|
1993 probe haunts current Jackson case
By DAWN HOBBS
NEWS-PRESS STAFF WRITER
The ghost of the 1993 child molestation case against Michael Jackson
has repeatedly revealed itself in the current case against the entertainer,
making it increasingly likely that the decade-old investigation
will play a role in the trial.
At least three former employees of Mr. Jackson's Neverland Valley
Ranch were contacted by Santa Barbara County authorities and alerted
that they may be called to take the stand, the News-Press has learned.
In addition, defense lawyers this week have examined photographs
from the old case and petitioned the court for more material from
that investigation.
The 1993 case crumbled when the boy accusing Mr. Jackson refused
to testify after his family accepted a multimillion-dollar civil
settlement from the entertainer. Recent news reports revealed that
Mr. Jackson settled with a second boy in 1993, and a book published
this week details an alleged intimate relationship between the entertainer
and the first accuser.
Although no charges were filed against Mr. Jackson in 1993, that
case could have considerable effect a decade later. State law allows
material generated from one case to be used in similar cases. And
the new publicity about that case may have come to the attention
of potential jurors who will be asked to pass judgment on Mr. Jackson.
The entertainer pleaded not guilty to child molestation and conspiracy
charges in April. Authorities allege those incidents occurred last
spring.
The most direct link between the cases would be the testimony
of the 1993 accuser or witnesses during the current case. testimony
from the three former employees, a security guard and two maids
who cleaned the entertainer's private quarters, could be used in
an attempt to show patterns in Mr. Jackson's behavior, sources close
to the case confirmed.
Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon may try to
show certain techniques allegedly used to seduce the boy in 1993
were used again with the current accuser, said one legal expert
watching the case.
"They want to show pattern of activity, but they have to
corroborate this alleged victim and his mother any way they can,"
said Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor and professor
at Loyola University School of Law. "There's another aspect
of it, though, and that would be to get the message to the jurors
that he got away with it before — don't let him get away with it
this time."
But the prosecution is not alone in resurrecting the 1993 case.
The defense lawyers, led by Thomas Mesereau, could use evidence
from that case to argue that their client is an easy mark for extortion
and to bolster their assertion that Mr. Sneddon has crossed the
line into prosecutorial misconduct.
"It's a double-edged sword for the prosecution," Ms.
Levenson said. "If they go into 1993, the defense would no
doubt spin it and say Jackson is an easy target and every 10 years
someone unfairly goes after him. It's a real chess match."
The trial is scheduled to begin in January. In the the meantime,
several pretrial hearings have been held in which the defense has
attacked the prosecution's case, accusing Mr. Sneddon of carrying
a vendetta against Mr. Jackson since 1993.
This week, co-counsel Robert Sanger was scheduled to sift through
more than 200 photographs from a 1993 search of Neverland to compare
it with a search in November 2003 in an attempt determine if authorities
have violated a warrant in the recent search. And last week, co-counsel
Steve Cochran requested that the judge order the prosecution to
turn over material generated during the 1993 investigation, including
reports, transcripts and witness statements because the "prosecution
has relied on information from that case in this case" and
that Mr. Jackson's right to "receive exculpatory information
. . . requires production of materials from the prior investigation."
These points will likely be argued today in a pretrial hearing.
"This is both a defensive and offensive move," said
Ms. Levenson. "They need to be prepared if the prosecution
seeks to introduce any of these prior acts. They may also use it
offensively for a motion to dismiss based on selective prosecution
or prosecutorial misconduct. Even without getting the case knocked
out, they'll want to use it in arguments that there's been a rush
to judgement and that prosecutors have blinders on."
The potential intermingling of the two cases became apparent after
last November's Neverland raid. Mr. Sneddon told the News-Press
that he decided to try this case himself, in part because he is
so familiar with the five boxes of transcripts and evidence gathered
in that first investigation.
Details from the 1993 case surfaced this month when it was reported
that a second boy who accused Mr. Jackson of inappropriately touching
him through his clothing received a $2 million settlement. In response,
Mr. Jackson issued a statement stating he "settled with certain
individuals because I was concerned about my family and the media
scrutiny that would have ensued if I fought the matter in court.
. . . I have been a vulnerable target for those who want money."
Two people involved in the old case have already shown up on the
stand in this one. The 1993 accuser's psychiatrist and the family's
civil attorney, both of whom are also involved in the current case,
testified during grand jury proceedings in April. The alleged victim
from the old case was notified he could be called to testify but
did not take the stand. Sources close to the family have told the
News-Press he wants to testify only once, at trial.
Last month, two current Neverland employees who worked there in
1993 and law enforcement officers who assisted in the 1993 raid
testified about the location of certain offices on the ranch then
and now. If the three former employees recently contacted by authorities
take the stand, it's likely they'd testify to activities they saw
at the ranch. In a deposition from the old case obtained by the
News-Press, one maid reported seeing Mr. Jackson sleep in the same
bed with boys and shower with them. Another employee told the News-Press
he could also corroborate the molestation claim. But the credibility
of some of these witnesses may be undermined, because several sold
their stories to tabloids or were involved in civil litigation against
Mr. Jackson.
After the 1993 criminal case dissolved, five former employees
— including the three recently contacted by authorities —
sued Mr. Jackson for wrongful termination, claiming they had been
forced to resign after they cooperated with the criminal investigation.
But they lost their suit and were ordered to pay $1.5 million in
damages.
"The Jackson lawyers will claim these people have a bias
against their client," Ms. Levenson said. "The problem
for the prosecutor is he's always going with a one-victim case.
. . . The one witness you want to hear from in the prior case is
the alleged victim. Part of the problem is that if you only bring
in the other witnesses, it's going to look like window dressing.
The defense will say they don't have the evidence so they're trying
to distract you with peripheral witnesses who have their own agenda."
Staff Writer Scott Hadly contributed to this report.
|
