|
JACKSON'S HISTORY: Singer's past relationships with boys haunt current case
PAST: Old allegations look ever more vital to DA's case
By SCOTT HADLY
NEWS-PRESS SENIOR WRITER
Michael Jackson's 15-year-old accuser and the boy's brother stumbled under harsh cross-examination over the past two weeks, potentially weakening the prosecution's case because they are the only witnesses who can provide firsthand testimony that the pop star molested a child.
But they may not be the only ones for long, as prosecutors try to bolster their case by bringing in testimony detailing Mr. Jackson's past relationships with seven other boys dating back at least 15 years.
Judge Rodney Melville has yet to decide whether witnesses regarding those relationships will testify.
But as the trial progresses and Mr. Jackson's attorneys sow seeds of doubt about the credibility of the accuser and his family, those past allegations appear ever more vital to the prosecution's case.
"It's crucial," said Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola School of Law who is observing the trial.
Although California law allows evidence of a defendant's disposition to commit sex crimes to be introduced at trial, the law also leaves the decision up to the judge.
Judge Melville could include all, some or none of the evidence, Ms. Levenson said.
On Wednesday, prosecutors asked for a hearing on the matter "sooner rather than later," and the judge indicated that it may come next week.
Whatever Judge Melville decides, both sides are anticipating that at least some of Mr. Jackson's past interaction with boys will be part of the trial.
Mr. Jackson's attorneys said the prosecutors want a group of "disgruntled former employees, paid tabloid informants and other disreputable characters" to testify about his past.
For their part, prosecutors have been counting on using the evidence. They want to counter Mr. Jackson's assertion that the current allegations "were fabricated by the victim and his family for financial gain," said Senior Deputy District Attorney Gerald Franklin in a motion filed earlier this year.
California's evidence code was changed a decade ago to allow prosecutors to include past crimes and even uncharged allegations of a crime in sex offense cases.
"As a matter of logic, the best way to prove that a man is a sex offender is to prove that he has sexually offended again and again," Mr. Franklin said.
The only caveats are that such evidence must be relevant and support the prosecution's theory regarding a defendant's intent, motive, opportunity and plan or scheme to commit the charged offense.
A Court of Appeal opinion upholding the law said, "The Legislature has determined the need for this evidence is 'critical' given the serious and secretive nature of sex crimes and the often resulting credibility contest at trial."
The author of the 1995 legislation, former Assemblyman James Rogan, R-Glendale, a one-time prosecutor and judge, said it was important to include this sort of evidence.
The law allows a judge to make a "common sense" assessment of the evidence, and if it is allowed, gives juries a chance to make a rational assessment of the probability or improbability for the defendant to commit such a crime, Mr. Rogan said.
Most of the prosecution's evidence of Mr. Jackson's prior activities stem from a 1993-1994 investigation into allegations against the star.
At that time, prosecutors in Los Angeles and Santa Barbara convened criminal grand juries and spent months investigating allegations that Mr. Jackson had carried on a sexual relationship with a 13-year-old boy. The investigation found other boys with whom Mr. Jackson was allegedly involved.
But the case fell apart when the accuser and his family reached a $20 million civil settlement with Mr. Jackson and then refused to cooperate with investigators.
Now prosecutors want to tell jurors about those alleged relationships. But so far, only one of the seven boys is on the prosecution's witness list and three of the others may be brought in to testify for the defense.
The News-Press reported last year that the boy who was the focus of the 1993 investigation, now in his early 20s, told authorities he would take the stand only if his testimony was necessary to convict Mr. Jackson, sources close to the case said. Another boy who may be called by prosecutors is the son of a former maid at Neverland Valley Ranch, also now in his early 20s. Mr. Jackson paid more than $2 million to that boy after his mother alleged that the star had touched her son inappropriately.
The prosecution wants to use the evidence to show a pattern of behavior, said former Santa Barbara County Sheriff Jim Thomas, who is working as a consultant for MSNBC on the trial. Mr. Thomas was sheriff during the 1993 investigation.
"I think it's very important, because it would show the jury that there's a past pattern and practice," said Mr. Thomas.
The more parallels prosecutors can show, the more it bolsters the claims of the current accuser, he said. The focus of the case might also turn from the problems of the accuser and his family to Mr. Jackson.
"If it comes in, I think the momentum of the case changes," Mr. Thomas said. "The defense will continue to discredit these witnesses, but the jury at some point might say, 'Wait a minute, all these people can't be lying.'"
But the evidence cuts both ways. Mr. Jackson's attorneys have effectively argued that the prior cases provided a sort of script to follow for those interested in shaking down the star. In this case, the current accuser and his family even contacted the attorney involved in the 1993 settlement before contacting authorities about the allegations.
Defense attorney Robert Sanger said in court papers that prosecutors have for more than a decade had a sort of "open casting call for witnesses who are willing to make these types of allegations."
email: shadly@newspress.com
|
