Former guard testifies Jackson engaged in sex act with boy
 

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/07/ja...ial/index.html

SANTA MARIA, California (CNN) -- A former security guard at Michael Jackson's Neverland Ranch testified Thursday that he saw the pop star performing oral sex on a young boy while the two were standing nude outside a shower.

The former guard, Ralph Chacon, testified that Jackson and the boy -- who was involved in a civil suit against Jackson in 1993 -- were engaged in "passionate" kissing and were caressing before the sex act.

The 46-year-old singer is accused of molesting another boy -- now 15 years old -- at Neverland, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold the boy's family captive in 2003.

Jackson has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

"[Jackson's] hands were all over his body," Chacon said of the incident outside the shower in late 1992 or 1993.

The family of the boy, who was 9 or 10 at the time of the incident, filed a civil lawsuit against the entertainer 12 years ago. Without admitting guilt, Jackson agreed to a multimillion-dollar settlement to end that case.

Chacon's testimony marks the first time in this trial that jurors have heard allegations of sexual contact that went beyond fondling or masturbation.

(snip)

His former maid just testified that she walked in on Jackson and a little boy taking a shower together. :o

He could be damned on all this testimony. However, two jurors were seen laughing and making fun of the tickle testimony, which does not bode well for its credibility. So, who knows.

that is truly disturbing information. I may not be able to sleep or eat for days now....blech.

The last couple of days have seen extremely damning testimony but today's is by far the most damning.
He's toast.

I could not agree more. As soon as the judge ruled that all this "pattern" evidence was allowed to come in to the case, he was damned. No wonder the freak is having physical problems.

Seems that Johnny Cochran was correct in advising Jackson to settle the earlier civil suit.

White toast.
I wonder who molested him when he was 9-10? I wonder if all the details and problems, etc, will come out when he is forced to seek help and found guilty? If he doesn't say something, his rep will never recover, not even a teensy bit, IMO.

Marbled toast.

That is so disturbing. :shudder: :distress:

There was some poll out that Dan Abrams mentioned last night on his show on MSNBC (I LOVE HIM) where only 1% of all adults polled found that Michael Jackson had a positive influence. About 70% thought he had a very negative influence. Amazing considering that he is an internationally recognized superstar (albeit a while ago).

Well, there's one guaranteed way to tell if all this shower stuff is true or not. If MJ's defense attorney cross examines the shower victims, it ain't true. If he declines, then it's definitely true.

Huh? :confused:

"Guaranteed"? Well, I guess the jury might as well just turn in the verdict now if credibility depends on Thomas Messareau's legal techniques. :rolleyes:

His reputation will never recover irregardless of whether or not he tells who molested him.

That and his prescription drug habit. It's been alleged that he likes to shoot Demerol. Talk about out of touch with reality. :shocked:

Jordie
 

It infuriates me that Jordy Chandler, the 93 accuser who took 20 million instead of putting him away then, is refusing to testify. The man has some responsibility to society at this point. His testimony could put the final nail in this ugly coffin but he has taken his millions and flown out of the country. That really ticks me off because he is an adult now and his testimony could be key.
T.M. did vigorously cross examine the security guard and maid, both of whom lost large civil suits with MJ. They both were accused of stealing from him and found liable to repay him around 2 Mil.
IMO, the boy who just testified a few days ago, the maid's son, was the strongest witness so far. He was not rocked by T.M. and he was very credible.

He sold his "responsibility to society" for $20 million :shrug: Happens all the time.

The maid's testimony was tainted and two jurors were seen laughing at the "tickle" testimony. That does not bode well for their credibility. The most damning by far has been the eyewitness shower testimony.

I think there is too much evidence for the jury not to convict though, esp. on the alcohol charges.

Gimme a break, the guy doesn't have anywhere near $20 million. His disgusting family got and spent most of it. While he probably was molested by Jackson, it was a ploy on the part of his family to get some cash. And that they did. Sick bastards.

I heard something about his father molesting him, I don't know if that's true though. I also heard that his father had sex with groupies in front of Michael when they were out on the road with The Jackson 5. Whether or not any of the sexual stuff is correct, it is a known fact that M.J.'s dad was physically and mentally abusive to his kids, and a real control freak to boot. He definitely had (and probably still has to some degree) mental control over Michael.

I'm sorry but...
 

Well, let's see. In general, high level attorneys are not complete idiots. I'm assuming that Messareau has said to MJ, "Look, I need to know- did you do any of the stuff that you are accused of?" I mean, defense attorneys have gotta know the score in order to build their case. If Jackson did molest all these kids and he's an idiot, which is entirely possible, then he may have said, "No, I'm completely innocent." Now, if MJ came clean and said yes or no truthfully and the he really is innocent, then Messareau is going to subpoena any involved in these shower claims and rip them to shreds. However, if MJ came clean and said, "Yeah I ****ed around with these boys", then Messareau is going to stay far, far, away from allowing anyone to give any more damaging testimony then they've already stated. This is just my take on it as a nobody.

Wednesday there was a whole pile of people boo-hooing and praising what a wonderful man Johnny Cochren was. All I could think was "Jeez, I'll bet ya anything O.J. told him 'yeah, I killed the bitch' and yet he still defended him and got him off." I know I wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing that I allowed someone to escape punishment for murdering his wife.

My problem with it is than anyone with any sort of decency who witnessed that **** would have immediately reported it to the parents of the kid or the cops- regardless of money, employment, whatever.

I don't know - In a lot of these cases - people who are truly sick - they don't think they're necessarily doing anything wrong

MJ may seriously think that he's done absolutely nothing wrong- even if he has - he may believe that he hasn't....:shrug:

It happens...and I MJ is obviously not well....he swears to the heavens he's had no plastic surgery done...HELLO!?! He may actually believe that...THAT is the sad and sick part....many times people's own lies become their truths...

burnt toast ;)

Omg!
 

And my boss said the same thing as well....

Basically you're supposed to be like....oh MJ is such a monster - but my first thought is...the damn guard allegedly see MJ giving a kid oral sex and DOES NOTHING!?! He's just as much a monster in my book :nod:

I also saw the footage of the not-guilty verdict replaid where Cochran embraced Simpson which made my stomach turn all over again. I nearly screamed when the verdict was read and I was at a restaurant. It is still just as horrifying today. I also heard Sharpton quoted as talking about how great the "you must acquit" crap was. :distress: Cochran died early of a guilty conscience, or these are the years he traded with the devil for that OJ verdict.

This is naive. People of strong moral fiber are few and far between these days. I hope I'm wrong about that. :distress:

That said, there is still no excuse for not reporting these heinous acts if they happened.

:nod: so true. And what irks me further is that it seems like the press was trying to make some kind of beloved character out of him when he died. What a load of crap. :rolleyes:

I completely & totally agree with you Dee. I think he's delusional.

I just want to remind everyone of Cochran's work as a civil rights lawyer and his work on the Geronimo Pratt and Abner Louima cases.
That said, I think O.J. was guilty. But he had a right to a defense and that was Cochran's job.

I agree with you. He did do some great things.

Yes, O.J. had a right to a defense, but Cochran wasn't forced to do it. He knew O.J. butchered his wife and he took money to get him off- he did it for the cash. Plain and simple. It's reality and it's sickening.

I can't imagine how awful it would be to be a public defense attorney- they HAVE to defend the accused who have confidentially admitted their guilt but still want to get off.

There are many criminal defense attorneys that do not ask if their client commited the crime. They focus on the reasonable doubt issue instead of the innocence issue.

I don't for one second believe that Wacko Jacko would admit anything inappropriate to his lawyer. He is in denial. I mean, how many times has he lied about how many plastic surgeries he has had? I don't think he has the ability to be rational. Also, remember how Jacko didn't even call his lawyer the day he didn't show up in court and left poor Tom hung out to dry in front of the judge? Sounds to me as if there is not a great level of communication between the two of them. He should have been the first person Jacko called when he wasn't gonna show up.

He's a mental mess, he is a very very very sick man on so many levels. And he's not credible at all because of this.

Right? That's more or less what I was trying to say....he's totally deluded...I don't think HE thinks he's done anything wrong or innapropriate...he needs some intensive mental HELP...and to be locked up away from kids...

The think I fear is that he'll be found not-guilty and there will still be stupid ass parents who will send their kids to see him....I hope that's not the case...it's just what I fear.

Yep. I don't see that anyone can paint Jacko as rational with his decisionmaking. One poor decision after another. :distress:

There is a big fear that he will be found not guilty. Juries are too unpredictable.

The only thing that Messareau can do is poke holes in the credibility of the prosecution's witnesses. That is the defense attorney's job. His client certainly isn't credible and would be a disaster on the stand. There is no way to "prove his innocence".

I'm looking at from Messereau's point. If I were him, I would be all over MJ like a ton of bricks to get a solid foundation- otherwise, he risks looking like an idiot in court. Then again, he IS getting paid- so, maybe the money mitigates whether or not he gives a **** if MJ goes up the river.

I agree with Jason- MJ is gonna get nailed on the alcohol charges no matter what. If Messereau can shred the **** out of the witnesses then MJ might get off on the other stuff.

Unfortunately, it does not always matter how much you ask a client to be straight with you - they still may not clue you in to things that can be brought up in court because:

1. They don't think the other side will bring it up;
2. They don't think it is important;
3. They are embarrassed or afraid.

For example, one of the first things that I ask my clients is, " If so-and-so were sitting here, what would they tell me about you and what the problems are in this situation?" And I take it from there. No matter how much you tell them to tell you the worst of the worst about stuff, you will almost always be surprised by what the other side will dredge up in court. I don't do any criminal work, but family law can almost be as worse because everyone has some crap to throw around in custody cases.

Hmmm.

"SANTA MARIA, Calif. - Before the Michael Jackson child molestation trial recessed for the weekend, prosecutors presented an ex-employee of Jackson's who testified he was delivering an order of french fries to Jackson at Neverland’s arcade late one night and saw the singer holding “Home Alone” actor Macaulay Culkin up to a video game console with one hand on the boy’s waist and the other in the boy’s shorts.

advertisement

“I was shocked. I almost dropped the french fries,” said Phillip LeMarque, 70. He said he sneaked away and then returned, loudly announcing himself.

The defense has asserted that Culkin has repeatedly said he was never molested, and a spokeswoman for the actor has said he has no plans to be part of the case.

Under defense questioning, LeMarque said he and his wife, a cook, sued Jackson for unpaid overtime and received a settlement.

LeMarque said he quit because his wife was asked to sign a false affidavit saying she saw a former maid go through people’s purses. That ex-maid, whose son received a financial settlement from Jackson in the 1990s after he alleged molestation, testified this week that she once found Jackson showering with a boy.

Also on Friday, Jackson’s former maid testified that she and other employees used a “media broker” to sell stories to tabloids, including one claiming inside knowledge of Jackson’s sex life with ex-wife Lisa Marie Presley.

Adrian McManus, who earlier testified for the prosecution that she saw Jackson in compromising positions with boys, insisted under cross-examination that she was not out to get Jackson’s money even when she and four other Neverland employees sued him for millions.


• Defense continues attack on witnesses
• Jackson guard says he saw oral sex
• Bonné: Trial takes a turn for the seedy
• Jackson attends Johnnie Cochran funeral
• Jackson: ‘God and truth are on our side’

"I wanted justice,” she said of the wrongful-termination lawsuit, which backfired and resulted in a large judgment against the plaintiffs.

“But your idea of justice was millions of bucks?” asked Jackson attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr.

“That’s not what I call justice,” said the witness. “Honestly, a simple ‘sorry for what we did to you’ would have been enough for me.”

Jackson is on trial on charges of molesting a 13-year-old boy at his Neverland ranch. The prosecution is presenting evidence, much of it from former Jackson employees, that the crime was part of a pattern of inappropriate behavior by the pop star with boys.

Mesereau has used the ex-employees’ legal battles with Jackson and the sale of stories to tabloids to attack their credibility.


Marriage to Presley
McManus, who is not the ex-maid whose son received a settlement, acknowledged that she signed agreements with the Star tabloid and the Splash media and picture agency to sell purported secrets about Jackson’s life with Presley.

Jackson, 46, married Presley in 1994. Presley filed for divorce in 1996. McManus was a Neverland maid from 1990 to 1994.

Prosecutor Ron Zonen asked McManus if she in fact had any information about kinky sex secrets of Jackson and Presley.

“No,” she said.

“Did you ever see any woman stay with Mr. Jackson in his room in the four years you worked at Neverland?” asked Zonen.

“No, I did not,” she said.

On Thursday, McManus testified that she saw the pop star kiss Culkin on the cheek while his hand was on Culkin’s bottom.

McManus described a similar scene with another boy: Jackson and the boy were changing their shirts and Jackson kissed the boy on his cheek and mouth and put his hand on his groin.

When she worked at Neverland, McManus was responsible for cleaning up Jackson’s room, and in an unexplained detour the prosecutor asked if she ever had to clean up after the singer’s pet monkey.

McManus said she did, and also had to clean the monkey’s diapers.

“Did you have to clean up monkey droppings on the floor?” Zonen asked.

“Not on the floor, just on the walls,” McManus said."