April 28th, 2005 Trial Analysis: Debbie Rowe, Iris Finsilver, Andrew Dietz, Jeffrey Schwartz, Crystalee Danko, Jennifer Simmons, Joe Corral, Part 2 of 3
The next prosecution witness was Debbie Rowe’s family law attorney Iris Finsilver, who has represented her since 1996. She helped to write the waiver that allowed Rowe to break her confidentiality agreement in order to participate in the rebuttal documentary, and she was also present during that interview. Here are her recollections of the interview:
15 DIRECT EXAMINATION
16 BY MR. ZONEN:
17 Q. Miss Finsilver, good morning.
18 A. Good morning.
19 Q. You’re not used to being on that side of the
20 witness stand, are you?
21 A. No, I’m not.
22 Q. What is your occupation?
23 A. I’m a lawyer.
24 Q. How long have you been an attorney?
25 A. I was admitted to the bar of Michigan in or
26 about 1986.
27 Q. In then California?
28 A. In California, I believe I was admitted in 8052
2 Q. What kind of a practice do you have?
3 A. Family law.
4 Q. And family law means what?
5 A. Divorce, custody, child custody, support,
6 family matters.
7 Q. All right. Is Debbie Rowe Jackson your
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. How long has she been your client?
11 A. Since in or about 1996.
12 Q. Did you represent her in her divorce with
13 Michael Jackson?
14 A. Yes, sir.
15 Q. Do you continue to represent her?
16 A. Yes, sir.
17 Q. Were you present at the filming of an
18 interview that took place in Calabasas at the
19 residence of Marc Schaffel back in February of 2003?
20 A. Yes, sir.
21 Q. Prior to doing that, had you engaged in any
22 legal work to be able to allow Deborah Rowe to
23 participate in that interview?
24 A. Yes, sir.
25 Q. What was the purpose of that?
26 A. It was — she had signed a confidentiality
27 agreement, and in order for her to speak of Mr.
28 Jackson, she would have to be released from the 8053
1 confidentiality agreement for the express purpose of
2 speaking about Mr. Jackson.
3 Q. Did you draft that waiver of
5 A. I think it was a mutual effort between Mr.
6 Jackson’s lawyers and myself. It was in fact, yes.
7 Q. But it was one that was drafted as a
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. And was it one that required signatures?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. Whose signatures were required on that
14 A. Mr. Jackson’s and Deborah Rowe Jackson’s.
15 Q. And did Debbie Rowe sign the document?
16 A. Yes, sir.
17 Q. And to your knowledge, did Mr. Jackson sign
18 the document?
19 A. Yes, sir.
20 Q. And following the signing of that document,
21 did Miss Rowe participate in an interview?
22 A. Yes, sir.
23 Q. Were you present during the interview?
24 A. Yes, I was.
25 Q. Were you present during the entirety of the
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. Approximately how long did that interview 8054
2 A. Well, I can tell you the whole day was about
3 nine hours. And I can’t exactly tell you how long
4 the filming took place. It was many hours of
5 filming throughout a nine-hour day.
Finsilver confirmed that Schaffel was present during the interview, and made suggestions to certain questions and answers, and Zonen quickly ended his direct examination. Mesereau declined to cross examine Finsilver.
6 Q. All right. Was there a man by the name of
7 Marc Schaffel present?
8 A. Yes, sir.
9 Q. Did you know Marc Schaffel prior to that
11 A. I had never met him prior to that day.
12 Q. Did you know his name prior to that day?
13 A. I believe I did.
14 Q. In what context?
15 A. In that he would be —
16 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Relevance and
18 THE COURT: Overruled.
19 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Go ahead.
20 THE COURT: Go ahead.
21 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Oh, you don’t need to be told
22 that, do you?
23 A. In that he would be part of the interview
24 that was going to be taking place, so that’s how I
25 heard of his name. And I knew that we were going to
26 be going to Marc Schaffel’s home, where the filming
27 was conducted.
28 Q. And was that where it was conducted, at his 8055
2 A. Yes, sir.
3 Q. Was he present during the interview?
4 A. Yes, sir.
5 Q. Was he present during the entirety of the
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Did he periodically make comments with
9 regards to the answers or questions that were given?
10 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; leading.
11 THE COURT: Overruled.
12 You may answer.
13 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
15 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Did you hear any
16 representations from Mr. Schaffel at any time during
17 the course of the filming that dealt specifically
18 with the subject of Ms. Rowe’s children?
19 A. Yes.
20 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; leading.
21 THE COURT: Overruled. The answer was,
22 “Yes.” Next question.
23 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: What were those
25 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay.
26 MR. ZONEN: Relevant for prior stated
28 THE COURT: Overruled. 8056
1 You may answer.
2 Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Go ahead.
3 A. I heard him, in connection with her answers,
4 when she would give a favorable answer, “Oh, Michael
5 will be very, very pleased about this. You’re
6 really helping him out of a big jam, and you’ll go
7 to Neverland and you’ll see Michael and your kids.”
8 Q. On how many occasions did he give an answer
9 of that nature?
10 A. I recall two specific times. There may have
11 been more. I just —
12 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; move to strike.
13 THE COURT: The last sentence is stricken.
14 MR. ZONEN: Thank you. I have no further
16 THE COURT: Mr. Mesereau?
17 MR. MESEREAU: No examination, Your Honor.
18 THE COURT: Thank you. You may step down.
19 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honor.
20 THE COURT: Call your next witness.
21 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, I want to get an
22 exhibit book.
23 THE COURT: All right.
24 MR. SNEDDON: I was going to ask permission
25 to go between there, but I’ll….
26 MR. ZONEN: I apologize, Your Honor.
27 I thought it would be a little faster than we
28 expected, but we are moving ahead of schedule. 8057
1 THE COURT: That’s fine.
2 MR. SNEDDON: Call Andrew Dietz, Your Honor.
3 THE COURT: Come forward, please.
4 When you get to the witness stand, remain
5 standing. Face the clerk and raise your right hand.
The next prosecution witness was Andrew Dietz, the owner of a retail travel agency called “Air Apparent, Inc.” Jackson’s company “MJJ Productions” had been a client of Dietz for over 15 years, and as a result of this business relationship the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department executed a search warrant on Dietz’s business in 2004 in order to obtain travel records for MJJ Productions for February and March 2003.
16 DIRECT EXAMINATION
17 BY MR. SNEDDON:
18 Q. Good morning.
19 A. Good morning.
20 Q. Mr. Dietz, you have a business — you’re
21 going to have to lean into that mike. Okay?
22 A. Good morning.
23 Q. Good morning. Do you have a business?
24 A. Yes, I do.
25 Q. And what is the name of your business?
26 A. Air Apparent, Inc.
27 Q. And where is your business located?
28 A. Los Angeles, California. 8058
1 Q. And what is the nature of the business?
2 A. It’s a retail travel agency.
3 Q. And basically could you describe for us what
4 that means? What’s a retail travel agency do?
5 A. We arrange transportation.
6 Q. And any other services you provide in
7 addition to transportation?
8 A. Not that I can think of.
9 Q. In connection with that transportation, you
10 make reservations at hotels and things like that?
11 A. Yes. Certainly.
12 Q. Now, in that particular business, what is
13 your position?
14 A. I’m the president.
15 Q. And how long have you been associated with
16 that business?
17 A. Since 1980.
18 Q. Now, is one of your clients MJJ Productions?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And how long has MJJ Productions been a
21 client of yours?
22 A. I believe around 15 years.
23 Q. And what is the nature of the business
24 services that you provide to MJJ Productions?
25 A. We arrange hotel, air transportation,
26 commercial air transportation, car reservations for
27 many of the people that he employs and engages in
28 work for himself. 8059
1 Q. What is the — can you describe to the jury
2 what the business relationship is in terms of how
3 the services, once they’re provided, how they’re
4 invoiced and paid and how that works?
5 A. A call — I think if you’re asking how is
6 business conducted —
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. — a call’s typically made and a reservation
9 is usually made, a ticket is usually generated.
10 It’s then invoiced and sent to the client.
11 Q. Now, at the time that the ticket is made,
12 do you have to — do you have to pay for the ticket
14 A. The minute the ticket is issued, it’s my
15 obligation to pay the carrier.
16 Q. Okay. I guess that was the question. And
17 then you pay it and then invoice the client?
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. And then the client repays you?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. Was that the type of business arrangement
22 that you had with MJJ Productions?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Now, at some point back in 2004, did members
25 of the sheriff’s department come to your business
26 and execute a search warrant with regard to your
28 A. Yes, they did. 8060
1 Q. And those records involved MJJ Productions;
2 is that correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And the time period covered by that was
5 March — February and March of 2003?
6 A. I believe that’s correct.
The remainder of his direct examination consisted of him identifying travel records for Jackson during the time period of February and March 2003. For the most part, it was uneventful (and even rather boring!), but in this excerpt, Sanger became suspicious of Sneddon’s evidence, and asked Judge Melville for permission to engage Dietz in what is called a “voire dore” examination. Sneddon asked Dietz if the official Client Summary Form that he displayed in front of open court were official transactions that occurred between MJJ Productions and Air Apparent, and Dietz gave a very lukewarm confirmation, so Sanger became suspicious that Sneddon was trying to use transcations that belonged to another client as evidence against Jackson:
4 Q. Mr. Dietz, with regard to the Exhibit 853 –
5 okay? – that’s the one that has the void tickets on
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. — does your business maintain information
9 that would reflect the adjustment as to whether or
10 not the original invoice is sent to your client for
11 payment or some subsequent amount is sent to reflect
12 the voids?
13 A. The original invoice may have definitely
14 been mailed out. Actually, no, I know that it was
15 not mailed out. It was adjusted to reflect that one
16 passenger — that only one e-ticket was issued.
17 Q. Now, going to the Client Summary form, okay?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Do the Client Summary forms contain
20 information maintained by your business in the
21 normal course of business to reflect the
22 transactions that occurred on the exhibits that I
23 showed you, 223 to 249?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And that information is kept in the normal
26 course of your business, correct?
27 A. The information on that summary is.
28 Q. Yes. 8089
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And with regard to the mode and time of the
3 preparation of that information as it’s placed into
4 your computer, it’s made at or about the time of the
5 transactions; is that correct?
6 MR. SANGER: Objection. That — there’s a
7 lack of foundation. That’s the connection. Lack of
9 THE COURT: Overruled.
10 You may answer.
11 THE WITNESS: Can you repeat the question?
12 THE COURT: Yes.
13 (Record read.)
14 THE WITNESS: Yes and no.
15 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: Yes and what?
16 A. Reservations can be made. It’s only — an
17 invoice is generated only when the reservation is
18 turned into a ticket.
19 Q. Right. And that’s what we’re talking about
21 A. Okay.
22 MR. SANGER: Objection. Move to strike
23 counsel’s comment.
24 MR. SNEDDON: Well —
25 THE COURT: Overruled. Go ahead.
26 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: Just so there will be no
27 question about it, the exhibits we’re talking about,
28 except for the one exhibit, 223, all reflect 8090
1 transactions that occurred, correct, tickets were
3 A. Except for —
4 MR. SANGER: I’m sorry, I have to object.
5 What exhibits are we talking about, except for 223?
7 MR. SNEDDON: I’ll clarify it.
8 Q. I asked you to look at the documents 223
9 through 249, and then I asked you to look at 852 and
10 853, correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. All right. Are those all transactions that
13 occurred between you, Air Apparent, your company,
14 and MJJ Productions?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And with regard to the information contained
17 on those transactions, is that the information
18 that’s downloaded to your computers?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And you use that for your business purposes?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And with regard to the exhibits, now getting
23 back to 854 and 855 – all right? —
24 A. Yeah.
25 Q. — they contain a client summary – correct? —
26 A. Yeah.
27 Q. — of all of those transactions from
28 information that was loaded into your computers at 8091
1 or about the time of the transactions?
2 A. Correct.
3 MR. SNEDDON: All right. I move they be
5 MR. SANGER: And I would object.
6 MR. SNEDDON: Let me ask one more question.
7 I want to ask one more question, and this may take
8 care of it.
9 Q. With regard to the Client Summary form –
10 okay? – and the information that’s on that form –
11 okay? – does that information — from that
12 information, are you able, in the due course of your
13 business, to be able to provide invoices to clients
14 to be paid that may be different than the original
15 invoices that were sent out?
16 A. Yes.
17 MR. SNEDDON: All right. Now I move they —
18 THE WITNESS: But not in that form.
19 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: I understand that. But
20 that’s what the information is used for, correct,
21 the information that’s in your computer?
22 A. Yes.
23 MR. SANGER: I’m going to object. It’s
24 leading; argumentative; statements of counsel.
25 THE COURT: Overruled.
26 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: I think the point you’re
27 trying to make — and I think you made it, but let’s
28 just make sure that the jury understands. What 8092
1 you’re —
2 MR. SANGER: Move to strike comments of
3 counsel, Your Honor.
4 THE COURT: Sustained.
5 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: The Client Summary form was
6 a form that was produced specifically to respond to
7 the search warrant, correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. That form itself is not something that you
10 use ordinarily, correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. All right. But the information on the form
13 is all information that you house at your place of
14 business to conduct business, correct? It was just
15 downloaded into a different format?
16 A. I — yes.
17 MR. SANGER: Objection. Well — I was going
18 to object, compound.
19 THE COURT: Sustained.
20 MR. SNEDDON: All right. We’ll break it up.
21 Q. Is it information that you maintain at your
22 place of business to conduct business?
23 A. Is what, the —
24 Q. The information on those forms.
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. Is that input into your computer?
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. All right. And is that information – 8093
1 A. That’s the output. That is the output from
3 Q. Well, let’s go back. It’s a matter of
5 A. Okay.
6 Q. The information on the form is the output?
7 A. Correct.
8 Q. The information that went into the computer
9 is the input?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. The information that’s input is information
12 that you keep in the normal course of your business?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. It happened to be output into this format
15 for this trial?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. But reflects information that you keep?
18 A. Yes.
19 MR. SNEDDON: All right. Now I move that
20 they be admitted.
21 MR. SANGER: And I object and request either
22 to have an opportunity to voir dire or ask the Court
23 to reserve ruling until cross.
24 THE COURT: Well, I think he needs to ask him
25 some questions about this, so I’ll let you voir dire
26 now, rather than wait. I don’t think that’s
28 MR. SANGER: That’s fine. That’s why I 8094
1 offered. Thank you.
3 VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
4 BY MR. SANGER:
5 Q. Mr. Dietz, how are you doing?
6 A. Good. How are you doing?
7 Q. I’m doing fine, thank you.
8 On 854 and 855, it’s my understanding that
9 you had not seen those document before they were
10 shown to you by the District Attorney; is that
12 A. Um, before last evening?
13 Q. Yes.
14 A. I might have looked at them in preparation
15 for coming up here.
16 Q. You’re not sure?
17 A. I’m not sure.
18 Q. And those are not documents that you
19 downloaded from your computer; is that correct?
20 A. I don’t believe I downloaded them. I
21 believe one of my accounting staff did.
22 Q. Okay. So you’re assuming that that was
23 something somebody on your accounting staff did; is
24 that correct?
25 A. I’m pretty certain that it’s something that
26 somebody did on my accounting staff.
27 Q. You have not had an opportunity to verify
28 whether or not the billing amounts, the invoice 8095
1 amounts to the particular client, are accurate in
2 each regard on those two exhibits; is that correct,
4 A. Do you mean the invoices to the statement?
5 Q. Yes. In other words —
6 A. To the Client Summary that’s been presented?
7 Q. Let me withdraw it. Your question indicates
8 that my question was not clear.
9 A. All right.
10 Q. On 854 and 855 —
11 A. Yeah.
12 Q. — these client billing summaries —
13 A. Yeah.
14 Q. — they show invoice amounts to the client,
16 A. Correct.
17 Q. You have not had an opportunity to determine
18 whether or not the invoice amounts shown on those
19 documents are accurate in each case; is that
21 A. Not in each case.
22 Q. And these documents, as far as you knew,
23 were prepared for the purposes of this litigation;
24 is that right?
25 A. Yes.
26 MR. SANGER: I have no further questions on
27 voir dire, and I object.
28 THE COURT: Does that material on the 8096
1 printouts on 854, 855, is that a compilation of the
2 material that’s in your computer on this particular
4 THE WITNESS: Yes.
5 THE COURT: All right. Your objection is
6 overruled. They’re admitted as a compilation. But
7 after that —
8 MR. SNEDDON: I should have let you ask the
9 questions, Your Honor. We’d be way ahead of the
11 THE COURT: Well, I’ve just got to start
12 this break early. That was so painful.
14 (Recess taken.)
15 THE COURT: All right. Mr. Sneddon, go
17 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: Mr. Dietz, I placed in
18 front of you the document that’s in evidence.
19 That’s 853, all right?
20 And does that document have or bear an
21 invoice number?
22 A. Yes, it does.
23 Q. What is that invoice number?
24 A. 0143505.
25 Q. And the amount of money that’s indicated on
26 that invoice number is what?
27 A. $6,644.
28 Q. For four tickets? 8097
1 A. Correct.
2 MR. SNEDDON: I’m going to place on the
3 Elmo, Your Honor, if I might have it for just a
4 moment, page six of Exhibit 855.
5 No, the other one. Back. Back. There.
6 All right.
7 Q. The information contained on page six of
8 Exhibit 855 has the date in the far left-hand
9 corner; is that correct?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. And moving down the date to March 1st, 2003,
12 in the second column over, what does the number
13 143505 refer to?
14 A. The invoice number.
15 Q. And with regard —
16 MR. SANGER: Excuse me.
17 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: — to the far right-hand
18 side of the exhibit at the top, it bears the word
19 “fare,” correct, f-a-r-e?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And with regard to the flight on Invoice No.
22 143505, you billed $1,661, correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Is the invoice number and trip reflected on
25 page six of the Exhibit 855 the same trip that’s
26 represented by the invoice number on 853?
27 A. You got me there. Where is 855?
28 Q. 853, the one in your hands. 855 is the one 8098
1 on the board.
2 A. Okay.
3 Q. Is that the same trip?
4 A. That is the same trip, but the invoice
5 was — the ticket was issued the weekend. It was
6 changed over the weekend, or reservations were
7 cancelled. Flights were issued, e-tickets were
8 issued. Three of the passengers did not travel —
9 Q. So this —
10 A. — on this itinerary.
11 Q. Okay. So 855 reflects the fact that only
12 one person traveled on that itinerary that’s been
13 marked as 853 that’s in your hand, correct?
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. I couldn’t hear you.
16 A. Correct.
17 MR. SNEDDON: All right. No further
19 MR. SANGER: Can I have the exhibits,
21 MR. SNEDDON: I was going to put them back
22 together again. If you want to have them, here.
23 MR. SANGER: Why don’t we keep them out for
24 now, please.
25 MR. SNEDDON: The rest of them are up there.
26 MR. SANGER: May I approach to retrieve the
28 THE COURT: Yes. 8099
1 MR. SANGER: I’m just a little concerned,
2 Your Honor. Mr. Sneddon said he was going to put
3 them back together, so I think I will give them to
4 Mr. Sneddon so they get in the right position there.
5 MR. SNEDDON: They’re all in order except
6 for the one that was taken away from me.
7 MR. SANGER: All right. There it is.
Sanger began his cross examination by asking Dietz if he could assume that Jackson travelled on a particular day in which the Cascio’s voided their trip, and Dietz answered that there wouldn’t be any way for him to know:
10 BY MR. SANGER:
11 Q. All right. First of all, on — with regard
12 to these summaries you just saw up on the board,
13 particularly you took a look at one of the pages, I
14 think it was page six, and it showed the amount that
15 was billed, and it showed it was billed for one
16 person to travel, right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Say a word so the court reporter can get it
20 A. Sorry.
21 Q. That’s okay.
22 You are assuming that that record was
23 accurately placed into the computer database by
24 whoever entered these things; is that correct?
25 A. Correct.
26 Q. All right. And you noted from the other
27 actual tickets that it appeared that three of the
28 tickets, the ones for the Cascios, I believe, were 8100
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Okay. There was the Cascios and LaPerruque,
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. They were voided. You look at that, and you
7 pretty much figure, well, as far as your company was
8 concerned, the person that traveled on that
9 particular day was Mr. Jackson?
10 A. I would not necessarily assume that.
11 Q. Okay. I was going to ask you how you would
12 come to that conclusion. So you’re saying you don’t
13 know that?
14 A. Correct.
In this excerpt, Dietz explains how Jackson’s travel arrangements were made:
15 Q. All right. Now, I want to show you — you
16 have the book in front of you there —
17 A. Yeah.
18 Q. — with the exhibits in the 200 series. And
19 I’d ask you to turn to Exhibit 223, and I believe
20 that that is a two-page exhibit; is that correct?
21 A. Yes, it is.
22 MR. SANGER: All right. And, Your Honor,
23 with the Court’s permission, I would like to put the
24 copy I was given of those two pages up on the — on
25 the board, if I may.
26 THE COURT: Okay.
27 MR. SANGER: Or up on the machine.
28 Q. And I’m going to show you the first page of 8101
1 exhibit — the 223. And that’s already been up
2 there before, but I’ll ask you to look at that
3 again. And this appears to be an itinerary that was
4 generated somehow, correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. That’s not your usual format for itineraries
7 that are generated, is it?
8 A. For itineraries, I believe it is.
9 Q. Okay. All the other itineraries that you
10 have shown for Exhibits 224 through 249 are
11 generated on letterhead, with a different font, in a
12 different format; isn’t that correct?
13 A. Yes, they’re associated with an invoice.
14 Q. All right. Now, this particular one was not
15 associated with an invoice because it was not
16 sent — an invoice was not sent for payment on this
17 flight; is that correct?
18 A. I cannot tell from what I see here.
19 Q. All right. Do you know whether or not that
20 flight took place?
21 A. I do not know.
22 Q. All right. And ordinarily when flights are
23 booked through your agency by MJJ Productions, who
24 is it that contacts you to book the flights?
25 A. Evvy.
26 Q. All right. And I’ll tell you what. I’m
27 going to ask you to just turn around and look this
28 way, and I’ll direct your attention to the board in 8102
1 a second when we put the next one up, but it’s hard
2 for everybody to hear you.
3 A. Okay.
4 Q. So Evvy Tavasci is ordinarily the person who
5 would be contacting your agency, correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. All right. And she contacts your agency not
8 just for Mr. Jackson’s travel arrangements, but for
9 other employees of MJJ Productions, correct?
10 A. Definitely.
11 Q. Okay. And to your knowledge, if some other
12 employee of MJJ Productions needs to travel for some
13 business-related purpose, they would contact her,
14 and she would in turn contact you; is that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. When you make a flight arrangement for Evvy
17 Tavasci, or at her — at her request, do you fax a
19 A. I’m not sure. I don’t know our daily
21 Q. You’re not the person that actually does it?
22 A. Not at all.
23 Q. You just own the place?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. There you go. All right. Well, let me show
26 you this anyway and see if this is — this is the
27 second page I’m going to put up of this exhibit, and
28 I’d like you to read the top — no, I’m kidding. 8103
Sanger questioned Dietz about the authorization process when it comes to making travel arrangements for MJJ Productions, and Dietz confirmed that most transactions had Evvy’s Tavasci’s authorization.
5 Q. If you look at these two documents that are
6 marked as 223, is there any way to determine the
7 time of day on February 5th that these tickets were
9 A. Requested?
10 Q. Yes.
11 A. No. Prior to 11:31.
12 Q. You know it’s prior to 11:31, because that’s
13 when the fax first was attempted, the fax that
14 didn’t work, correct?
15 A. That’s correct.
16 Q. And ordinarily, your people would be pretty
17 prompt if they were setting up a ticket for the same
18 day. And I believe this is a ticket for the same
19 day, right? You can take a look at your —
20 A. Yes, it looks like that way. Yes, for a
21 flight at two o’clock in the afternoon.
22 Q. The flight was to depart at two o’clock in
23 the afternoon of February the 5th?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. So if somebody were doing this and faxing it
26 out at 11:51 in the morning, they probably had made
27 the arrangements very shortly before that; is that
28 correct? 8105
1 A. That is correct.
2 Q. All right. Now, the fact that on the top
3 of — you keep looking at what you’re looking at
5 A. They didn’t necessarily make the reservation
6 at the time they called it in. I mean, on this day.
7 They could have — they could have made the
8 reservation prior to this date.
9 Q. Okay.
10 A. If that’s the question.
11 Q. Well, that’s fair enough.
12 You look — well, you’re looking at your
13 copy there. You’re on the first page?
14 A. Uh-huh.
15 Q. And at the top — at the top there, it says,
16 “To MJJ Productions,” and “Attention: Evvy,
17 Personal and Confidential”?
18 A. Uh-huh.
19 Q. Does that mean that Evvy was actually the
20 person that called this in?
21 A. Not necessarily.
22 Q. Somebody could have called it in and then
23 you would be dealing with Evvy Tavasci at MJJ
24 Productions, correct?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. So, in essence, from the records that you
27 have before you, you do not have any idea who called
28 in this request for tickets? 8106
1 A. Let me clarify. Most of the tickets, to my
2 knowledge, were ordered or confirmed by Evvy.
3 Q. I understand.
4 A. Some of them were called in by other
5 employees of MJJ Productions.
6 Q. Okay.
7 A. But nothing was done without, typically,
8 getting Evvy’s authorization.
9 Q. So theoretically, before this flight —
10 before the tickets would actually issue on this
11 flight, you would need to have Evvy’s confirmation,
13 A. Typically, yes.
14 Q. Maybe Narcisse, who also worked there,
16 A. I’m not sure if Narcisse is on the — she
17 definitely is calling some things in. I’m not sure
18 if she’s a part of the approval process.
19 Q. But going back to my question originally,
20 here, you cannot tell who actually called this in.
21 In other words, somebody else — somebody else
22 entirely different could have called it in?
23 MR. SNEDDON: I’m going to object. Calls
24 for speculation, Your Honor.
25 THE COURT: Overruled.
26 THE WITNESS: I cannot tell who called this
28 Q. BY MR. SANGER: All right. And then if you 8107
1 look at the air fare there, that’s economy air fare,
2 $1,180.50 per person, right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Does that tend to indicate to you that this
5 was a flight that was scheduled at the last minute?
6 A. I — I can’t speculate on that. I think it
7 was — I mean, my gut feeling is yes, but —
8 Q. All right.
9 A. I don’t know if it was called in last
11 Q. Okay. I’m going to take that down for a
13 A. You know, it might have been
14 contemporaneously, only because ticket fares are
15 good for only, you know, for a 24-hour period per
16 se. So the fare is only good for — for a certain
17 time frame, and then it will move on. So —
18 Q. Now, you testified to some other documents
19 as to who might have been — I’m sorry, you
20 testified to other documents as to whose names were
21 on particular tickets or potential tickets. You do
22 not actually know who flew on a particular day; is
23 that correct?
24 A. I do not.
25 Q. And, of course, if you — if somebody booked
26 flights independent of your agency, you would not
27 know about those flights; is that correct?
28 A. That is correct. 8108
1 MR. SANGER: Okay. I have no further
2 questions. And I have the exhibits that were handed
3 to me. I’m just going to leave them here.
The next prosecution witness was Jeffrey Schwartz, a custodian of records for Talk America, a long distance internet telephone provider. Mag Nicola asked Schwartz to confirm that the phone records that were introduced in court belonged to Jay Jackson:
13 DIRECT EXAMINATION
14 BY MR. NICOLA:
15 Q. Good afternoon, sir.
16 A. Good afternoon.
17 Q. Would you tell the jury, please, who you’re
18 employed with?
19 A. My employer is Talk America.
20 Q. And what is Talk America?
21 A. We’re a C-lite local and long-distance
22 Internet telephone provider.
23 Q. Are you here to testify today as their
24 custodian of records?
25 A. I am.
26 MR. NICOLA: May I approach the witness,
27 Your Honor?
28 THE COURT: Yes. 8110
1 Q. BY MR. NICOLA: I’ve placed in front of you
2 Exhibit 458, and I ask you if you recognize that
3 document, and if you do, what is it, please?
4 A. I do. It’s subscriber information from a
5 customer of Talk America, Jay Jackson.
6 Q. And does that Exhibit 458 also contain toll
7 records for the period of January, February and
8 March of the year 2003?
9 A. It does.
10 Q. Is the information contained within that
11 exhibit material that is generated within the
12 regular course and scope of the business of Talk
14 A. It is.
15 Q. Okay. And is the material that is in there,
16 the information that is in that exhibit, collected
17 at or near the time of the individual toll calls?
18 A. Yes, it is.
19 Q. And is it relied upon to conduct the
20 business of Talk America?
21 A. Yes, it is.
22 MR. NICOLA: Your Honor, we would offer 458
23 into evidence at this time.
24 MR. SANGER: I just have a technical
25 question. There’s a different 458 that we were
26 provided. Has that been withdrawn or —
27 MR. NICOLA: That was never identified.
28 MR. SANGER: Never provided to the Court? 8111
1 MR. NICOLA: No.
2 MR. SANGER: Oh, okay. I’m just now
3 informed by counsel that what was provided to us was
4 not provided to the Court or marked. So….
5 MR. NICOLA: We used a different exhibit
6 number for this.
7 MR. SANGER: So based on that, I have no
9 THE COURT: It’s admitted.
This particular telephone information may seem insignificant, but pay attention because it’s huge blow to the prosecution’s case! Most of the telephone calls that are discussed in the excerpt below are from Jay Jackson’s phone to Frank Cascio or Neverland! Janet Arvizo was in steady contract with Frank and Neverland during the time period of February 18th and 19th (the day before the shooting of the rebuttal video), and this is consistent with the defense’s assertion that Janet kept trying to weasel her way back to Neverland, and she was never held against her will!
10 MR. NICOLA: Thank you, Your Honor.
11 May I please have “Input No. 4,” Your Honor?
12 Q. Mr. Schwartz, I would just like to go to the
13 first page of the toll records of that exhibit. I’m
14 going to project a few items up onto the screen, and
15 if you could please explain them to the jury once
16 they’re up there, okay?
17 A. Okay.
18 Q. Let’s begin with the headings in the columns
19 entitled A, B, C, D, et cetera. And I’m just going
20 to point with the laser. If you can speak next to
21 that second mike, please, it would be more
22 convenient for you, and everyone will be able to
23 hear you.
24 Could you tell the jury what’s in this
25 section, the first line, Section A, please?
26 A. That’s a number where the call would
27 originate from.
28 Q. Is that the number that corresponds to the 8112
2 A. Yes, it does.
3 Q. The customer?
4 A. Yes, that’s correct.
5 Q. Okay. And is that a mobile phone number or
6 is that a landline?
7 A. That’s a landline.
8 Q. Do you provide local service for that, or
9 did you during the time period in question?
10 A. We did not.
11 Q. Okay. What kind of service did you provide
12 to that particular landline?
13 A. We provided LD service only.
14 Q. And LD, for those of us who don’t know?
15 A. Long distance.
16 Q. Long-distance service.
17 What’s in Column B?
18 A. Column B is where the call would have
20 Q. What does that mean?
21 A. That means where the receiver would have
22 been picked up on the other end.
23 Q. The number that was dialed by the person at
24 the 9279 number?
25 A. That’s correct.
26 Q. Okay. Column C, is that the date of the
28 A. The date and the time. 8113
1 Q. Do you know whether the time stamp is based
2 on a particular time zone?
3 A. It is on the time zone where the call
4 originated from.
5 Q. So if the phone number is registered in Los
6 Angeles, it’s going to be in Pacific Coast time,
8 A. Correct.
9 Q. The next column seems to indicate a place.
10 A. That is the origination column date.
11 Q. Okay.
12 A. That is the origination which corresponds to
13 the Column A.
14 Q. Column E appears to be the state, obviously,
16 A. Correct.
17 Q. Correct?
18 A. Correct, I’m sorry.
19 Q. And of course there’s Column H and Column I.
20 What is Column H, please?
21 A. Column H is actually the duration of the
22 call, from the time the call is received until the
23 call was terminated.
24 Q. So that’s the actual time that the call
26 A. Correct.
27 Q. And what is this over here, Column I?
28 A. That would be the time that the call was 8114
1 billed for.
2 Q. Okay. For example, in this column, H, on
3 the second line, a 34-second call results in one
4 minute worth of billing?
5 A. Correct. That is correct. Common practice
6 in the telecommunications industry.
7 Q. We’ve heard that, yes.
8 I’d like to direct your attention, please,
9 to the middle of this chart, if I may.
10 Beginning with the entry on line 25 —
11 A. Okay.
12 Q. — this would be the calling number, Mr.
13 Jackson, correct?
14 A. That would be the origination of the call
15 for Mr. Jackson, correct.
16 Q. And this number here, (201) 213-0763, is the
17 number that was placed — or dialed by whoever was
18 using this phone?
19 A. Placed and terminated at that number,
21 Q. Okay. And does this call on Item No. 24 —
22 excuse me, Item No. 25 indicate the call was a
23 completed call?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. How can you tell that?
26 A. By the duration of the call.
27 Q. Over here, the 6:32?
28 A. That’s correct. 8115
1 Q. Which on the bill appears to be what, seven
3 A. What line are we looking at? 25?
4 Q. Yes, right where the pointer is.
5 A. That’s correct. Well, six minutes and 32
6 seconds. Billed for seven minutes.
7 Q. Okay. And that’s how Cingular bought AT&T.
8 Okay. Here we go. Line No. 27, same
9 number, to Morristown, New Jersey?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. And that call lasted 15 seconds, correct?
12 A. Correct.
13 Q. Now, is that a completed call, if it lasts
14 15.3 seconds?
15 A. Yes. Any call — I’m sorry.
16 Q. Explain that, please.
17 A. Well, any call that is entered into the
18 record, if the call was not answered, if there was
19 not an answer on the telephone, there wouldn’t be a
20 record for the call because the call would not have
21 terminated. But once the call is received and
22 answered, regardless of one second or 20 seconds, or
23 as far as ten minutes, there would be a record of
24 the call.
25 Q. Okay. So does that mean that this call was
26 either answered on the other end or it got forwarded
27 to voice mail or something like that?
28 A. Any one of those possibilities is possible, 8116
2 Q. Okay. And this 15 seconds also costs a
3 minute, right?
4 A. That is correct also.
5 Q. Going down the list to Item No. 28 on the
6 left, same number was dialed to Morristown, New
7 Jersey, at 11:53?
8 A. That’s correct.
9 Q. Is this military time?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. So the next call down here at 1320 hours,
12 that’s actually 1:20 p.m., correct?
13 A. That’s also correct.
14 Q. And the 1:20 p.m. call lasted one minute and
15 eight seconds?
16 A. And billed for two minutes, if that’s what
17 you’re asking, yes. Yes, it did.
18 Q. This is my favorite one right here.
19 The next call appears to be the same number,
20 is that correct, on line 30?
21 A. Yes. That’s correct.
22 Q. And that call was placed at 1324, 1:24 in
23 the afternoon, correct?
24 A. Yes, that’s correct.
25 Q. To Morristown, New Jersey, for a period of
26 2.4 seconds?
27 A. That’s correct.
28 Q. Immediately thereafter, at 1334 hours, that 8117
1 number was called again, correct?
2 A. That’s correct.
3 Q. And that call lasted 3.1 seconds?
4 A. That’s also correct.
5 Q. And in total, that was two minutes, in
6 telephone company time, right?
7 A. That’s also correct, yes.
8 Q. You can tell I enjoy this, huh?
9 The remainder of these calls, at 1539 hours,
10 Item 32, Item 33 at 1407 hours, Item 34 at 2036
11 hours, Item 35 at 2043, and Item 36 at 2048, were
12 all to the same phone number in Morristown, New
13 Jersey, right?
14 A. That is correct.
15 Q. And they were all completed calls?
16 A. That is correct also.
17 Q. Now, I believe I misspoke and called 1359
18 1539. So Item 32 is actually a call placed at 1359
19 or nearly two o’clock in the afternoon, right?
20 A. That’s correct.
21 Q. Okay. Now, beginning with Item 36 — 37,
22 excuse me, on February 16th, 2003, at 4:07 in the
23 afternoon, was a call placed to a phone number in
24 Wyckoff, New Jersey?
25 A. That’s correct.
26 Q. And what does your record reflect that phone
27 number to be?
28 A. (201) 847-7576. 8118
1 Q. Now, you have no way of knowing whether the
2 receiving phone call — excuse me, the number dialed
3 is a cellular phone or a landline, correct?
4 A. You could gather the information. I do not
5 know. You could gather the information if you had
6 to gather it. You could do that.
7 Q. By some kind of a cell site?
8 A. Or a customer service record. You could
9 request what we call a “CSR,” which would be a
10 Customer Service Record, for the receiving call.
11 Q. How long are those records kept?
12 A. I believe a record should be kept for eight
13 years, is what a telephone record is required to be
14 kept, so —
15 Q. Okay. Would the subscriber information on
16 this end of the phone call also tell you whether
17 it’s a cell phone or a landline?
18 A. Yes, it could.
19 Q. Okay. Now, beginning with Item 37, and
20 continuing down to Item 41, there appear to be
21 four — four calls in a row between four o’clock in
22 the afternoon and approximately 10:23 the following
23 day, February 17th, to the same number in Wyckoff,
24 New Jersey; is that correct?
25 A. That’s correct.
26 Q. And were those completed calls?
27 A. Yes, they were.
28 Q. Proceeding to Item 42, was a different 8119
1 number called on February 17th of 2003 at 11:24 in
2 the morning?
3 A. Yes. Different between 41 and 42 is what
4 your — is the question?
5 Q. Yes.
6 A. Yes, different.
7 Q. Is that the same phone number that was
8 called on the 15th to Morristown, New Jersey?
9 A. Yes, it is.
10 Q. Okay. And was that a completed phone call?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And how long did that one last?
13 A. Item 42?
14 Q. Yes, please.
15 A. It looks like 17 minutes and 39 seconds,
16 billed for 18 minutes probably.
17 Q. There you go. Okay.
18 And the item right below 42 is 43.
19 A. Right.
20 Q. Could you tell us about that phone call
21 including the location and duration, please?
22 A. It looks like it was 26 minutes and 15
23 seconds to Wyckoff, New Jersey. The (201) 847-7576
25 Q. Would you turn the page, please? Okay. I’m
26 trying to get this up there. How about we just do
27 it verbally.
28 Items 45 through 48 — excuse me, 45 through 8120
1 47, are they all telephone calls placed from the
2 Jackson residence, Jay Jackson residence, to the
3 7576 telephone number in Wyckoff, New Jersey?
4 A. Yes, they are.
5 Q. And were they all completed phone calls?
6 A. Yes, they were.
7 Q. And did they occur between February 18th of
8 2003 and February 19th of 2003?
9 A. Yes, they did.
10 MR. NICOLA: Your Honor, I have no further
11 questions of this witness.
To be continued: https://michaeljacksonvindication2.wordpress.com/2014/03/08/april-28th-2005-trial-analysis-debbie-rowe-iris-finsilver-andrew-dietz-jeffrey-schwartz-crystalee-danko-jennifer-simmons-joe-corral-part-3-of-3/