 total?

 

22 A. I would say approximately an hour.

 

23 Q. At the conclusion of the — of this project,

 

24 when you finished shooting it, what happened? After

 

25 you finished it, you’ve got the videotape. What

 

26 happened next?

 

27 A. Well, we wrapped equipment and everybody

 

28 left. 7700

 

1 Q. Okay. Did you see who left with whom?

 

2 A. Not specifically, no.

 

3 Q. Did you provide the videotape that you had

 

4 shot to anybody, any member of the group that had

 

5 come from — well, did you give that tape to anybody

 

6 that night? Let me just put it that way.

 

7 A. No, I didn’t.

 

8 Q. Did anybody want that tape?

 

9 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Calls for

10 speculation; vague; foundation.

 

11 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I can ask the question a

 

12 little better.

 

13 THE COURT: All right.

 

14 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did somebody ask you

 

15 for that tape?

 

16 A. I believe Paul, Marc Schaffel’s associate.

 

17 Q. Was there a discussion with Paul about him

 

18 getting the tape that night?

 

19 A. He asked me to turn him — turn over the

 

20 tapes to him.

 

21 Q. Yes.

 

22 A. And I refused.

 

23 Q. Did anybody else ask you to turn those tapes

 

24 over, other than Paul?

 

25 A. Maybe Christian.

 

26 Q. Okay.

 

27 A. I’m not sure.

 

28 Q. Why did you refuse to turn the tapes over? 7701

 

1 A. Well, first of all, I wanted to make a copy

 

2 so in case — as insurance, to have a second copy of

 

3 that tape. Also, there was some other issues that

 

4 were not resolved by then, so I kind of kept the

 

5 tape for that.

 

6 Q. At the conclusion of the evening, did you

 

7 spend some time with Janet, any time privately with

 

8 Janet?

 

9 A. Yes, I did.

 

10 Q. When did that occur in relationship to the

 

11 end of the video shoot and everybody leaving?

 

12 A. It was towards the end of when everybody was

 

13 leaving. At the end of the shoot.

 

14 Q. Do you remember who was still at the home at

 

15 that time?

 

16 A. Everybody was there.

 

17 Q. Did you have a purpose in meeting her

 

18 separately?

 

19 A. Yeah.

 

20 Q. What was your purpose?

 

21 A. I — I remember I gave her, like, a loan.

 

22 Q. Okay. What was — let me back up.

 

23 During the period of time that you first

 

24 became acquainted with the Arvizos to the time of

 

25 this shoot, how many separate meetings would you say

 

26 you had with the Arvizo family?

 

27 A. Including the kids?

 

28 Q. Yeah. 7702

 

1 A. Six, seven.

 

2 Q. Did you get to know them?

 

3 A. Yeah.

 

4 Q. How did you feel about the Arvizo family?

 

5 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Vague;

 

6 foundation; relevance.

 

7 THE COURT: Sustained.

 

8 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you at some point

 

9 that night decide to give Janet Arvizo a loan based

 

10 on your own desire?

 

11 A. Did I decide?

 

12 Q. Yeah.

 

13 A. Yeah.

 

14 Q. You did.

 

15 A. Yeah.

 

16 Q. Did Janet Arvizo ever ask you for any money?

 

17 A. No.

 

18 Q. Did she ever request anything from you?

 

19 A. No.

 

20 THE COURT: All right. We’ll take our break

 

21 now.

 

22 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right.

 

23 (Recess taken.)

 

24 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Okay. I think where we

 

25 left off, we were talking about —

 

26 THE BAILIFF: Is your microphone on?

 

27 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It is now, yeah.

 

28 Q. We were talking about the end of the video 7703

 

1 shoot and your having this private conversation with

 

2 Janet. When you had that private conversation with

 

3 Janet, did you give her some money?

 

4 A. That’s correct.

 

5 Q. And I think I’ve already asked you, did she

 

6 ever ask you for that money?

 

7 A. No.

 

8 Q. Whose idea was it to give Janet some money?

 

9 A. It was mine.

 

10 Q. During that period of time that you were

 

11 with the Arvizo family, did you form any kind of

 

12 affection for this family during this period of

 

13 time?

 

14 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; relevance.

 

15 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Goes to his —

 

16 MR. MESEREAU: And leading.

 

17 THE COURT: All right. The objection is

 

18 overruled.

 

19 You may answer.

 

20 THE WITNESS: I kind of felt sorry when I —

 

21 about the whole family, about Gavin being — you

 

22 know, being sick, and, you know, close to dying from

 

23 cancer, and that kind of thing.

 

24 So — and then over the video shoot that we

 

25 had in, I believe, October 2000, I worked with Star

 

26 and Gavin very closely, so we became kind of, you

 

27 know, buddies —

 

28 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Okay. 7704

 

1 A. — in a way.

 

2 Q. Okay. Were those the reasons why you did

 

3 this act?

 

4 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; leading.

 

5 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I’ll strike that.

 

6 Q. Did what you have just described have

 

7 anything to do with your decision to give Janet some

 

8 money?

 

9 A. I’m sorry. Repeat that question one more

 

10 time.

 

11 Q. You just described that you had some

 

12 affection for Gavin and Star and you were sad about

 

13 the hardship of Gavin’s cancer.

 

14 Did your feelings towards the Arvizo family

 

15 have anything to do with your decision to give

 

16 them — give Janet some money?

 

17 A. Yeah.

 

18 Q. Okay. And how much money did you give

 

19 Janet?

 

20 A. $2,000.

 

21 Q. Did you envision that she would pay this

 

22 back some day?

 

23 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; leading.

 

24 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

25 THE WITNESS: Can I answer that?

 

26 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Yes, you can answer it.

 

27 A. Well, I told her that, “This is a loan, a

 

28 personal loan, from me to you, and pay me whenever 7705

 

1 you have the money.”

 

2 Q. And did you have a date that you envisioned

 

3 getting this money back by?

 

4 A. No. I left it up to her.

 

5 Q. During the period of time that you were

 

6 working on this rebuttal film, and I mean the entire

 

7 film, not just the portion with the Arvizos, did you

 

8 work with — did you spend any time at Mr.

 

9 Schaffel’s home?

 

10 A. Yes, I did.

 

11 Q. What did you do at Mr. Schaffel’s home?

 

12 A. Mostly rough editing, meaning I would go

 

13 through Mr. Jackson’s archival footage, find certain

 

14 footage from concerts to some other material. And

 

15 while we were creating this new footages for the

 

16 interviews, then I would make a rough cut. And then

 

17 the production company who was assigned to do this

 

18 entire video, Brad Lachman Productions, would do the

 

19 final editing.

 

20 Q. During this period of time, did you ever

 

21 have an opportunity to overhear Mr. Schaffel talking

 

22 on the phone?

 

23 A. As I remember, there were a couple of times

 

24 that I had, like, questions that I wanted to ask

 

25 Marc Schaffel, and I would walk from the room where

 

26 we set up the equipment, like the editing equipment,

 

27 to his office, and, you know, he would be on the

 

28 phone or things like that. 7706

 

1 Q. Did you ever hear him making any remarks

 

2 concerning getting people out of the country?

 

3 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Leading;

 

4 foundation; move to strike.

 

5 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

6 You may answer.

 

7 THE WITNESS: If I remember correctly, one

 

8 occasion I walked into the room, and I think I heard

 

9 Schaffel saying, “We’re going to get them out of the

 

10 country.”

 

11 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Do you remember hearing

 

12 that?

 

13 A. To my best recollection, yes.

14 Q. Was there anything about the context of that

 

15 conversation that struck you as unusual?

 

16 A. Not at the time.

 

17 Q. Did you know what he was talking about?

 

18 A. Not at the time.

 

19 Q. Did you know who he was talking to?

 

20 A. No.

Moslehi’s professional relationship with Jackson ended in 2003, after he received a termination letter stating that his services would no longer be required. He attempted to arrange a meeting at Neverland with Jackson for February 26th, 2003 to discuss his unpaid invoices, but just prior to the start of that meeting he was told to leave the property by Jackson’s assistant.

21 Q. So at some point you said that during 2003,

 

22 you were — you ended your relationship as Mr.

 

23 Jackson’s personal DP; is that correct?

 

24 A. Well, Mr. Jackson stopped calling and using

 

25 my service.

 

26 Q. Okay. Was there a specific date that was

 

27 associated with that change?

 

28 A. I think after that rebuttal documentary, 7707

 

1 “The Footage You Were Never Meant To See” —

 

2 Q. Yes.

 

3 A. — I guess after that, basically that was

 

4 the last project that Mr. Jackson used my services.

 

5 Q. Were you ever terminated?

 

6 A. Terminated — well, they just stopped using

 

7 my service.

 

8 Q. Were you ever informed that your services

 

9 were no longer required?

 

10 A. I received a letter from —

 

11 Q. That’s “yes” or “no.”

 

12 A. Yes.

 

13 Q. Okay. So tell me, do you remember what date

 

14 that was?

 

15 A. I believe it was February 21st of 2003.

 

16 Q. And when did “The Footage You Were Never

 

17 Meant To See,” that rebuttal video, when did that

 

18 air on the network?

 

19 A. I believe it was February 20th of 2003.

 

20 Q. Did you watch it on T.V.?

 

21 A. Yes, I did.

 

22 Q. Did Mr. Jackson ever contact you after that?

 

23 A. If I remember correctly, the day after, he

 

24 called me. Mr. Jackson called me.

 

25 Q. And what was the substance of — what was

 

26 the purpose of that phone call?

 

27 A. He thanked me for my good work.

 

28 Q. Did you have any conversations with him – 7708

 

1 well, let me strike that.

 

2 Does Mr. Jackson still owe you the $250,000

 

3 that had been promised?

 

4 A. Part of this is paid, but there’s still a

 

5 substantial amount of unpaid invoices that has not

 

6 been paid yet.

 

7 Q. Did you bring that up with Mr. Jackson?

 

8 A. I — I believe I had one conversation to him

 

9 about my invoices not being paid. But I had

 

10 hundreds of conversation with his personal

 

11 assistant, his accountant, all his agents, including

 

12 his managers, and his lawyers.

 

13 Q. Okay. My question is, did you bring that up

 

14 to Mr. Jackson on the 20th when he called you — or

 

15 was it the 21st —

 

16 A. The 21st.

 

17 Q. — the 21st when he called you and said you

 

18 did a good job on the rebuttal video?

 

19 A. I believe I mentioned that for the very

 

20 first time that my invoices are not being paid.

 

21 Q. Okay. Later that day, did you receive a

 

22 communication from Mr. Jackson’s attorney?

 

23 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; leading.

 

24 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

25 Yes, go ahead.

 

26 THE WITNESS: Yes, I did.

 

27 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: What was his name?

 

28 A. David LeGrand. 7709

 

1 Q. And can you tell me what the substance of

 

2 that communication was?

 

3 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay.

 

4 THE COURT: Sustained.

 

5 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Can you tell me….

 

6 It’s offered in furtherance, Your Honor.

 

7 THE COURT: Sustained.

 

8 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Is that the day that

 

9 you were terminated?

 

10 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Misstates the

 

11 evidence; move to strike.

 

12 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: That’s fair.

 

13 Q. Is that the day that you were informed —

 

14 THE COURT: Stricken.

 

15 Go ahead. Next question.

 

16 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Is that the day that

 

17 you were informed that your services were no longer

 

18 required by Mr. Jackson?

 

19 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; misstates the

 

20 evidence.

 

21 THE COURT: Sustained.

 

22 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Were you ever informed

 

23 that your services were no longer required by Mr.

 

24 Jackson?

 

25 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; asked and

 

26 answered.

 

27 THE COURT: Sustained.

 

28 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: When were you informed 7710

 

1 that your services — when were you informed that

 

2 Mr. Jackson no longer needed your services?

 

3 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Misstates the

 

4 evidence; leading; move to strike.

 

5 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

6 You may answer.

 

7 THE WITNESS: I believe was February 21st,

 

8 by a letter.

 

9 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Okay. How did you

 

10 receive that letter?

 

11 A. By fax.

 

12 Q. Was it before or after you spoke with Mr.

 

13 Jackson on the phone?

 

14 A. After.

 

15 Q. Did you continue to make any efforts to have

 

16 your outstanding bill paid by Mr. Jackson?

 

17 A. Yes, I did.

 

18 Q. What did you do?

 

19 A. I made several communications between Mr.

 

20 Jackson’s accountant, managers, personal assistant,

 

21 and his lawyer, David LeGrand. I have provided them

 

22 with my invoices, and I basically let them know

 

23 that, you know, my invoices are not being paid and

 

24 they are due immediately. And it was failed.

 

25 Q. Did you ever make an attempt to contact Mr.

 

26 Jackson again personally about your outstanding

 

27 invoices?

 

28 A. I remember I made a conversation with Mr. 7711

 

1 Jackson’s personal assistant, Evvy, and I explained

 

2 to her that my invoices were promised to be paid at

 

3 certain date, and they are not, and that I’d like to

 

4 make a meeting with Mr. Jackson to discuss these

 

5 matters.

 

6 Q. So did you attempt to meet with Mr. Jackson?

 

7 A. I did.

 

8 Q. When was that?

 

9 A. The meeting was supposed to be, I believe,

 

10 February 26th of 2003.

 

11 Q. And how did you go about attempting to

 

12 contact Mr. Jackson on that date?

 

13 A. I believe I spoke to Evvy, Mr. Jackson’s

 

14 personal assistant, and I was informed that Mr.

 

15 Jackson will come to L.A. from Florida at certain

 

16 date, and that I can meet with Mr. Jackson, have a

 

17 meeting with him and go through these issues.

 

18 Q. Did you go to Neverland that day?

 

19 A. I did.

 

20 Q. And was Mr. Jackson there?

 

21 A. When I arrived at Neverland, Mr. Jackson was

 

22 not there.

 

23 Q. What did you do?

 

24 A. I talk — I spoke to, I believe, Joe Marcus,

 

25 and I told him the reason I’m in Neverland, to meet

 

26 with Mr. Jackson. And he informed me that Mr.

 

27 Jackson is on his way, coming home right now, so why

 

28 not just wait for him. 7712

 

1 Q. Did you wait for him?

 

2 A. Yes, I did.

 

3 Q. Did Mr. Jackson show up?

 

4 A. I saw Mr. Jackson arriving, yes.

 

5 Q. Did he arrive with anybody?

 

6 A. I believe with his entourage, like Miko and

 

7 bodyguards, and I think maybe his own kids.

 

8 Q. You previously mentioned Miko, identified

 

9 his picture. Is he a part of Mr. Jackson’s

 

10 entourage?

 

11 A. Sometimes he travels with Mr. Jackson.

 

12 Q. Do you know what his relationship is with

 

13 Mr. Jackson?

 

14 A. I would say friend/associate, some sort.

 

15 Personal assistant kind of.

 

16 Q. All right. So where were you when Mr.

17 Jackson arrived at Neverland?

 

18 A. I was waiting for Mr. Jackson outside the

 

19 main house in the little catering area, and just

 

20 waiting for him so he can — you know, so I can have

 

21 this meeting with him.

 

22 Q. And did you see him?

 

23 A. I saw Mr. Jackson coming in.

 

24 Q. Did he see you?

 

25 A. I believe he did.

 

26 Q. Could he have missed you?

 

27 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; calls for

 

28 speculation. 7713

 

1 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: That’s fair.

 

2 Q. Where were you standing in relationship to

 

3 Mr. Jackson when he walked in his house?

 

4 A. Again, I was behind the main house on the

 

5 north side of the main house. There’s a little

 

6 catering area, kind of, a little bar kind of. It’s

 

7 not like a liquor bar, but like a little catering

 

8 bar area.

 

9 Q. Okay.

 

10 A. I was just waiting. There were two tables

 

11 there. I was just sitting and waiting.

 

12 Q. Was that in clear view where Mr. Jackson

 

13 walked?

 

14 A. I believe, yeah.

 

15 Q. You could see him clearly?

 

16 A. Yeah.

 

17 Q. How far away were you from him?

 

18 A. I would say 30 feet, 40 feet.

 

19 Q. Did he acknowledge you?

 

20 A. Um, that I’m there?

 

21 Q. Yeah. Did he even — did he acknowledge

 

22 that you were there in any way?

 

23 A. Mmm —

 

24 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Foundation; calls

 

25 for speculation.

 

26 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

27 THE WITNESS: I don’t remember whether he

 

28 saw me, I mean eye contact or not, but I felt like 7714

 

1 that he knows that I’m here.

 

2 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Okay. Did he wave, say

 

3 anything to you, do anything to acknowledge your

 

4 presence?

 

5 A. Not at that moment.

 

6 Q. Did he do it at some other time?

 

7 A. Well, I — I received a call.

 

8 Q. Okay. So Mr. Jackson walks inside — did he

 

9 go inside his house?

 

10 A. He was going inside his house.

 

11 Q. Okay. And you were still sitting where you

 

12 were sitting?

 

13 A. That’s correct.

 

14 Q. What happened after that?

 

15 A. They informed me that there’s a phone call

 

16 for me.

 

17 Q. How much time passed between the time that

 

18 Mr. Jackson walked into his house and you were

 

19 informed that there was a phone call for you?

 

20 A. I would say five to ten minutes.

 

21 Q. Did you go inside and take this phone call?

 

22 A. Yes, I did.

 

23 Q. Who was it from?

 

24 A. Evvy called me, Mr. Jackson’s assistant.

 

25 Q. And what was the purpose of this call?

 

26 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Foundation;

 

27 hearsay.

 

28 THE COURT: Sustained. 7715

 

1 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you do something

 

2 after you talked to Evvy?

 

3 A. I left the property.

 

4 Q. Has Mr. Jackson ever paid you the money he

 

5 owes you?

 

6 A. Not in full.

 

7 Q. Have you had to take legal action to try and

 

8 get your money?

 

9 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Leading; assumes

 

10 facts not in evidence.

 

11 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

12 You may answer.

 

13 THE WITNESS: Yes, I have filed a lawsuit.

There was surveillance done on Moslehi by Jackson’s investigators, and Auchincloss concluded his direct examination by asking Moslehi to identifying himself on a surveillance tape that was seized by police:

14 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: After you terminated or

 

15 after you stopped working the last time for Mr.

 

16 Jackson, did you become aware that you were — at

 

17 any time that you were being — that there was

 

18 surveillance on you?

 

19 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; leading.

 

20 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

21 You may answer.

 

22 THE WITNESS: Did I know about surveillance

 

23 being conducted on me? No.

 

24 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you give anybody

 

25 permission to take your video, take videotapes of

 

26 you?

 

27 A. No.

 

28 Q. And prior to your testimony today, did you 7716

 

1 review a DVD on this computer to my left of an

 

2 Exhibit No. 815? Did you review that?

 

3 A. Yes, I did.

 

4 Q. Is that image an image of you?

 

5 A. Yes, it is.

 

6 Q. Is that an image that you permitted or

 

7 allowed anybody to take?

 

8 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Leading;

 

9 foundation.

 

10 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

11 You may answer.

 

12 THE WITNESS: No, I did not give permission

 

13 to anybody to follow me or take pictures of me.

 

14 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Your Honor, there’s one

 

15 last unpublished portion of 815 that I’d like to

 

16 publish for the jury at this time. We’ve previously

 

17 admitted the rest of that DVD.

 

18 THE COURT: All right. Is that on the

 

19 computer, or is it on —

 

20 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: That’s on the computer, so

 

21 I’d ask for “Input 1.”

 

22 (Whereupon, a portion of a DVD, Plaintiff’s

 

23 Exhibit No. 815, was played for the Court and jury.)

 

24 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Mr. Moslehi, whose

 

25 vehicle is that? We’re looking at a — appears to

 

26 be a large SUV in the center frame of this picture.

 

27 A. It seems to be my vehicle.

 

28 Q. And who is the individual that I’ve 7717

 

1 stopped — where I’ve stopped this video at? Who is

 

2 the individual that seems to be approaching that

 

3 vehicle?

 

4 A. It seems to be me.

 

5 Q. Okay.

 

6 (Whereupon, a portion of a DVD, Plaintiff’s

 

7 Exhibit No. 815, was played for the Court and jury.)

 

8 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: That’s it.

 

9 Thank you, Mr. Moslehi. No more questions.

Under cross examination by Mesereau, Moslehi admitted that although Janet never explicitly asked for money, she let it be known that she was struggling financially, and that is why he offered to loan her the $2,000 dollars, and gave her an indefinite period of time to repay him. Moslehi’s initially admitted this in an interview with Sgt. Steve Robel on April 23rd, 2005.

11 CROSS-EXAMINATION

 

12 BY MR. MESEREAU:

 

13 Q. Good afternoon.

 

14 A. Good afternoon.

 

15 Q. Mr. Moslehi, my name is Thomas Mesereau, and

 

16 I speak for Mr. Jackson.

 

17 A. Nice meeting you.

 

18 Q. Same here.

 

19 You gave an interview on April 23rd of this

 

20 year with Sergeant Steve Robel, correct?

 

21 A. Where was this?

 

22 Q. I’m not sure where. My understanding is

 

23 that you were with your attorney, Mr. Dowling,

 

24 correct? And you met with Sergeant Steve Robel of

 

25 the Santa Barbara sheriffs. Do you recall that

 

26 recent interview?

 

27 A. You said the 24th of 2004?

 

28 Q. The date that I have is April 23rd. Do you 7718

 

1 recall a recent interview with a Santa Barbara

 

2 sheriff?

 

3 A. Of this year, 2005?

 

4 Q. Yes.

 

5 A. I believe so.

 

6 Q. Okay. And your lawyer was present, correct?

 

7 A. I don’t remember my lawyer being present.

 

8 Q. Is your lawyer’s name Mr. Dowling?

 

9 A. Alan Dowling.

 

10 Q. Alan Dowling, okay.

 

11 And when — let me restate all this.

 

12 You recently interviewed with a Santa

 

13 Barbara sheriff, correct?

 

14 A. That’s correct.

 

15 Q. And when do you think that interview was?

 

16 A. Recent-recent or —

 

17 Q. The most recent interview you gave to a

 

18 Santa Barbara sheriff.

 

19 A. The most recent was, I guess, two days ago.

20 Q. Right. Okay. And to your knowledge, was

 

21 that with a Sergeant Steve Robel of the Santa

 

22 Barbara Sheriff’s Office; do you know?

 

23 A. I believe I was talking to another

 

24 gentleman. Maybe he was present in and out or —

 

25 kind of things.

 

26 Q. Okay. Where did the interview take place?

 

27 A. This interview took place at Santa Barbara

 

28 District Attorney’s Office. 7719

 

1 Q. Okay. Do you know if any representative of

 

2 the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s Office was

 

3 present at the interview you gave?

 

4 A. Yeah. I think, again, at the beginning, I

 

5 was talking to Mr. Auchincloss. Then Mr. Robel came

 

6 in and out.

 

7 Q. Okay.

 

8 A. And, yeah, Mr. Alan Dowling was there, too.

 

9 Q. Right. Okay.

 

10 A. Yeah. I’m sorry.

 

11 Q. And the purpose of the interview was to

 

12 inform the prosecution for the first time that you

 

13 had given money to Janet Arvizo, right?

 

14 A. The purpose of the interview was I guess an

 

15 overall of what’s going to be taking place in this

 

16 courtroom —

 

17 Q. Okay.

 

18 A. — when I take the stand.

 

19 Q. And in the interview, you admitted that you

 

20 now recalled that you had given $2,000 to Janet

 

21 Arvizo, right?

 

22 A. During that interview, yes.

 

23 Q. Yes. And you indicated to the Santa Barbara

 

24 sheriffs that Janet had not ever directly asked you

 

25 for money, right?

 

26 A. That’s correct.

 

27 Q. But you also indicated with your attorney

 

28 that Ms. Arvizo had described to you her financial 7720

 

1 situation from time to time, correct?

 

2 A. If I remember correctly, I had one

 

3 conversation with Janet Arvizo which took place at

 

4 Neverland, and this was right after the Martin

 

5 Bashir documentary.

 

6 Q. Yes.

 

7 A. And at that time, there were some

 

8 discussions as to her life is upside down, and, you

 

9 know, she can’t work and things like this.

 

10 Q. But at some point she led you to believe

 

11 that her family was having some financial

 

12 difficulties, true?

 

13 A. What I understood from that conversation is

 

14 that she couldn’t work and that they had to, you

 

15 know, move around because of the media and the press

 

16 following them.

 

17 Q. Right. She led you to believe at one point

 

18 that she was out of money, right?

 

19 A. We never discussed money with her. I mean,

 

20 she was just explaining to me what has happened to

 

21 her since the Martin Bashir documentary.

 

22 Q. But you got the impression at one point that

 

23 she needed financial assistance, correct?

 

24 A. Um, that she needed financial assistance?

 

25 Q. Well, let me restate the question.

 

26 A. Yes.

 

27 Q. In that interview you had with the Santa

 

28 Barbara sheriffs on April 23rd, 2005, your lawyer 7721

 

1 spoke to Sergeant Robel, correct?

 

2 A. That’s correct. Alan Dowling.

 

3 Q. And he did so in your presence, right?

 

4 A. That’s correct.

 

5 Q. And on your behalf, your lawyer indicated

 

6 that you had learned about Janet Arvizo’s dire

 

7 financial circumstances, correct?

 

8 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I’m going to object — I’m

 

9 going to object as to any comments about this lawyer

 

10 as hearsay.

 

11 THE COURT: Sustained.

 

12 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Was one of the —

 

13 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: And I’ll move to strike

 

14 the question.

 

15 THE COURT: It’s not necessary. Go ahead.

 

16 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Was one of the purposes of

 

17 that meeting for you and your lawyer to explain why

 

18 you gave $2,000 to Janet Arvizo?

 

19 A. One of — yes.

 

20 Q. And on your behalf, your lawyer did at one

 

21 point explain why, true?

 

22 A. I believe so.

 

23 Q. And at some point, it was your belief that

 

24 Janet Arvizo was out of money, right?

 

25 A. Again, if I remember correctly, we didn’t

 

26 specifically talk about money. She was mainly

 

27 complaining about her life being upside down because

 

28 of this Martin Bashir documentary, and not being 7722

 

1 able to work.

 

2 Q. And the impression you got was that she

 

3 needed some financial assistance, right?

 

4 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; asked and

 

5 answered.

 

6 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

7 You may answer.

 

8 THE WITNESS: Could you repeat that again,

 

9 please?

 

10 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Yes. You got the

 

11 impression that Janet and her family could use some

 

12 financial help. That’s why you made a loan, right?

 

13 A. Sure.

 

14 Q. Okay. You based your conclusion that Janet

 

15 needed financial help on what she had said to you

 

16 from time to time, right?

 

17 A. Could you repeat that one more time?

 

18 Q. Sure. Let me restate it completely.

 

19 You didn’t just give her $2,000 for no

 

20 reason, right?

 

21 A. That’s correct.

 

22 Q. You thought she could use it, right?

 

23 A. That’s correct.

 

24 Q. You thought she needed it based on things

 

25 she had told you about she and her family, right?

 

26 A. Sure.

 

27 Q. She didn’t directly ask for it at any time,

 

28 right? 7723

 

1 A. No, she never asked for it.

 

2 Q. But she led you to believe that their lives

 

3 had been turned upside down and she needed some

 

4 financial help, right?

 

5 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Compound;

 

6 misstates the evidence; asked and answered.

 

7 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

8 You may answer.

 

9 THE WITNESS: Could you repeat that one more

 

10 time? I’m sorry.

 

11 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Yes, okay. At some

 

12 point — let me restate the question. I’ll withdraw

 

13 the previous question.

 

14 A. Okay.

 

15 Q. At some point after numerous discussions

 

16 with Ms. Arvizo, you formed the conclusion that she

 

17 and her family could use some financial help from

 

18 you, right?

 

19 A. After one conversation with her that night,

 

20 February 19th, on the phone, I felt that they could

 

21 use some financial assistance.

 

22 Q. Okay. And because you had reached that

 

23 conclusion, you gave her $2,000, correct?

 

24 A. That’s correct.

 

25 Q. You called it a loan, but you didn’t expect

 

26 to be repaid, correct?

 

27 A. Well, actually, I’ve been expecting to be

 

28 paid. But if not, I can live without it. 7724

 

1 Q. Okay. I mean, realistically when you gave

 

2 it to her, did you expect her to repay it?

 

3 A. I did.

 

4 Q. Did you —

 

5 A. I mentioned, “This is not a gift. It’s a

 

6 loan. It’s from me.”

 

7 Q. Okay.

 

8 A. “And pay me whenever.”

 

9 Q. Okay. And has she ever repaid it?

 

10 A. No.

 

11 Q. Okay. Now, is the conversation where you

 

12 spoke to her and then concluded she could use some

 

13 financial help the 25-minute conversation?

 

14 A. Approximately.

 

15 Q. Okay. And to your knowledge, where was

 

16 Janet Arvizo when you had this approximately

 

17 25-minute conversation?

 

18 A. At what location she was, you mean?

 

19 Q. Yes. If you know.

 

20 A. I don’t remember.

 

21 Q. And did she call you?

 

22 A. No.

 

23 Q. Did you call her?

 

24 A. No.

 

25 Q. Where were you when you had the 25-minute

 

26 conversation?

 

27 A. At Neverland.

 

28 Q. Okay. And do you know approximately what 7725

 

1 date that conversation took place?

 

2 A. I believe it was February 19, 2003.

 

3 Q. Okay. So the impression you got that Janet

 

4 could use a little help was formed before the

 

5 rebuttal video was filmed at your home, true?

 

6 A. That’s true.

 

7 Q. The rebuttal video was filmed at your home

 

8 the next day, right?

 

9 A. Well, the morning after.

 

10 Q. Okay.

 

11 A. Once, you know, it goes over midnight, the

 

12 date changes.

Next, Moslehi was questioned about his participation in the “Take Two” rebuttal, and interestingly he admitted that it was his idea, and not Jackson’s, to set up his camera and film Jackson’s interviews with Bashir. It’s a good thing that Moslehi took the initiative to make this suggestion to Jackson, because otherwise it would have been much harder to prove just how deceitful and dishonest Bashir’s edited documentary really was!

13 Q. Now, are you familiar with a company called

 

14 I Films, Inc.?

 

15 A. That’s my company.

 

16 Q. Is that still your company?

 

17 A. Yes, it is.

 

18 Q. And the services you provided to either Mr.

 

19 Jackson or Mr. Jackson’s company has been on behalf

 

20 of I Films, Inc., right?

 

21 A. That’s correct.

 

22 Q. Okay. And that’s a corporation, obviously,

 

23 right?

 

24 A. That’s correct.

 

25 Q. Okay. And I believe you said you’ve been

 

26 providing services for Mr. Jackson for a long time,

 

27 correct?

 

28 A. From 1996 to 2003. 7726

1 Q. Okay. All right. And when you’ve provided

 

2 services for Mr. Jackson, you have periodically gone

 

3 to different locations to provide the service,

 

4 correct?

 

5 A. That’s correct.

 

6 Q. And you have typically sent an invoice not

 

7 long after you provide the service, right?

 

8 A. That’s correct.

 

9 Q. All right. At some point you dealt with a

 

10 company called Brad Lachman Productions, Inc.,

 

11 right?

 

12 A. That’s correct.

 

13 Q. And to your knowledge, who is Brad Lachman

 

14 Productions, Inc.?

 

15 A. It’s a production company that FOX hired to

 

16 put the rebuttal documentary together.

 

17 Q. Okay.

 

18 A. Final editing.

 

19 Q. And was it your understanding that that

 

20 rebuttal documentary was being done by FOX

 

21 Television?

 

22 A. What do you mean, “by FOX Television”?

 

23 Q. Well, you mentioned FOX, correct?

 

24 A. Yeah, it was supposed to be aired by FOX.

 

25 Q. And to your knowledge, was FOX involved in

 

26 the production in any way?

 

27 A. Could have been.

 

28 Q. Okay. When you were doing the filming, was 7727

 

1 it your belief that FOX was somehow involved at that

 

2 point?

 

3 A. Well, I never met anybody from FOX

 

4 Television to discuss certain matters, but most of

 

5 the communications came from Brad Lachman

 

6 Productions.

 

7 Q. Okay. And you signed an agreement with Brad

 

8 Lachman Productions on approximately February 14th,

 

9 2003, right?

 

10 A. I don’t remember.

 

11 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I just

 

12 show you that document?

 

13 A. Sure.

 

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

 

15 THE WITNESS: Okay.

 

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

 

17 look at that document?

 

18 A. I never been provided with that document.

 

19 Q. But do you see your signature on the

 

20 document?

 

21 A. It seems to be my signature.

 

22 Q. Okay. Do you recall what the purpose of

 

23 that document was?

 

24 A. There was an interview of me being used in

 

25 that rebuttal documentary.

 

26 Q. Okay. And when you were interviewed, who

 

27 did your interview, if you know?

 

28 A. Brad Lachman Productions. 7728

 

1 Q. Okay. Did they choose an interviewer to

 

2 actually interview you?

 

3 A. I believe they did.

 

4 Q. And do you recall where your interview took

 

5 place?

 

6 A. In a hotel.

 

7 Q. Okay. And was that prearranged by somebody?

 

8 A. I believe so.

 

9 Q. Okay. And I gather the purpose of that

 

10 interview was to allow you, who had known Michael

 

11 Jackson, to say good things about him?

 

12 A. Well, actually that interview was supposed

 

13 to be the rebuttal, to be used for the rebuttal

 

14 documentary that we were working on titled, “Footage

 

15 You Were Never Meant To See.”

 

16 Q. Right.

 

17 A. To respond to some of the comments that

 

18 Martin Bashir made.

 

19 Q. And the reason you were interviewed was that

 

20 when Martin Bashir was filming his interview with

 

21 Michael Jackson, you were also filming that

 

22 interview, true?

 

23 A. That’s correct.

 

24 Q. And Bashir had arranged to film the

 

25 interview separate and apart from what you were

 

26 doing, right?

 

27 A. There were two different cameras and two

 

28 different angles. 7729

 

1 Q. Yes. And you were filming it at the request

 

2 of Mr. Jackson, right?

 

3 A. No.

 

4 Q. Who were you filming it at the request of?

 

5 A. Myself. There was no request as far as me

 

6 recording it. I decided on my own.

 

7 Q. But certainly Mr. Jackson knew you were

 

8 there, right?

 

9 A. Yes.

 

10 Q. And you were right next to Mr. Jackson doing

 

11 your filming while Bashir was doing his filming of

 

12 Mr. Jackson, right?

 

13 A. That’s correct.

 

14 Q. And your intention was to make sure you had

 

15 a full copy of all the questions and answers between

 

16 Bashir and Michael Jackson?

 

17 A. Repeat that question one more time.

 

18 Q. Yes. Maybe I wasn’t clear on that.

 

19 Your intent was to try and film a complete

 

20 copy of the interview between Bashir and Michael

 

21 Jackson, right?

 

22 A. Actually, my intention was just to document

 

23 this interview on my camera.

 

24 Q. Yes, okay. And one of the purposes was not

 

25 to allow Bashir to have exclusive possession of what

 

26 he had done in that interview, right?

 

27 A. Would you repeat that one more time?

 

28 Q. Sure. I’m sorry if I’m unclear. 7730

 

1 If you hadn’t filmed Mr. Bashir’s interview

 

2 with Michael Jackson, logic suggests that the only

 

3 person that would have had a copy of that interview

 

4 would have been Bashir, right?

 

5 A. Well, you see, there were like two different

 

6 cameras, one single scene. So meaning if there was

 

7 not my camera in there —

 

8 Q. Yes.

 

9 A. — the only other camera that would have

 

10 been in there would have been Martin Bashir’s

 

11 camera.

 

12 Q. Yes. And if that had been the case, Mr.

 

13 Bashir could have selectively used, or not used,

 

14 whatever parts he wanted and he would have had

 

15 control of all the product, right?

 

16 A. Yes.

 

17 Q. And when you saw the Bashir documentary, you

 

18 knew that there were parts where Mr. Bashir had said

 

19 positive things about Michael Jackson that he had

 

20 left out of his documentary, right?

 

21 A. That’s correct.

 

22 Q. And the reason you were being interviewed by

 

23 Brad Lachman Productions was because the intention

 

24 was to have some of those parts that you had filmed

 

25 appear in the rebuttal video, right?

 

26 A. That’s —

 

27 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I’m going to object;

 

28 relevancy and beyond the scope. 7731

 

1 MR. MESEREAU: I believe he opened the

 

2 entire door, Your Honor.

 

3 THE COURT: The objection’s overruled.

 

4 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: In fact, the title of that

 

5 documentary on television was, “The Michael Jackson

 

6 Interview: The Footage You Were Never Meant To

 

7 See,” right?

 

8 A. That was the title of the rebuttal video,

 

9 that’s correct.

 

10 Q. And the words “The Footage You Were Never

 

11 Meant To See” were supposed to apply to footage you

 

12 had?

 

13 A. That’s correct.

 

14 Q. That Bashir had never used, right?

 

15 A. That’s correct.

 

16 Q. That included footage where Mr. Bashir was

 

17 complimenting Mr. Jackson on what a parent he was,

 

18 right?

 

19 A. That’s right.

 

20 Q. Complimenting Mr. Jackson on what a good

 

21 person he was, right?

 

22 A. That’s correct.

 

23 Q. He was complimenting Mr. Jackson on his

 

24 wonderful role in the world involving children,

 

25 right?

 

26 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; hearsay.

 

27 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

28 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Right? 7732

 

1 A. Do I answer?

 

2 THE COURT: Yes.

 

3 THE WITNESS: Yeah.

 

4 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: He had footage about Mr.

 

5 Jackson wanting an international day in honor of

 

6 children, right?

 

7 A. I’m sorry. Say that again.

 

8 Q. Mr. Bashir, in his interview, talked to Mr.

 

9 Jackson about Mr. Jackson’s desire to have a day

 

10 around the world in celebration of children, right?

 

11 A. Yeah.

 

12 Q. And your belief at that time was that Mr.

 

13 Bashir had presented a very distorted view of that

 

14 interview with Mr. Jackson, correct?

 

15 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; calls for a

 

16 conclusion.

 

17 MR. MESEREAU: State of mind, Your Honor.

 

18 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Relevance.

 

19 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

20 You may answer.

 

21 THE WITNESS: Say that one more time.

 

22 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Yeah, I’m sorry. Sorry.

 

23 Your role in the television show titled,

 

24 “The Michael Jackson Interview: The Footage You

 

25 Were Never Meant To See,” was to talk about the

 

26 footage you had in that interview that Bashir didn’t

 

27 use, right?

 

28 A. That’s correct. 7733

 

1 Q. And that was footage that was very positive

 

2 about Mr. Jackson, true?

 

3 A. Most of Martin Bashir’s comments were

 

4 positive.

 

5 Q. Yes. And the agreement you signed with Brad

 

6 Lachman Productions related to the fact that you

 

7 yourself were going to appear in that documentary,

 

8 right?

 

9 A. That’s correct.

 

10 Q. So your role in that documentary was not

 

11 just filming people. It was actually appearing

12 yourself, right?

 

13 A. At one point, yes. I basically did an

 

14 interview to appear in that with the permission of

 

15 Mr. Jackson.

 

16 Q. Okay. That’s why you signed an agreement

 

17 with Brad Lachman Productions, Inc., right?

 

18 A. Just for that interview.

 

19 Q. Yes.

 

20 A. For my interview, yes.

 

21 Q. Okay.

 

22 A. Not the footage.

 

23 Q. But the consent was to use your likeness and

 

24 your words in the show, right?

 

25 A. My image, my voice in the show.

 

26 Q. Yes. Okay. And you signed that on

 

27 February 14th, 2003, right?

 

28 A. Again, I don’t — I don’t think I have the 7734

 

1 copy of that, but if that’s what it says, I believe

 

2 so.

 

3 Q. Okay. And that is what it says, and you

 

4 think that’s accurate?

 

5 A. I’m sure. If you tell me, I believe you.

 

6 Q. Okay. You believe that’s accurate, the date

 

7 I showed you, right?

 

8 A. I didn’t pay attention to the date. I was

 

9 just looking at my signature.

 

10 Q. Would it refresh your recollection just to

 

11 see the date?

 

12 A. Sure.

 

13 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach?

 

14 THE COURT: Yes.

 

15 THE WITNESS: Sure.

 

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

 

17 look at the document?

 

18 A. No.

 

19 (Laughter.)

 

20 THE WITNESS: Oh, right now? Oh, I’m sorry.

 

21 I thought you were talking about the entire thing.

 

22 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Have you had a

 

23 chance to look at the date on the document?

 

24 A. I looked at the date of the document just

 

25 right now, yes.

 

26 Q. And does it refresh your recollection that

 

27 it was signed on February 14th, 2003?

 

28 A. I believe so. 7735

 

1 Q. All right. Now, I gather from what you’ve

 

2 said that you decided at some point that your role

 

3 in this rebuttal documentary titled, “The Michael

 

4 Jackson Interview: The Footage You Were Never Meant

 

5 To See,” was to be both participant and help film

 

6 portions of it, right?

 

7 A. Would you repeat that one more time?

 

8 Q. Yeah, and I think — I think you’ve said

 

9 this. You were both interviewed to appear in it,

 

10 and you also were doing footage yourself?

 

11 A. Sure.

 

12 Q. Okay. Okay. And I believe you told the

 

13 prosecutor that the footage you took of the Arvizos

 

14 you decided to retain yourself at some point, right?

 

15 A. Well, I — well, what happened is, it

 

16 remained in my possession and it was not turned over

 

17 that night.

 

18 Q. Okay. Okay. And one of the reasons was you

 

19 wanted to make sure you got paid, right?

 

20 A. One of the reasons, if I remember correctly,

 

21 was that Mr. Jackson’s managers, his agents, they

 

22 promised me certain things.

 

23 Q. Right.

 

24 A. And they did not fulfill their promise.

 

25 Q. So you thought you would get paid either

 

26 that night or the next day, right?

 

27 A. Yes.

 

28 Q. And that didn’t happen? 7736

 

1 A. That didn’t happen.

 

2 Q. So you were retaining control of the video

 

3 to make sure you were paid properly, right?

 

4 A. Well, I figured I did everything that I

 

5 promised them, but they not fulfill their promise,

 

6 so I’m going to stop doing whatever I was doing

 

7 until I get paid.

Next, Moslehi testified about the various people that he interviewed for the rebuttal documentary:

8 Q. Okay. Now, how many interviews did you do

 

9 yourself to help prepare the rebuttal show?

 

10 A. How many interviews I shot, or —

 

11 Q. Yes, how many did you shoot? You, yourself.

 

12 A. Of other people?

 

13 Q. Yes.

 

14 A. For that rebuttal documentary?

 

15 Q. Yes. You did the Arvizos, obviously.

 

16 A. We did Arvizos. We did Mr. Jackson’s

 

17 parents. I believe Debbie Rowe.

 

18 Q. Okay.

 

19 A. Mr. Jackson’s makeup artist.

 

20 Q. That’s Karen Faye?

 

21 A. Karen Faye.

 

22 Q. Okay.

 

23 A. That’s what I remember right now.

 

24 Q. Do you recall whether or not you did an

 

25 interview with Mr. Jackson’s physician? Pardon me,

 

26 I’m sorry, that’s not — that’s not phrased well.

 

27 Do you recall whether or not you filmed any

 

28 footage of an interview with Mr. Jackson’s 7737

 

1 physician?

 

2 A. Do you have a name? Because Mr. Jackson has

 

3 a lot of physicians.

 

4 Q. Do you recall doing anything like that?

 

5 A. No.

 

6 Q. Okay.

 

7 A. Not any physicians that I remember.

 

8 Q. And were you involved with Brad Lachman

 

9 Productions while you were doing these filmings?

 

10 A. I had some involvement with them.

 

11 Q. Okay. And what was the involvement you had

 

12 with Brad Lachman Productions?

 

13 A. Providing footage to them from Mr. Jackson’s

 

14 archival office and some new footage that we were

 

15 shooting.

 

16 Q. Okay. Okay. Now, was it your understanding

 

17 that you would be paid for the actual interview you

 

18 did?

 

19 A. No.

 

20 Q. Okay. You were expecting payment for the

 

21 film footage that you did, right?

 

22 A. For my services.

 

23 Q. Yes, okay. All right. And I believe you

 

24 testified that the footage of the Arvizos that you

 

25 did never appeared in that television documentary,

 

26 right?

 

27 A. That’s correct.

 

28 Q. Did you, yourself, deal with anybody from 7738

 

1 FOX when it came to preparing this documentary?

 

2 A. I don’t believe so.

 

Surprise, surprise! Martin Bashir did not obtain Moslehi’s expressed written consent before using Moslehi’s image in his crock-umentary!

3 Q. Do you recall at one point complaining that

 

4 Martin Bashir had used footage of you in his

 

5 televised interview with Mr. Jackson?

 

6 A. Did I ever complain?

 

7 Q. Yes.

 

8 A. To who?

 

9 Q. To anyone, that you had appeared in this

 

10 documentary without your permission.

 

11 A. I discussed with some people that I was in

 

12 that documentary without my permission, but I wasn’t

 

13 really complaining, because, you know, it’s just —

 

14 Q. But your position certainly was that you had

 

15 appeared in the Bashir documentary without any

 

16 permission from you, right?

 

17 A. I did not sign anything to Martin Bashir to

 

18 use me in that video, but then he did and — you

 

19 know, it was okay with me.

 

20 Q. Did you ever send a letter to anyone

 

21 complaining about the fact that Bashir had used you

 

22 in his documentary without your permission?

 

23 A. Send any letter?

 

24 Q. Yes, about the unauthorized use of your

 

25 likeness by Bashir.

 

26 A. I received a letter from Mr. Jackson’s

 

27 lawyer asking me to sign that document that you’re

 

28 talking about. 7739

 

1 Q. Okay.

 

2 A. But I never did.

 

3 Q. You never did, okay.

 

4 A. I never did.

 

5 Q. Okay. But your position at the time was he

 

6 had used your likeness without any authorization

 

7 from you?

 

8 A. He never ask me if we can do that, but he

 

9 used it.

 

10 Q. Now, he was not some friend of yours, was

 

11 he, Mr. Bashir?

 

12 A. We became friends, kind of.

 

13 Q. Okay. Did you remain friends?

14 A. I’m sorry?

 

15 Q. Did you remain friends?

 

16 A. After the air — after the airing it?

 

17 Q. Yes.

 

18 A. I guess not.

 

19 Q. Okay.

 

20 A. I’ve never seen the guy again.

Before wrapping up his cross examination for the day, Meseareau questioned Moslehi about the money that he was suing Jackson for, which included a percentage of the profits of the “Take Two” documentary that he was promised from Weisner and Konitzer. Moselehi claimed that he had no knowledge of the fact that they had been caught embezzling money from Jackson.

21 Q. Okay. All right. Around March of 2003, you

 

22 were represented by a law firm named Greenberg

 

23 Traurig, correct?

 

24 A. March 2003, that’s correct.

 

25 Q. And Greenberg Traurig is a large law firm

 

26 with different offices around the country, right?

 

27 A. That’s correct.

 

28 Q. And they were representing you in your 7740

 

1 desire to get paid, right?

 

2 A. That’s correct.

 

3 Q. All right. And you were asking to be paid

 

4 for the work you did, right?

 

5 A. For my services and out-of-pocket expenses.

 

6 Q. But you were also asking for more money than

 

7 that, correct?

 

8 A. What do you mean by that?

 

9 Q. Well, your lawyer claimed that you were

 

10 promised you would be compensated above and beyond

 

11 the moneys set forth in your invoices, right?

 

12 A. Mr. Jackson’s managers, Ronald and Dieter —

 

13 Q. Right.

 

14 A. — they promised me percentage of the net

 

15 profit of this — of this documentary.

 

16 Q. Yes. So your position was that you not only

 

17 should be paid what was in your invoices, but that

 

18 you should be given a profit percentage of what was

 

19 made on the whole show, right?

 

20 A. They promised me that all my invoices for

 

21 the last year and a half that has not been paid at

 

22 the time, approximately $250,000 —

 

23 Q. Right.

 

24 A. — will be paid in full, plus a percentage

 

25 of the net profit.

 

26 Q. Yes. And obviously they never came through

 

27 with that, did they?

 

28 A. They never fulfilled their promise. 7741

 

1 Q. Okay. And at some point did you learn that

 

2 they had been caught stealing close to a million

 

3 dollars from Mr. Jackson?

 

4 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; assumes facts

 

5 not in evidence.

 

6 THE COURT: Sustained.

 

7 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: At some point did you ever

 

8 learn that they were stealing anything from Mr.

 

9 Jackson?

 

10 A. No.

 

11 Q. Okay. But you were dealing with — excuse

 

12 me, I’m going — sorry.

 

13 Your lawyers were dealing with a lawyer for

 

14 Mr. Jackson named David LeGrand, right?

 

15 A. That’s correct.

 

16 Q. And to your knowledge, Mr. LeGrand had an

 

17 office in Las Vegas?

 

18 A. That’s correct.

 

19 Q. Okay. Did you ever talk to him personally

 

20 yourself?

 

21 A. Yes, I did.

 

22 Q. And at some point you turned that over to

 

23 your lawyers, right?

 

24 A. To my lawyer, yes.

 

25 Q. To deal with him directly?

 

26 A. Yes.

 

27 Q. Okay. Now, when you say that Dieter and

 

28 Konitzer promised you a net profit’s interest in 7742

 

1 that rebuttal documentary, what did you believe

 

2 “a net profit’s interest” meant?

 

3 A. A percentage of, like, the gross sales or

 

4 net profit of it, some sort.

 

5 Q. Is that what Dieter and Konitzer promised

 

6 you?

 

7 A. That’s correct.

 

8 Q. The two of them?

 

9 A. That’s correct.

 

10 Q. All right. And you took the position that

 

11 you owned a copyright interest in the footage you

 

12 had done, right?

 

13 A. What footage?

 

14 Q. The footage that you did to put together the

 

15 T.V. documentary about “The Footage You Were Never

 

16 Meant To See,” right?

 

17 A. That’s correct.

 

18 Q. All right. And what did you mean by your

 

19 having a copyright interest?

 

20 A. I’m the author of this footage, and because

 

21 no payment has ever made for those, I’m claiming

 

22 ownership of it.

 

23 Q. Okay. Okay. So you claim that you owned an

 

24 interest in footage that was used in that television

 

25 documentary, right?

 

26 A. That’s correct.

 

27 Q. And did you ever see that television

 

28 documentary? 7743

 

1 A. “The Footage You Were Never Meant To See”?

 

2 Q. Yes.

 

3 A. Yes.

 

4 Q. And that was narrated by Maury Povich,

 

5 correct?

 

6 A. That’s correct.

 

7 Q. Okay. When did you first meet Dieter?

 

8 A. The very first time?

 

9 Q. Yes.

 

10 A. 1996.

 

11 Q. So you knew Dieter before he was doing

 

12 anything for Mr. Jackson, correct?

 

13 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; assumes facts.

 

14 THE COURT: Overruled.

 

15 You may answer.

 

16 THE WITNESS: I met Mr. Dieter during the

 

17 History tour, Mr. Jackson’s world tour, and his

 

18 position was merchandising.

 

19 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. He said he was

 

20 trying to merchandise something involving Mr.

 

21 Jackson, correct?

 

22 A. He was doing the merchandising of that tour,

 

23 I believe.

 

24 Q. Okay.

 

25 A. With a promoter.

 

26 Q. With a promoter you said?

 

27 A. Yeah.

 

28 Q. And who was the promoter, if you know? 7744

 

1 A. Avram.

 

2 Q. Okay.

 

3 A. Forgot his name. Mr. Avram.

 

4 Q. After you met him in 1996, did you do any

 

5 business with Dieter, other than what you have

 

6 described today?

 

7 A. After 1996?

 

8 Q. Let me rephrase it. Bad question.

 

9 You met him in 1996, right?

 

10 A. That’s correct.

 

11 Q. After you met him in 1996, did you do any

 

12 business with him?

 

13 A. Until like from 1996 till sometime — I

 

14 mean, are you giving me a time frame or —

 

15 Q. Yes. Between the time you first met Dieter

 

16 in 1996 —

 

17 A. Okay.

 

18 Q. — and the events you’ve described today —

 

19 A. Okay.

 

20 Q. — did you personally do any other business

 

21 with him?

 

22 A. “Business” meaning financial business-type

 

23 of — no. No.

 

24 Q. Did you have any involvement with him at all

 

25 between the time you met him in 1996 and the events

 

26 you’ve described today?

 

27 A. When you say “involvement,” what do you mean

 

28 by that? 7745

 

1 Q. Were you in communication with him at all?

 

2 A. Sometimes.

 

3 Q. And when did you start communicating with

 

4 him after you first met him in 1996?

 

5 A. Well, just an example would be we’re on the

 

6 tour, and he’s doing merchandising —

 

7 Q. Right.

 

8 A. — and we will just see each other and say

 

9 “Hi” at a venue, let’s say, and he would show like

 

10 the new jackets that he designed and things like

 

11 that.

 

12 Q. Okay.

 

13 A. Basically that kind of — that kind of, you

 

14 know, interaction.

 

15 Q. Right. After the tour ended, when did you

 

16 next communicate with Dieter?

17 A. I would see Dieter once in a while —

 

18 Q. Okay.

 

19 A. — with Mr. Jackson.

 

20 Q. Okay. And that would be in Los Angeles?

 

21 A. Various locations.

 

22 Q. And your understanding was that he was

 

23 trying to merchandise memorabilia, jackets, things

 

24 like that, involving the name “Michael Jackson,”

 

25 right?

 

26 A. For the tour.

 

27 Q. Yes. Okay. Your understanding was he was

 

28 trying to merchandise products, correct? 7746

 

1 A. That’s correct.

 

2 Q. Products like jackets, right?

 

3 A. Sure.

 

4 Q. Jackets that were supposed to be associated

 

5 with Michael Jackson, right?

 

6 A. Sure.

 

7 Q. Okay.

 

8 A. Mr. Jackson’s name would be on it.

 

9 Q. Right. Right. And when did you first meet

 

10 Konitzer, if you know?

 

11 A. I believe late 2002. I would say in

 

12 November, December 2002.

 

13 Q. Okay. You didn’t meet him when you first

 

14 met Dieter, right?

 

15 A. No.

 

16 Q. Okay. Okay.

 

17 THE COURT: All right. Let’s take our

 

18 afternoon recess.

 

19 8:30 tomorrow morning. Remember the

 

20 admonitions.

 

21 (The proceedings adjourned at 2:30 p.m.)

To be continued: https://michaeljacksonvindication2.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/april-27th-2005-trial-analysis-hamid-moslehi-terry-paulsen-gabrel-dominguez-anne-marie-sims-joseph-shebroe-jeanne-mulcahy-debbie-rowe-part-1-of-4-2/

Advertisements

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: