http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source ... |0|0|0&p=1
daję adres, bo nie umiem wkleić z getty
Nowy (?) świadek - Hamid Moslehi
tak od tematu:
ahhh, czy mówiłam już, że kocham ten uśmiech? 
27.04 - sąd
Moderatorzy: DaX, Sephiroth820, MJowitek, majkelzawszespoko, Mafia
27.04 - sąd
Dziś Michael w bordowym garniturze :) Ładnie :)
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source ... |0|0|0&p=1
daję adres, bo nie umiem wkleić z getty
Nowy (?) świadek - Hamid Moslehi
tak od tematu:
ahhh, czy mówiłam już, że kocham ten uśmiech?
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source ... |0|0|0&p=1
daję adres, bo nie umiem wkleić z getty
Nowy (?) świadek - Hamid Moslehi
tak od tematu:
ahhh, czy mówiłam już, że kocham ten uśmiech?
Ostatnio zmieniony śr, 27 kwie 2005, 20:32 przez kate, łącznie zmieniany 2 razy.
nie mogłam się dostać na forum przed chwilą... 
ale nieważne
Debbie właśnie przyjechała do sądu
Michael Jackson's ex-wife, Debbie Rowe, arrived at the Santa Maria courthouse Wednesday, preparing to testify about an interview she gave in early 2003 in which she defended the pop star as child-molestation charges began to swirl around him.
Odrzucając sprzeciw obrony, sędzia zdecydował w poniedziałek, że Rowe będzie mogła zeznawać.
Pomimo tego, że Rowe nie jest zoobowiązana do przestrzegania umowy o poufności, którą podpisała z Michaelem kiedy rozwodzili się w 1999r., jej zeznania raczej nie będą zagłębiać się w temat jej małżeństwa z MJ'em.
Zamiast tego, oskarżenie wzywa ją na świadka, aby zeznała o wywiadzie z 2003r. (ile razy to już słyszeliśmy?
)
Sędzia Melville zdecydował, że ograniczy jej zeznania do tematów dotyczących tylko i wyłącznie wywiadu. Nie pozwoli jej zawędrować w stronę pikantniejszych szczegółów ich związku.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/27/j ... index.html
Jak na razie - nic więcej. Zapewne niedługo uzupełnią... Ciekawa jestem, co Debbie opowie w sądzie
EDIT: Zastanawiam się, czy FOXNews to wiarygodne źródło...
bo znalazłam tam artykuły niezbyt przychylne Michaelowi.
Ale znalazłam też fragment, który mówi, że nie cały wywiad Debbie był "scripted"; do tego Rowe chciała nagrać go z własnej woli... I nie dość że nikt jej o nagrywanie nie prosił to jeszcze nikt jej za to nie zapłacił...
W wywiadzie były (podobno) pruszane tematy takie jak: seksualność Michaela, ich życie płciowe, małżeństwo, rolę Debbie jako rodzica, "zdolności" macierzyńskie Michaela oraz wiele innych, które zapewne nie zostałyby poruszone w "ustawionym" wywiadzie. Odpowiedzi Rowe często były wymijające i niecałkiem pochlebiające Michaelowi.
In fact, Rowe volunteered at the time to tape the interview to help Jackson. I'm told that not only did no one ask her to do it, but she was not paid for it either.
In the interview, which will likely be played back today for the jury, Drew asked Rowe pointed questions about Jackson's sexuality, their sex life, their marriage, her role as a parent, Jackson's parenting skills and a lot of other subjects that would certainly not have surfaced in a controlled setting. Her answers were often evasive and not exactly flattering to Jackson
a to cały artykuł:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,154754,00.html
Cóż za rewelacje FOXNews to chyba coś na wzór onetu albo interii
--------------
to już z cnn:
W 2001 roku, Rowe zrezygnowała z praw do opieki nad dziećmi. Mówiła wtedy, że Jackson jest "genialnym ojcem" i że pozostanie z Michaelem było najlepszym wyjściem dla dzieci.
In 2001, Rowe gave up her parental rights to Prince Michael and Paris. At the time, she said Jackson was a "brilliant father" and it was in the children's "best interest" to be with him.
ale nieważne
Debbie właśnie przyjechała do sądu
Michael Jackson's ex-wife, Debbie Rowe, arrived at the Santa Maria courthouse Wednesday, preparing to testify about an interview she gave in early 2003 in which she defended the pop star as child-molestation charges began to swirl around him.
Odrzucając sprzeciw obrony, sędzia zdecydował w poniedziałek, że Rowe będzie mogła zeznawać.
Pomimo tego, że Rowe nie jest zoobowiązana do przestrzegania umowy o poufności, którą podpisała z Michaelem kiedy rozwodzili się w 1999r., jej zeznania raczej nie będą zagłębiać się w temat jej małżeństwa z MJ'em.
Zamiast tego, oskarżenie wzywa ją na świadka, aby zeznała o wywiadzie z 2003r. (ile razy to już słyszeliśmy?
)Sędzia Melville zdecydował, że ograniczy jej zeznania do tematów dotyczących tylko i wyłącznie wywiadu. Nie pozwoli jej zawędrować w stronę pikantniejszych szczegółów ich związku.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/27/j ... index.html
Jak na razie - nic więcej. Zapewne niedługo uzupełnią... Ciekawa jestem, co Debbie opowie w sądzie
EDIT: Zastanawiam się, czy FOXNews to wiarygodne źródło...
bo znalazłam tam artykuły niezbyt przychylne Michaelowi. Ale znalazłam też fragment, który mówi, że nie cały wywiad Debbie był "scripted"; do tego Rowe chciała nagrać go z własnej woli... I nie dość że nikt jej o nagrywanie nie prosił to jeszcze nikt jej za to nie zapłacił...
W wywiadzie były (podobno) pruszane tematy takie jak: seksualność Michaela, ich życie płciowe, małżeństwo, rolę Debbie jako rodzica, "zdolności" macierzyńskie Michaela oraz wiele innych, które zapewne nie zostałyby poruszone w "ustawionym" wywiadzie. Odpowiedzi Rowe często były wymijające i niecałkiem pochlebiające Michaelowi.
In fact, Rowe volunteered at the time to tape the interview to help Jackson. I'm told that not only did no one ask her to do it, but she was not paid for it either.
In the interview, which will likely be played back today for the jury, Drew asked Rowe pointed questions about Jackson's sexuality, their sex life, their marriage, her role as a parent, Jackson's parenting skills and a lot of other subjects that would certainly not have surfaced in a controlled setting. Her answers were often evasive and not exactly flattering to Jackson
a to cały artykuł:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,154754,00.html
Cóż za rewelacje
FOXNews to chyba coś na wzór onetu albo interii --------------
to już z cnn:
W 2001 roku, Rowe zrezygnowała z praw do opieki nad dziećmi. Mówiła wtedy, że Jackson jest "genialnym ojcem" i że pozostanie z Michaelem było najlepszym wyjściem dla dzieci.
In 2001, Rowe gave up her parental rights to Prince Michael and Paris. At the time, she said Jackson was a "brilliant father" and it was in the children's "best interest" to be with him.
Zamieszczam troche informacji z foxnews, z bbbc news i cnn oraz MJJSource
wiec zaczynamy Fox news:
Jacko's Ex Rowe: Interview Wasn't Scripted
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
SANTA MARIA, Calif. — Debbie Rowe, (search) ex-wife of Michael Jackson (search) and the mother of his two eldest children, testified Wednesday for the prosecution that Jackson asked her to appear in a TV interview done to rebut the damaging documentary that led to his arrest.
But in a setback for the prosecution, a weeping Rowe said her televised statements praising Jackson weren't scripted or rehearsed.
"I didn't want anyone to be able to come back to me and say my interview was rehearsed," Rowe said. "As Mr. Jackson knows, no one can tell me what to say."
She reiterated that she had been offered a list of questions by her interviewers but she declined to look at them before she talked.
"It was a cold interview and I wanted to keep it that way," she said, glancing at Jackson as she spoke. The pop star, dressed in a maroon suit, showed no obvious reaction to her testimony.
Prosecutors called Rowe to bolster their argument that Jackson conspired to hold the accuser's family captive to get them to rebut the documentary, in which the singer said he lets children sleep in his bed. The accuser's mother claims a video she recorded praising Jackson was made under duress and that every word was from a script.
The prosecution has said Rowe would offer similar testimony — that she was also pressured to praise Jackson in a video — but her testimony Wednesday did not reflect that.
She is expected to be on the stand for at least a few days and could be the prosecution's final witness before it rests its case.
Rowe testified that Jackson spoke to her by phone in February 2003 and asked her to take part in a TV show that was being made to rebut the Martin Bashir "Living With Michael Jackson" (search) documentary. She said Jackson told her that the documentary was full of lies.
Her testimony was the first to suggest Jackson had direct involvement in the production of the rebuttal program.
Rowe, who once gave up her parental rights to their son and daughter but recently had them restored, is embroiled in a Los Angeles family court fight with Jackson over visitation with the children.
Some court observers said Rowe seemed to have a genuine affection for her ex-husband even as she testified for the prosecution.
Prosecutors had wanted Rowe to say that the video in which she praises Jackson was scripted by Jackson's team. The mother of Jackson's accuser has claimed that a video she appeared in was also done from a script.
In February 2003, Rowe did a videotaped televised interview saying the children, Prince, 8, and Paris, 7, belonged with their father. The prosecution contends that Rowe was pushed into doing that interview by Jackson, who allegedly promised her visitation with the kids if she did.
"I did not leave my children," Rowe said in that interview. "My children are with their father, where they’re supposed to be." In the same interview, she said that there are some people who are meant to be parents and Jackson "is one of them."
Jackson is accused of molesting a 13-year-old boy in February or March 2003, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold the accuser's family captive to get them to rebut the "Living With Michael Jackson" documentary in which the singer tells an interviewer he lets children sleep in his bed, though not in a sexual way.
Also Wednesday, Jackson's attorneys asked for a mistrial but were turned down by the judge during a dispute over testimony about that documentary, which led to the pop star's prosecution.
The pop icon's ex identified herself on the stand as Deborah Rowe Jackson, although she said she prefers to be addressed as Ms. Rowe.
Asked by prosecutor Ron Zonen how she knows Jackson, she said, "We've been friends and we were married."
Rowe said she knew Jackson for 20 years before they wed, but when asked about the marriage, she replied, "We never shared a home."
On the stand, Rowe said that when they divorced she gave up custody of the children but was allowed limited visits of eight hours every 45 days. But she said she missed many chances to see the children because they were traveling with Jackson.
Rowe was a nurse for one of Jackson's plastic surgeons when they married in November 1996. Their son, Prince Michael, was born in February 1997, followed by their daughter, Paris, in April 1998. The couple filed for divorce in October 1999. Jackson has a third child, Prince Michael II, whose mother has remained anonymous.
On Monday, the judge overruled defense objections to allowing Rowe to testify but stressed he would "look to ways to restrict that testimony."
At least one legal eagle said Rowe's testimony shouldn't be a part of Jackson's molestation trial.
"This is another example of Judge [Rodney] Melville losing control of this trial. This is why this trial is taking forever," criminal defense attorney Drew Findling told FOX News on Wednesday. "To the rest of the U.S., this is garbage. ... Who gives a crap? If ever she [Debbie Rowe] has been scripted, she's been scripted for today."
There was also talk Wednesday that Jackson himself could eventually be called to the stand, though some law experts bristled at the thought.
"I wouldn’t put Michael Jackson on the stand," Findling told FOX News. "The problem is the weirdness factor. The more he talks, the weirder he is. … You don’t want him to get 20 years in jail for being a freak."
Earlier Wednesday, the jury heard from the man who recorded a video featuring the family of the young accuser.
Hamid Moslehi (search) testified at the pop star's child molestation trial that he did not see them reading or rehearsing from a script.
His testimony did not support an account by the boy's mother, who alleges she was forced to closely follow a script praising Jackson as part of a scheme in which her family was held captive to get their help in rebutting a damaging television documentary about Jackson.
Moslehi testified that the boy, his brother and sister were at his house for two or three hours before the taping began and he saw them playing but not rehearsing. He said the mother was there for about an hour before the taping and that he did not see her reading or rehearsing either.
Moslehi, Jackson's former videographer, also said he did not see anyone coaching the mother as she applied her makeup for the taping in his bathroom.
The woman has testified that Jackson associate Dieter Wiesner coached her on what to say.
Wiesner and associate Ronald Konitzer, who are named as unindicted co-conspirators in the case, were also the subject of Moslehi's testimony on Tuesday.
He said the two men became Jackson's managers in late 2002, a few months before they allegedly took part in a conspiracy to hold the family captive.
Prosecutors asked Moslehi about Wiesner and Konitzer to try to link them more closely to the singer. The mother of the accuser has testified that the German businessmen intimidated her family.
On cross-examination, Jackson defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. (search) tried to show that Jackson was a victim of Wiesner and Konitzer, not a close associate.
Mesereau asked Moslehi if he knew that Wiesner and Konitzer had stolen close to $1 million from Jackson. The question drew a prosecution objection, and the judge did not allow a direct answer. When Mesereau repeated it without the dollar figure, the witness answered no.
It was not certain who would testify after Moslehi, but prosecutors were expected to call Rowe to the stand soon.
Also on Tuesday, a travel agent testified that a Jackson associate ordered her to arrange a one-way trip to Brazil for the singer's accuser and his family, then canceled the journey at the last minute.
Cynthia Montgomery was called Tuesday to support a prosecution claim that Jackson was planning to kidnap the accuser and his family and send them to Brazil for an indefinite period following the February 2003 documentary in which the singer said he let children sleep in his bed.
Montgomery said the orders for the planned March 1, 2003, flight were given to her by Marc Schaffel, another Jackson associate named by prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator.
At the last minute, Montgomery said, the travel plans were canceled by Schaffel, who told her "his plans had changed."
The accuser's mother has testified that she orchestrated her family's escape from Jackson's associates by claiming her children had to visit their grandparents before they could leave for Brazil. The mother has said the family left Jackson's Neverland estate for the last time on March 12, 2003.
FOX News' Catherine Donaldson-Evans, Roger Friedman, Jim Hammer, Anita Vogel and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
A tu kilka informacji z BBC news:
Jackson's ex-wife in witness box
Michael Jackson and Debbie Rowe married in 1996
Michael Jackson's former wife has briefly given evidence in the pop star's child sex abuse trial.
Debbie Rowe, Mr Jackson's second wife and mother of two of his children, will continue her evidence when the trial resumes on Thursday.
A judge said on Monday that prosecutors could call Ms Rowe, who was married to Mr Jackson for three years.
Mr Jackson is on trial for allegedly abusing Gavin Arvizo when he was 13. The singer denies all 10 charges.
'Credible witness'
Ms Rowe met Mr Jackson - who denies all 10 charges against him - when she worked as a nurse in the office of the pop star's dermatologist.
Asked by prosecutors to state her name, she identified herself as Deborah Rowe Jackson, but indicated she preferred to be known as Ms Rowe.
The world was fascinated by the couple's relationship
Ms Rowe was married to Mr Jackson from 1996 to 1999 and together they had a son, Prince Michael, and a daughter, Paris.
Mr Jackson had a third child, Prince Michael II, with another woman in 2002.
Answering questions aimed at establishing her relationship with the singer, Ms Rowe told prosecutor Ron Zonen: "We've been friends and we were married."
She said she knew Mr Jackson for 20 years before they were married but denied they had ever lived together.
"We never shared a home," she added.
Legal analysts have suggested that Ms Rowe is likely to be regarded as a highly credible witness because of the nature of her relationship with Mr Jackson.
On Monday, Judge Rodney Melville indicated he would limit any evidence Ms Rowe presents after warnings from the defence team that it could open "a huge can of worms".
Star witnesses
Mr Jackson and Ms Rowe are currently involved in a custody battle over their two children.
Ms Rowe signed away her parental rights in 2001, but has since gone on to win a legal battle to regain them.
She is likely to be one of the last witnesses called by the prosecution against the pop star.
The defence team is expected to call on a host of celebrities to testify to the singer's good character and innocent love of children.
The stars could include actresses Liza Minnelli and Liz Taylor and singers Stevie Wonder and Diana Ross, as well as former child star Macaulay Culkin.
Mr Jackson faces up to 20 years in jail if convicted.
No teraz CNN:
Yet she says they weren't scripted, contradicting prosecutors
Thursday, April 28, 2005 Posted: 0251 GMT (1051 HKT)
Debbie Rowe arrives in court Wednesday in Santa Maria, California.
SANTA MARIA, California (CNN) -- Michael Jackson's ex-wife testified Wednesday that she was not honest when she praised her former husband as a parent during an interview she gave in February 2003 to help defend him after the broadcast of a damaging television documentary.
However, contradicting earlier statements from the prosecution, Debbie Rowe said her comments in the interview, while not truthful, were also not scripted or rehearsed, and she said she even turned down an offer to see the questions in advance.
"I didn't want anyone to come back to me to say my interview was rehearsed," she said. "No one tells me what to say, as Mr. Jackson knows. I speak my own mind."
Taking the stand in Jackson's child-molestation trial, Rowe -- who at times during her testimony became emotional -- said she was not promised money or any "quid pro quo" for participating in the interview.
However, she said that based on a conversation she had with Jackson, she expected that she was going to get to see him and their two children after the firestorm over the documentary passed.
"I was excited to see Michael and the children," she said. "I promised I would always be there for him and the children."
Rowe said she wanted "to be reintroduced to them and to be reacquainted with their dad."
"He's my friend," she said, and then began to weep.
Although Rowe participated in the interview, a reunion never took place. She told jurors that she last saw her son and daughter -- Prince Michael, 8, and Paris, 7 - nearly three years ago, and that her attempts through the years to get Jackson to let her spend more time with them were rebuffed.
In his opening statement, Santa Barbara County District Attorney Thomas Sneddon charged Rowe's "interview was scripted, and she did a complete rehearsal." He also said her attorney would testify that the camera was turned off so she could be coached between takes.
Monday, in arguing to get Rowe's testimony in front of the jury, prosecutor Ron Zonen described her interview as "highly scripted," echoing charges by the mother of Jackson's accuser that she was pressured into participating in a similar interview defending Jackson.
A grand jury indicted Jackson, 46, last year on charges of molesting a then-13-year-old boy, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold him and his family captive in 2003.
Jackson has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Confidentiality agreement waived
In her testimony Wednesday, Rowe said that after she and Jackson divorced in October 1999, she did not talk to him until February 2003, when he asked her in a telephone call to help him counter the documentary by British journalist Martin Bashir, in which he was shown holding hands with the teenage boy now accusing him of child molestation.
"He told me there was a video coming out, and it was full of lies, and would I help," Rowe said. "As always, I said 'yes.' "
She said she asked Jackson if he and the children were OK, and he assured her they were. She said she also asked him, "Can I see you and the children when it's all over with?" Rowe said Jackson agreed. She said he told her how "beautiful" the children were and that Paris was "strong-headed ... not unlike me."
Rowe said Jackson did not specify how he wanted her to help, telling her only that he wanted her to "work with" three of his associates, including Marc Schaffel, then president of one of Jackson's companies, Neverland Valley Entertainment.
She said she was granted a waiver of the confidentiality agreement she signed when she and Jackson divorced, which prohibited her from making comments about him or the children. Schaffel then arranged for the taping of the interview at his house, she said.
Rowe said the taping took nine hours. At the time, the Bashir documentary had been broadcast in Britain, but not the United States, and she said she was not aware of its contents.
Asked by Zonen if her comments during the interview were truthful, Rowe -- after a long pause -- finally responded, "No."
Asked further if her comments about Jackson's parenting of their children were truthful, she said, "No."
Court ended for the afternoon shortly afterward, before she explained what was untruthful in her remarks about his parenting. She will be back on the stand when court resumes Thursday morning.
Window into relationship
Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville said he would confine Rowe's testimony to the events surrounding her 2003 interview and not allow the questioning to venture into juicier details about her relationship and life with Jackson.
However, a few tidbits about their relationship did emerge Wednesday.
Rowe, who met Jackson when she worked as a nurse for his dermatologist, said she had known him more than 20 years, well before they were married. During their marriage, she said, "We never shared a home."
After their divorce, Jackson retained custody of the children, but she said she was allowed to see them once every 45 days for eight hours, usually in a hotel with their nanny.
However, Rowe said that she often missed her scheduled visits when Jackson was on tour or out of the country, or when she had to work. She was not allowed to make up visits she missed, Rowe said.
In 2001, she finally agreed to give up parental rights, ending her visitation privileges.
But last year, after Jackson was charged with child molestation, Rowe initiated legal proceedings to gain more contact with her children. Rowe and Jackson are negotiating a new custody agreement, with a retired judge overseeing the discussions.
A na koniec najprzyjemniesza rzecz MJJSource:
Day 40: Michael Jackson’s Ex-wife: "He’s My Friend… No One Can Tell Me What To Say"
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
On Day 40 of Michael Jackson’s trial, Mr. Jackson’s ex-wife, Deborah Rowe described him from the witness stand at his child molestation trial as "my friend" and said, contrary to the prosecution’s claims, that she was never rehearsed to say positive things about him on a video interview made to rebut a damaging TV documentary.
"I didn't want anyone to be able to come back to me and say my interview was rehearsed," Rowe said. "As Mr. Jackson knows, no one can tell me what to say."
Rowe, who is in a family court dispute over visitation with their children, Prince Michael and Paris, glanced at Mr. Jackson as she spoke. Mr. Jackson, dressed in a maroon suit, showed no obvious reaction to her testimony.
Prosecutors called Rowe to support their conspiracy case against Mr. Jackson, who is accused of molesting a 13-year-old boy in February or March 2003. The case alleges Mr. Jackson conspired to hold the accuser's family captive to get them to rebut the TV documentary "Living With Michael Mr. Jackson" by British journalist Martin Bashir.
The accuser's mother has claimed that a rebuttal video she made, praising Mr. Jackson as a father figure, was scripted.
Rowe reiterated that she had been offered a list of questions by her interviewers but she declined to look at them before she talked.
"It was a cold interview and I wanted to keep it that way," she said.
Deputy District Attorney Ron Zonen asked her what she expected after she gave the interview.
Teary, she said, "To be reunited with the children and be reacquainted with their dad."
Asked why she wanted to see Mr. Jackson again, she said, "He's my friend."
Rowe appeared nervous at first as she told jurors "we've been friends and we were married."
"Are you the mother of his two elder children?" asked Zonen.
"Yes," she said, naming them.
Asked about her domestic arrangements, she said, "We never shared a home ... we never shared an apartment."
Rowe and Mr. Jackson married in November 1996. Prince Michael was born in February 1997, followed by Paris in April 1998. The couple filed for divorce in October 1999. Mr. Jackson has a third child, Prince Michael II, whose mother has remained anonymous.
Rowe said she knew Mr. Jackson for perhaps 20 years before they married and once they divorced she was allowed visitation with the children for eight hours every 45 days. She said it was a tough schedule to keep because Mr. Jackson travels so much with the children and she finally relinquished all parental rights.
"The visitations were not comfortable," she said, explaining that they would meet at a hotel and "it was a very sterile environment."
In 2003, she said, she received a call through her former employer, a doctor who brought Mr. Jackson and her together. She said he told her that someone associated with Mr. Jackson wanted to talk to her and arranged a phone call for her with Marc Schaffel, who is named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the case.
Mr. Jackson got on the phone briefly during that conversation, she said.
"He told me there was a video coming out and it was full of lies and would I help. I said, as always, yes. I asked him if he was OK. I was very upset," she testified.
Rowe said her conversation with Mr. Jackson lasted perhaps 21⁄2 minutes and there was no discussion of what he wanted her to do other than to work with his associates.
She said all she could recall him saying was, "There was a bad video coming out."
"Did he tell you with any specificity what he wanted you to do?" asked Zonen.
"No," she said.
Her testimony did link Mr. Jackson to the making of the rebuttal video. But her account offered less evidence than the persecution seemed to expect to tie Mr. Jackson to a conspiracy. She said she was not pressured to say anything specific and that there was "no quid pro quo."
Asked why she would help Mr. Jackson, she said, "I promised him I would always be there for Michael and the children."
She did not give any details of her private life with Mr. Jackson and made it clear that she did not want to discuss it.
"My personal life was my personal life and no one's business," she said when asked by the prosecution if she had talked completely truthfully on the video that was made.
Rowe said that before the interview began at Schaffel's home, they talked briefly about her family and he reported on her children's progress.
She said Schaffel told her that "they were fine, that Michael was going to be OK, how big the children had gotten and how beautiful they were and how strongheaded Paris was, like me."
She said the videotaped interview lasted nine hours and that she recently saw a two-hour version of it which was shown to her by prosecutors.
She said she found it "very boring and dull" and didn't really pay attention while she was watching it.
"All I knew is whatever what is being put out about Michael was hurtful to Michael and the children," she said.
Rowe said she told Mr. Jackson's associates that before she could take part in the video she needed a release from a confidentiality agreement.
"The confidentiality agreement said I could not speak with the press, public, anyone, regarding Michael or the children or our lives together," she said.
In his opening statement on February 28, 2005, chief prosecutor Tom Sneddon told the jury, "Debbie Rowe will tell you her interview also was completely scripted. They scripted that interview just like they scripted the (accuser's mother's) interview."
But the prosecution's line of attack has faltered in the face of Rowe's reversed testimony - and she remained adamant that neither Mr. Jackson or his aides tried to coerce her into giving scripted answers.
Rowe was expected back on the stand Thursday for more questioning.
Earlier in the day, Mr. Jackson's attorneys asked for a mistrial but were turned down by Judge Rodney S. Melville during a controversy involving testimony about the television documentary.
Former Mr. Jackson videographer Hamid Moslehi testified that during taping of the documentary he used his own camera to record the scenes as a backup for Mr. Jackson. He said the ultimate documentary was edited in a way that "Mr. Jackson sounded different than if they had continued another two or three seconds of that statement."
Moslehi said the accuser, his brother and sister were at his house for two or three hours before the taping began and he did not see them rehearsing. He said that the mother was there for about an hour before the taping and that he did not see her reading, rehearsing or being coached.
He also said that the mother confided in him at times but that she never told him that she was being falsely imprisoned, that she was receiving death threats, that Mr. Jackson had given her children alcohol or that the singer improperly touched her son. He said she also never asked him to call police.
The judge had earlier barred the defense from showing sections of Moslehi's tape, so he ordered prosecutor Gordon Auchincloss to cease questioning Moslehi about his tape. But the prosecutor again ventured into that area, drawing another warning.
The defense finally made a motion for a mistrial, but the judge said he believed he had taken care of the problem by raising his own objection to the testimony.
Source: MJJsource / AP
oraz cos specjalnego - premium:
OFFICIALWIRE.COM: Sneddon's finale a lesson for America
PRINTED FROM OFFICIALWIRE.COM
THE INTERNET'S NO. 1 ONLINE NEWSWIRE & PR SERVICE!
Editorial: Sneddon's finale a lesson for America
If this isn't Judge Melville's last case, it should be...
by Jennifer Monroe
SANTA MARIA, CA -- (OfficialWire) -- 04/22/05 -- I have intentionally left this story alone because I recognized the sensitive nature of the charges, believing that reporting the story at its conclusion would satisfy any obligation we have toward our readers.
But enough is enough.
For far too many years, California District Attorney Tom Sneddon has sought to capitalize on both the popularity of some and eccentricities of others, including pop legend Michael Jackson, in the furtherance of his own career. In the case of Jackson, Sneddon is clearly motivated by personal animosity toward the singer.
Enough is enough.
It's time for Judge Rodney Melville to call an end to this exercise in libel masquerading as a trial, while there is still a chance for him to reclaim some of his integrity.
When this most recent Sneddon-debacle began in December 2003, Hattie Kauffman, national correspondent for The Early Show speaking about the District Attorney, said: "I think people do feel that he is a man on a mission. You know, this is going to be the signature case of his career."
Sneddon has said the Jackson case will be his last, before he retires to perform pro-bono work with children.
The problem is that Sneddon has a history for pursuing cases that should never have been brought to trial. One such case was against defense attorney Gary Dunlap.
Dunlap said: "...I was wrongfully prosecuted for a number of crimes, crimes I did not commit."
Sneedon had charged Dunlap, a frequent critic of the DA's department, with perjury and witness intimidation.
"We went to a jury trial and I was acquitted on all counts," Dunlap said.
Dunlap continued, "He said he had a very strong case against me. The problem was that his whole strong case was manufactured."
On January 30, 2005 Jackson made a court-approved video statement, saying: "Please keep an open mind and let me have my day in court. I deserve a fair trial like every other American citizen. I will be acquitted and vindicated when the truth is told."
With no credible evidence, a case supported by no end of lies advanced by a woman who is so obviously mentally ill, no other American would have to suffer such an injustice.
PRINTED FROM OFFICIALWIRE.COM
THE INTERNET'S NO. 1 ONLINE NEWSWIRE & PR SERVICE!
wiec zaczynamy Fox news:
Jacko's Ex Rowe: Interview Wasn't Scripted
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
SANTA MARIA, Calif. — Debbie Rowe, (search) ex-wife of Michael Jackson (search) and the mother of his two eldest children, testified Wednesday for the prosecution that Jackson asked her to appear in a TV interview done to rebut the damaging documentary that led to his arrest.
But in a setback for the prosecution, a weeping Rowe said her televised statements praising Jackson weren't scripted or rehearsed.
"I didn't want anyone to be able to come back to me and say my interview was rehearsed," Rowe said. "As Mr. Jackson knows, no one can tell me what to say."
She reiterated that she had been offered a list of questions by her interviewers but she declined to look at them before she talked.
"It was a cold interview and I wanted to keep it that way," she said, glancing at Jackson as she spoke. The pop star, dressed in a maroon suit, showed no obvious reaction to her testimony.
Prosecutors called Rowe to bolster their argument that Jackson conspired to hold the accuser's family captive to get them to rebut the documentary, in which the singer said he lets children sleep in his bed. The accuser's mother claims a video she recorded praising Jackson was made under duress and that every word was from a script.
The prosecution has said Rowe would offer similar testimony — that she was also pressured to praise Jackson in a video — but her testimony Wednesday did not reflect that.
She is expected to be on the stand for at least a few days and could be the prosecution's final witness before it rests its case.
Rowe testified that Jackson spoke to her by phone in February 2003 and asked her to take part in a TV show that was being made to rebut the Martin Bashir "Living With Michael Jackson" (search) documentary. She said Jackson told her that the documentary was full of lies.
Her testimony was the first to suggest Jackson had direct involvement in the production of the rebuttal program.
Rowe, who once gave up her parental rights to their son and daughter but recently had them restored, is embroiled in a Los Angeles family court fight with Jackson over visitation with the children.
Some court observers said Rowe seemed to have a genuine affection for her ex-husband even as she testified for the prosecution.
Prosecutors had wanted Rowe to say that the video in which she praises Jackson was scripted by Jackson's team. The mother of Jackson's accuser has claimed that a video she appeared in was also done from a script.
In February 2003, Rowe did a videotaped televised interview saying the children, Prince, 8, and Paris, 7, belonged with their father. The prosecution contends that Rowe was pushed into doing that interview by Jackson, who allegedly promised her visitation with the kids if she did.
"I did not leave my children," Rowe said in that interview. "My children are with their father, where they’re supposed to be." In the same interview, she said that there are some people who are meant to be parents and Jackson "is one of them."
Jackson is accused of molesting a 13-year-old boy in February or March 2003, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold the accuser's family captive to get them to rebut the "Living With Michael Jackson" documentary in which the singer tells an interviewer he lets children sleep in his bed, though not in a sexual way.
Also Wednesday, Jackson's attorneys asked for a mistrial but were turned down by the judge during a dispute over testimony about that documentary, which led to the pop star's prosecution.
The pop icon's ex identified herself on the stand as Deborah Rowe Jackson, although she said she prefers to be addressed as Ms. Rowe.
Asked by prosecutor Ron Zonen how she knows Jackson, she said, "We've been friends and we were married."
Rowe said she knew Jackson for 20 years before they wed, but when asked about the marriage, she replied, "We never shared a home."
On the stand, Rowe said that when they divorced she gave up custody of the children but was allowed limited visits of eight hours every 45 days. But she said she missed many chances to see the children because they were traveling with Jackson.
Rowe was a nurse for one of Jackson's plastic surgeons when they married in November 1996. Their son, Prince Michael, was born in February 1997, followed by their daughter, Paris, in April 1998. The couple filed for divorce in October 1999. Jackson has a third child, Prince Michael II, whose mother has remained anonymous.
On Monday, the judge overruled defense objections to allowing Rowe to testify but stressed he would "look to ways to restrict that testimony."
At least one legal eagle said Rowe's testimony shouldn't be a part of Jackson's molestation trial.
"This is another example of Judge [Rodney] Melville losing control of this trial. This is why this trial is taking forever," criminal defense attorney Drew Findling told FOX News on Wednesday. "To the rest of the U.S., this is garbage. ... Who gives a crap? If ever she [Debbie Rowe] has been scripted, she's been scripted for today."
There was also talk Wednesday that Jackson himself could eventually be called to the stand, though some law experts bristled at the thought.
"I wouldn’t put Michael Jackson on the stand," Findling told FOX News. "The problem is the weirdness factor. The more he talks, the weirder he is. … You don’t want him to get 20 years in jail for being a freak."
Earlier Wednesday, the jury heard from the man who recorded a video featuring the family of the young accuser.
Hamid Moslehi (search) testified at the pop star's child molestation trial that he did not see them reading or rehearsing from a script.
His testimony did not support an account by the boy's mother, who alleges she was forced to closely follow a script praising Jackson as part of a scheme in which her family was held captive to get their help in rebutting a damaging television documentary about Jackson.
Moslehi testified that the boy, his brother and sister were at his house for two or three hours before the taping began and he saw them playing but not rehearsing. He said the mother was there for about an hour before the taping and that he did not see her reading or rehearsing either.
Moslehi, Jackson's former videographer, also said he did not see anyone coaching the mother as she applied her makeup for the taping in his bathroom.
The woman has testified that Jackson associate Dieter Wiesner coached her on what to say.
Wiesner and associate Ronald Konitzer, who are named as unindicted co-conspirators in the case, were also the subject of Moslehi's testimony on Tuesday.
He said the two men became Jackson's managers in late 2002, a few months before they allegedly took part in a conspiracy to hold the family captive.
Prosecutors asked Moslehi about Wiesner and Konitzer to try to link them more closely to the singer. The mother of the accuser has testified that the German businessmen intimidated her family.
On cross-examination, Jackson defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. (search) tried to show that Jackson was a victim of Wiesner and Konitzer, not a close associate.
Mesereau asked Moslehi if he knew that Wiesner and Konitzer had stolen close to $1 million from Jackson. The question drew a prosecution objection, and the judge did not allow a direct answer. When Mesereau repeated it without the dollar figure, the witness answered no.
It was not certain who would testify after Moslehi, but prosecutors were expected to call Rowe to the stand soon.
Also on Tuesday, a travel agent testified that a Jackson associate ordered her to arrange a one-way trip to Brazil for the singer's accuser and his family, then canceled the journey at the last minute.
Cynthia Montgomery was called Tuesday to support a prosecution claim that Jackson was planning to kidnap the accuser and his family and send them to Brazil for an indefinite period following the February 2003 documentary in which the singer said he let children sleep in his bed.
Montgomery said the orders for the planned March 1, 2003, flight were given to her by Marc Schaffel, another Jackson associate named by prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator.
At the last minute, Montgomery said, the travel plans were canceled by Schaffel, who told her "his plans had changed."
The accuser's mother has testified that she orchestrated her family's escape from Jackson's associates by claiming her children had to visit their grandparents before they could leave for Brazil. The mother has said the family left Jackson's Neverland estate for the last time on March 12, 2003.
FOX News' Catherine Donaldson-Evans, Roger Friedman, Jim Hammer, Anita Vogel and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
A tu kilka informacji z BBC news:
Jackson's ex-wife in witness box
Michael Jackson and Debbie Rowe married in 1996
Michael Jackson's former wife has briefly given evidence in the pop star's child sex abuse trial.
Debbie Rowe, Mr Jackson's second wife and mother of two of his children, will continue her evidence when the trial resumes on Thursday.
A judge said on Monday that prosecutors could call Ms Rowe, who was married to Mr Jackson for three years.
Mr Jackson is on trial for allegedly abusing Gavin Arvizo when he was 13. The singer denies all 10 charges.
'Credible witness'
Ms Rowe met Mr Jackson - who denies all 10 charges against him - when she worked as a nurse in the office of the pop star's dermatologist.
Asked by prosecutors to state her name, she identified herself as Deborah Rowe Jackson, but indicated she preferred to be known as Ms Rowe.
The world was fascinated by the couple's relationship
Ms Rowe was married to Mr Jackson from 1996 to 1999 and together they had a son, Prince Michael, and a daughter, Paris.
Mr Jackson had a third child, Prince Michael II, with another woman in 2002.
Answering questions aimed at establishing her relationship with the singer, Ms Rowe told prosecutor Ron Zonen: "We've been friends and we were married."
She said she knew Mr Jackson for 20 years before they were married but denied they had ever lived together.
"We never shared a home," she added.
Legal analysts have suggested that Ms Rowe is likely to be regarded as a highly credible witness because of the nature of her relationship with Mr Jackson.
On Monday, Judge Rodney Melville indicated he would limit any evidence Ms Rowe presents after warnings from the defence team that it could open "a huge can of worms".
Star witnesses
Mr Jackson and Ms Rowe are currently involved in a custody battle over their two children.
Ms Rowe signed away her parental rights in 2001, but has since gone on to win a legal battle to regain them.
She is likely to be one of the last witnesses called by the prosecution against the pop star.
The defence team is expected to call on a host of celebrities to testify to the singer's good character and innocent love of children.
The stars could include actresses Liza Minnelli and Liz Taylor and singers Stevie Wonder and Diana Ross, as well as former child star Macaulay Culkin.
Mr Jackson faces up to 20 years in jail if convicted.
No teraz CNN:
Yet she says they weren't scripted, contradicting prosecutors
Thursday, April 28, 2005 Posted: 0251 GMT (1051 HKT)
Debbie Rowe arrives in court Wednesday in Santa Maria, California.
SANTA MARIA, California (CNN) -- Michael Jackson's ex-wife testified Wednesday that she was not honest when she praised her former husband as a parent during an interview she gave in February 2003 to help defend him after the broadcast of a damaging television documentary.
However, contradicting earlier statements from the prosecution, Debbie Rowe said her comments in the interview, while not truthful, were also not scripted or rehearsed, and she said she even turned down an offer to see the questions in advance.
"I didn't want anyone to come back to me to say my interview was rehearsed," she said. "No one tells me what to say, as Mr. Jackson knows. I speak my own mind."
Taking the stand in Jackson's child-molestation trial, Rowe -- who at times during her testimony became emotional -- said she was not promised money or any "quid pro quo" for participating in the interview.
However, she said that based on a conversation she had with Jackson, she expected that she was going to get to see him and their two children after the firestorm over the documentary passed.
"I was excited to see Michael and the children," she said. "I promised I would always be there for him and the children."
Rowe said she wanted "to be reintroduced to them and to be reacquainted with their dad."
"He's my friend," she said, and then began to weep.
Although Rowe participated in the interview, a reunion never took place. She told jurors that she last saw her son and daughter -- Prince Michael, 8, and Paris, 7 - nearly three years ago, and that her attempts through the years to get Jackson to let her spend more time with them were rebuffed.
In his opening statement, Santa Barbara County District Attorney Thomas Sneddon charged Rowe's "interview was scripted, and she did a complete rehearsal." He also said her attorney would testify that the camera was turned off so she could be coached between takes.
Monday, in arguing to get Rowe's testimony in front of the jury, prosecutor Ron Zonen described her interview as "highly scripted," echoing charges by the mother of Jackson's accuser that she was pressured into participating in a similar interview defending Jackson.
A grand jury indicted Jackson, 46, last year on charges of molesting a then-13-year-old boy, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold him and his family captive in 2003.
Jackson has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Confidentiality agreement waived
In her testimony Wednesday, Rowe said that after she and Jackson divorced in October 1999, she did not talk to him until February 2003, when he asked her in a telephone call to help him counter the documentary by British journalist Martin Bashir, in which he was shown holding hands with the teenage boy now accusing him of child molestation.
"He told me there was a video coming out, and it was full of lies, and would I help," Rowe said. "As always, I said 'yes.' "
She said she asked Jackson if he and the children were OK, and he assured her they were. She said she also asked him, "Can I see you and the children when it's all over with?" Rowe said Jackson agreed. She said he told her how "beautiful" the children were and that Paris was "strong-headed ... not unlike me."
Rowe said Jackson did not specify how he wanted her to help, telling her only that he wanted her to "work with" three of his associates, including Marc Schaffel, then president of one of Jackson's companies, Neverland Valley Entertainment.
She said she was granted a waiver of the confidentiality agreement she signed when she and Jackson divorced, which prohibited her from making comments about him or the children. Schaffel then arranged for the taping of the interview at his house, she said.
Rowe said the taping took nine hours. At the time, the Bashir documentary had been broadcast in Britain, but not the United States, and she said she was not aware of its contents.
Asked by Zonen if her comments during the interview were truthful, Rowe -- after a long pause -- finally responded, "No."
Asked further if her comments about Jackson's parenting of their children were truthful, she said, "No."
Court ended for the afternoon shortly afterward, before she explained what was untruthful in her remarks about his parenting. She will be back on the stand when court resumes Thursday morning.
Window into relationship
Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville said he would confine Rowe's testimony to the events surrounding her 2003 interview and not allow the questioning to venture into juicier details about her relationship and life with Jackson.
However, a few tidbits about their relationship did emerge Wednesday.
Rowe, who met Jackson when she worked as a nurse for his dermatologist, said she had known him more than 20 years, well before they were married. During their marriage, she said, "We never shared a home."
After their divorce, Jackson retained custody of the children, but she said she was allowed to see them once every 45 days for eight hours, usually in a hotel with their nanny.
However, Rowe said that she often missed her scheduled visits when Jackson was on tour or out of the country, or when she had to work. She was not allowed to make up visits she missed, Rowe said.
In 2001, she finally agreed to give up parental rights, ending her visitation privileges.
But last year, after Jackson was charged with child molestation, Rowe initiated legal proceedings to gain more contact with her children. Rowe and Jackson are negotiating a new custody agreement, with a retired judge overseeing the discussions.
A na koniec najprzyjemniesza rzecz MJJSource:
Day 40: Michael Jackson’s Ex-wife: "He’s My Friend… No One Can Tell Me What To Say"
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
On Day 40 of Michael Jackson’s trial, Mr. Jackson’s ex-wife, Deborah Rowe described him from the witness stand at his child molestation trial as "my friend" and said, contrary to the prosecution’s claims, that she was never rehearsed to say positive things about him on a video interview made to rebut a damaging TV documentary.
"I didn't want anyone to be able to come back to me and say my interview was rehearsed," Rowe said. "As Mr. Jackson knows, no one can tell me what to say."
Rowe, who is in a family court dispute over visitation with their children, Prince Michael and Paris, glanced at Mr. Jackson as she spoke. Mr. Jackson, dressed in a maroon suit, showed no obvious reaction to her testimony.
Prosecutors called Rowe to support their conspiracy case against Mr. Jackson, who is accused of molesting a 13-year-old boy in February or March 2003. The case alleges Mr. Jackson conspired to hold the accuser's family captive to get them to rebut the TV documentary "Living With Michael Mr. Jackson" by British journalist Martin Bashir.
The accuser's mother has claimed that a rebuttal video she made, praising Mr. Jackson as a father figure, was scripted.
Rowe reiterated that she had been offered a list of questions by her interviewers but she declined to look at them before she talked.
"It was a cold interview and I wanted to keep it that way," she said.
Deputy District Attorney Ron Zonen asked her what she expected after she gave the interview.
Teary, she said, "To be reunited with the children and be reacquainted with their dad."
Asked why she wanted to see Mr. Jackson again, she said, "He's my friend."
Rowe appeared nervous at first as she told jurors "we've been friends and we were married."
"Are you the mother of his two elder children?" asked Zonen.
"Yes," she said, naming them.
Asked about her domestic arrangements, she said, "We never shared a home ... we never shared an apartment."
Rowe and Mr. Jackson married in November 1996. Prince Michael was born in February 1997, followed by Paris in April 1998. The couple filed for divorce in October 1999. Mr. Jackson has a third child, Prince Michael II, whose mother has remained anonymous.
Rowe said she knew Mr. Jackson for perhaps 20 years before they married and once they divorced she was allowed visitation with the children for eight hours every 45 days. She said it was a tough schedule to keep because Mr. Jackson travels so much with the children and she finally relinquished all parental rights.
"The visitations were not comfortable," she said, explaining that they would meet at a hotel and "it was a very sterile environment."
In 2003, she said, she received a call through her former employer, a doctor who brought Mr. Jackson and her together. She said he told her that someone associated with Mr. Jackson wanted to talk to her and arranged a phone call for her with Marc Schaffel, who is named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the case.
Mr. Jackson got on the phone briefly during that conversation, she said.
"He told me there was a video coming out and it was full of lies and would I help. I said, as always, yes. I asked him if he was OK. I was very upset," she testified.
Rowe said her conversation with Mr. Jackson lasted perhaps 21⁄2 minutes and there was no discussion of what he wanted her to do other than to work with his associates.
She said all she could recall him saying was, "There was a bad video coming out."
"Did he tell you with any specificity what he wanted you to do?" asked Zonen.
"No," she said.
Her testimony did link Mr. Jackson to the making of the rebuttal video. But her account offered less evidence than the persecution seemed to expect to tie Mr. Jackson to a conspiracy. She said she was not pressured to say anything specific and that there was "no quid pro quo."
Asked why she would help Mr. Jackson, she said, "I promised him I would always be there for Michael and the children."
She did not give any details of her private life with Mr. Jackson and made it clear that she did not want to discuss it.
"My personal life was my personal life and no one's business," she said when asked by the prosecution if she had talked completely truthfully on the video that was made.
Rowe said that before the interview began at Schaffel's home, they talked briefly about her family and he reported on her children's progress.
She said Schaffel told her that "they were fine, that Michael was going to be OK, how big the children had gotten and how beautiful they were and how strongheaded Paris was, like me."
She said the videotaped interview lasted nine hours and that she recently saw a two-hour version of it which was shown to her by prosecutors.
She said she found it "very boring and dull" and didn't really pay attention while she was watching it.
"All I knew is whatever what is being put out about Michael was hurtful to Michael and the children," she said.
Rowe said she told Mr. Jackson's associates that before she could take part in the video she needed a release from a confidentiality agreement.
"The confidentiality agreement said I could not speak with the press, public, anyone, regarding Michael or the children or our lives together," she said.
In his opening statement on February 28, 2005, chief prosecutor Tom Sneddon told the jury, "Debbie Rowe will tell you her interview also was completely scripted. They scripted that interview just like they scripted the (accuser's mother's) interview."
But the prosecution's line of attack has faltered in the face of Rowe's reversed testimony - and she remained adamant that neither Mr. Jackson or his aides tried to coerce her into giving scripted answers.
Rowe was expected back on the stand Thursday for more questioning.
Earlier in the day, Mr. Jackson's attorneys asked for a mistrial but were turned down by Judge Rodney S. Melville during a controversy involving testimony about the television documentary.
Former Mr. Jackson videographer Hamid Moslehi testified that during taping of the documentary he used his own camera to record the scenes as a backup for Mr. Jackson. He said the ultimate documentary was edited in a way that "Mr. Jackson sounded different than if they had continued another two or three seconds of that statement."
Moslehi said the accuser, his brother and sister were at his house for two or three hours before the taping began and he did not see them rehearsing. He said that the mother was there for about an hour before the taping and that he did not see her reading, rehearsing or being coached.
He also said that the mother confided in him at times but that she never told him that she was being falsely imprisoned, that she was receiving death threats, that Mr. Jackson had given her children alcohol or that the singer improperly touched her son. He said she also never asked him to call police.
The judge had earlier barred the defense from showing sections of Moslehi's tape, so he ordered prosecutor Gordon Auchincloss to cease questioning Moslehi about his tape. But the prosecutor again ventured into that area, drawing another warning.
The defense finally made a motion for a mistrial, but the judge said he believed he had taken care of the problem by raising his own objection to the testimony.
Source: MJJsource / AP
oraz cos specjalnego - premium:
OFFICIALWIRE.COM: Sneddon's finale a lesson for America
PRINTED FROM OFFICIALWIRE.COM
THE INTERNET'S NO. 1 ONLINE NEWSWIRE & PR SERVICE!
Editorial: Sneddon's finale a lesson for America
If this isn't Judge Melville's last case, it should be...
by Jennifer Monroe
SANTA MARIA, CA -- (OfficialWire) -- 04/22/05 -- I have intentionally left this story alone because I recognized the sensitive nature of the charges, believing that reporting the story at its conclusion would satisfy any obligation we have toward our readers.
But enough is enough.
For far too many years, California District Attorney Tom Sneddon has sought to capitalize on both the popularity of some and eccentricities of others, including pop legend Michael Jackson, in the furtherance of his own career. In the case of Jackson, Sneddon is clearly motivated by personal animosity toward the singer.
Enough is enough.
It's time for Judge Rodney Melville to call an end to this exercise in libel masquerading as a trial, while there is still a chance for him to reclaim some of his integrity.
When this most recent Sneddon-debacle began in December 2003, Hattie Kauffman, national correspondent for The Early Show speaking about the District Attorney, said: "I think people do feel that he is a man on a mission. You know, this is going to be the signature case of his career."
Sneddon has said the Jackson case will be his last, before he retires to perform pro-bono work with children.
The problem is that Sneddon has a history for pursuing cases that should never have been brought to trial. One such case was against defense attorney Gary Dunlap.
Dunlap said: "...I was wrongfully prosecuted for a number of crimes, crimes I did not commit."
Sneedon had charged Dunlap, a frequent critic of the DA's department, with perjury and witness intimidation.
"We went to a jury trial and I was acquitted on all counts," Dunlap said.
Dunlap continued, "He said he had a very strong case against me. The problem was that his whole strong case was manufactured."
On January 30, 2005 Jackson made a court-approved video statement, saying: "Please keep an open mind and let me have my day in court. I deserve a fair trial like every other American citizen. I will be acquitted and vindicated when the truth is told."
With no credible evidence, a case supported by no end of lies advanced by a woman who is so obviously mentally ill, no other American would have to suffer such an injustice.
PRINTED FROM OFFICIALWIRE.COM
THE INTERNET'S NO. 1 ONLINE NEWSWIRE & PR SERVICE!
Kultura umożliwia rozkwit najpiękniejszych zdolności człowieka
Kermitek pisze:Zamieszczam troche informacji z foxnews, z bbbc news i cnn oraz MJJSource
Tak się głośno zastanawiam: może jednak lepiej zamieszczać linki.
Cóż, dotychczasowe zaznania Debbie okazały się rozczarowujące dla tych, którzy spodziewali się, że dobije ona ostatecznie Michaela. Powiedziała nawet, że uważa go za przyjaciela.
Równocześnie przyjaźń ta jest tak gorliwa, że nie widziali się od rozwodu. Powiem szczerze, dla mnie zaznania Debbie są wstrząsające i świadczą równie źle o niej co o Michaelu. Chodzi mi o to, że oni wcale ze sobą nie żyli, nie mieszkali, sporadycznie się widywali w trakcie małżeństwa. Ja rozumiem, że w małżeństwie może się nie powieść ale w tym przypadku wszystko wskazuje na to, że to był jakiś rozrodczy kontrakt na pokaz, zwłaszcza, że szybciutko zrzekła się praw do dziecka. To samo twierdził wczoraj w wywiadach Taraborelli (biografer Michaela). Michael pisze tyle pięknych piosenek o miłości, tak mądrze o niej mówi a równocześnie jak widać praktykuje coś bezuczuciowego i miłości pozbawionego. Chyba nie wiele osób by tak potrafiło. Poza tam nie mogę pojąć, skąd mu do głowy przyszedł pomysł z tą Debbie??? Mógłby mieć super fajne dziewczyny, podejrzewam, że prawie każdą na tym Forum i wiele innych na świecie. A On wymyślił sobie Debbie.
Moja teoria jest taka, że kobietą, którą Michael darzy prawdziwymi uczuciami jest Karen Faye. Tylko raz widziałem w prasie z 10 lat temu, jak przyłapano ich gdzieś razem w restauracji ale obejrzyjcie uważnie program Take 2,
Mez zaproponował ponoć jakąś formę kontraktu. Jezeli warunki zostaną przyjęte, będzie zeznawał Michael. Nie wiem jakie warunki.
-
smooth-jam
- Posty: 70
- Rejestracja: ndz, 10 kwie 2005, 14:31
To jest chyba najlepsze, jakoś tak młodziej wygląda, ba! nawet wystających kości policzkowych nie widać specjalnie (ale powątpuję w retusz...).
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 20.jpg?v=1
Poniżej wiadomo chyba kto, tu wygląda nawet lepiej niż na tym zdjęciu z aukcji pierścionka ;)
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 30.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 23.jpg?v=1
Gorące spotkanie:
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 08.jpg?v=1
MJ opuszcza sąd, co ciekawe wziął ochroniarzowi parasolkę i sam ją niósł ;) A jaki zadowolony ze spotkania z żonką :> A jakie okulary! ;)
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 10.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 99.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 09.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 40.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 90.jpg?v=1
A tu bez parasolki... a i tak są trzy parasolki... co oni z tymi parasolkami ;) ?
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 15.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 04.jpg?v=1
---
I jeszcze ciekawostka o ciemnoskórzej Shakirze, która nie jest Michaelem Jacksonem i wydaje płyty o perwersyjnych tytułach ;) Przepraszam, że nie na temat, ale wątku nowego zakładać nie będę http://muzyka.onet.pl/mr,1088631,plotki.html
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 20.jpg?v=1
Poniżej wiadomo chyba kto, tu wygląda nawet lepiej niż na tym zdjęciu z aukcji pierścionka ;)
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 30.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 23.jpg?v=1
Gorące spotkanie:
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 08.jpg?v=1
MJ opuszcza sąd, co ciekawe wziął ochroniarzowi parasolkę i sam ją niósł ;) A jaki zadowolony ze spotkania z żonką :> A jakie okulary! ;)
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 10.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 99.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 09.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 40.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 90.jpg?v=1
A tu bez parasolki... a i tak są trzy parasolki... co oni z tymi parasolkami ;) ?
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 15.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo ... 04.jpg?v=1
---
I jeszcze ciekawostka o ciemnoskórzej Shakirze, która nie jest Michaelem Jacksonem i wydaje płyty o perwersyjnych tytułach ;) Przepraszam, że nie na temat, ale wątku nowego zakładać nie będę
http://muzyka.onet.pl/mr,1088631,plotki.html
Ostatnio zmieniony czw, 28 kwie 2005, 20:59 przez Pank, łącznie zmieniany 1 raz.
Chyba dostali niektórzy po nosie a tu wklejam tekst po polsku z interii.Mam nadzieje ze to niektórym pomoze zwłaszcza tym co w ogole nie znaja angielskiegoMJPOWER pisze:
Widzę, że chłopaki dostali po krawacie
Jackson: Zaskakujące zeznania
28.04.2005 09:16
Michael Jackson / AFP
Debbie Rowe, była żona Michaela Jacksona, zaskoczyła prokuraturę podczas środowego (27 kwietnia) przesłuchania w sądzie. Oskarżyciele w ostatniej chwili powołali ją na świadka, a jej zeznania miały być kluczowe dla sprawy i ostatecznie pogrążyć piosenkarza.
Prokuratura chciała wykorzystać fakt, że obecnie Rowe i Jacksona prowadzą sprawę sądową o prawo do opieki nad dwójką ich dzieci. Przysługuje ona jedynie piosenkarzowi, a jego była żona walczy w sądzie o prawo widzenia Prince'a Michaela i Paris.
Jednak Rowe kompletnie zaskoczyła oskarżycieli zeznaniami. Miały one wzmocnić twierdzenia prokuratury, jakoby Jackson zmuszał rodzinę Arvizo do udziału w filmie dokumentalnym o nim samym i przygotował im gotowy tekst wywiadu.
"Debbie Rowe powie wam, że jej słowa były uprzednio przygotowane. Podobnie jak to miało miejsce w przypadku wywiadu z rodziną Arvizo" - powiedział ławie przysięgłych prokurator Tom Sneddon.
Debbie Rowe zaskoczyła prokuraturę zeznaniami / AFP
Kobieta podkreśliła jednak, że wszystko to, co powiedziała na temat byłego męża przed kamerami nie było wymuszone. Żaden z pracowników Jacksona nie kazał jej również czytać gotowego tekstu.
"Nie chciałam by ktokolwiek zarzucił mi, że moje słowa były wcześniej przygotowane i przećwiczone. Poza tym pan Jackson wie, że nikt nie może mi rozkazywać" - powiedziała Rowe.
Na pytanie prokuratury, dlaczego zgodziła się na wywiad, była żona piosenkarza rozpłakała się.
"Chciałam zobaczyć moje dzieci i znów spotkać byłego męża" - powiedziała wzruszona.
Przesłuchanie Debbie Rowe kontynuowane będzie w czwartek, 28 kwietnia.
(INTERIA.PL)
Kultura umożliwia rozkwit najpiękniejszych zdolności człowieka
Przede wszystkim, wielkie DZIĘKI wszystkim za materiały.
A co do Michael'a....
Nie będę powtarzać, że wygląda bardzo dobrze i że się cieszę widząc Go w takiej formie- to byłoby już nudne
Myślę natomiast, że Michael miał szczególne powody do tego, aby być po tej rozprawie zadowolony.
Myślę, że wszyscy oczekiwali, że Debbie, jako BYŁA, jak wszystkie niemal "byłe" będzie Michael'a gnoić.
Tymczasem- było dobrze- pokazała charakterek (Michael nie miał z nią łatwego życia ) i (mam nadzieję) prawdę.
A sądzę, że sam Michael bał się trochę jej zeznań....
A co do Michael'a....
Nie będę powtarzać, że wygląda bardzo dobrze i że się cieszę widząc Go w takiej formie- to byłoby już nudne
Myślę natomiast, że Michael miał szczególne powody do tego, aby być po tej rozprawie zadowolony.
Myślę, że wszyscy oczekiwali, że Debbie, jako BYŁA, jak wszystkie niemal "byłe" będzie Michael'a gnoić.
Tymczasem- było dobrze- pokazała charakterek (Michael nie miał z nią łatwego życia
) i (mam nadzieję) prawdę.A sądzę, że sam Michael bał się trochę jej zeznań....
"Everywhere I go
Every smile I see
I know you are there
Smilin back at me
Dancin in moonlight
I know you are free
Cuz I can see your star
Shinin down on me"
Every smile I see
I know you are there
Smilin back at me
Dancin in moonlight
I know you are free
Cuz I can see your star
Shinin down on me"
Umieszczam tez jeden artykuł przetłumaczony na polski o sprawie MJ'a
John Kerry: Oczy Ameryki, nie sa juz szeroko zamkniete
“W tym momencie, ta sprawa wyglada jak kampania oszczerstw. To jest legalne pozwolenie na wszystko.” Była Prokurator, Laurie Levenson, Profesor Szkoly Prawnczej - Loyola. „Eksperci” z namaszczonych mediow nie mogliby sobie wyobrazic, nawet w najgorszych z możliwych scenariuszy, ze sprawa Prokuratora Generalnego – Toma Sneddona, moglaby utonąć w grzęzawisku znieslawiających ruchomych piaskow. Jeśli to nie jest kampania oszczerstw, to gdzie w takim razie są legiony oburzonych, moralnych orędownikow przeciw wykorzystywaniu dzieci wykrzykujących o publiczną ekzekucje przez powieszenie? Jeśli bylaby to legalna i budząca zaufanie, majaca podstawy i okolicznosci sprawa, nie pomyslalby kto, ze media przynajmniej to by oglosily? Cos nie wydaje się w porzadku z tym niepokojącym obrazkiem. Historia pokazala nam, przy wielu okazjach, ze zwiazek miedzy mediami i stanem jest ewidentny. Przyszla pora na nas wszystkich, by opuscic nasze bańki fantazji i wiedzy w tym momencie historii, nasze instytucje miejskie są na skraju niebezpiecznego urwiska. Cmentarze dudnią od ostrzegających syren od naszych przodkow, którzy cierpieli niemilosiernie w zwiazku z takim partnerstwem. Reklamowy homonim atakujący Michaela Jacksona i kogokolwiek, kto osmiela się go popierac, zintensyfikowal się jako ze media organizacji zmienily swoje taktyki, by uratowac swoja twarz i odbudowac rozpadającą się wiarygodnosc. Nie zapominajmy, ze Ameryka jest narodem narodzonym z braku zaufania do absolutnej wladzy Stanu, jak również jako ingerencja Stanu w zycie prywatne obywateli. Jeśli zyjemy w spoleczenstwie, gdzie sprawy takie jak ta sa badane w sądzie, z tymi źle wyćwiczonymi swiadkami, wobec tego pozwolcie nam wyznac, ze nie posiadamy zadnych prawdziwych standardow edukacyjnych. Nie posiadamy ani moralnej bazy, by uwydatniac prawnicze standardy, ani nie posiadamy zwyklych, przyzwoitych wartosci, by prowadzic dialog na temat moralnosci. Czy mamy uwierzyc, ze ten rodzaj prowadzenia sprawy jest akceptowany w naszych sądach? Czy jest to cos, z czego można być dumnym? Jakie zeznania przed Lawa Przysieglych, albo dowody racjonalnie przekonaly Sędziego Melville’a, ze to było dosc adekwatne, by nakazac proces? Gdzie jest odpowiedzialność?
To jest fasada i zaden profesor prawa nie osmieli sie, by inaczej to racjonalizowac. Jenak media to zracjonalizowaly, nieprawda? Swiadek po swiadku, media rzeźbią w naglowkach ostroznie wyćwiczone slogany albo wyrażenia, a jednak, opuszaczają kotekst i trywializują wplyw sprzecznosci. Ktokolwiek, kto studiuje historie, czy to polityczną, ekonomiczną, czy prawną, nie bylby zdziwiony, gdyby dowiedzial się, ze ta selektywna historiografia jest powszechnym zjawiskiem. Czy ktokolwiek mysli, ze dziennikarze relacjonują dokladnie to, co widzą bez: uprzedzen, fragmentarycznosci i wykluczania? Wiekszosc Amerykanow nie mysli tak, a wiekszosc uczonych to potwierdzilo. Szerząca się cenzura przez uniwersytety w przebraniu politycznej poprawnosci była skazana na przefiltrowanie do instytucjonalnych mediow masowych. Czy to dlatego, ze Michael Jackson uwydatnil swoje prawo, by nie być typową ikoną, która tak wielu rozwsciecza? Wybral by nie być stereotypowym idolem, który zostal nam zareklamowany jako chlodny i miał efekt na naszą psychike. Michael Jackson postanowil być bardziej samo- zrobiony, niż sfabrykowany. On oczywiście nie zabiega o to, by opinia publczna zdefiniowala kim on jest. Czyz nie? Czytajac same naglowki ktos moglby zostac przekonany by pomyslec, ze Tom Sneddon ma silna sprawe, lacznie z wiarygodnymi swiadkami i szkodliwymi zeznaniami. W rzeczywistosci jest tak, ze nie ma dat i czasu dla tych zarzucanych czynow związanych z molestowaniem i ze mamy bande kluczowych swiadkow, którzy sa ubodzy w kase i mają wiele powodow, by być zwabionymi do przypominania sobie nagle nowych zeznan. Jak ja zaluje, ze nie ma agencji, nie przeciwnie do Agencji do Obrony Konsumentow, dla dziennikarzy i mędrcow. Tam, widz i czytelnik moglby sprawdzic wskaznik wiarygodnosci i porownac z klamliwymi srednimi. Teraz byby dobry czas, by powolac podobną agencje do zycia. Miejmy jasnosc w jednej sprawie: wolny rynek pomyslow jest polem bitwy dla kontroli sfer wplywu na umysl. Tak jak spodziewamy się, ze Lawnik zastanawia się podczas logicznego procesu, gdy wydaje werdykt, każdy potrzebuje się nauczyc w jaki sposób radzic sobie z informacjami i wziąć pod uwage uprzedzenia narratora, porządki dzienne i wendety. To jest wojna i konsekwencje są prawie smiertelne. Ty myslisz, ze Michael Jackson jest winny? Zbadaj nature tego zarzutu. Czy zrodla są wiarygodne? Czy sa nawet podobne do szczegolowych dowody, by go skazac w sądzie prawa? Pomysl jak latwo zazdrosna i nikczemna osoba moze wmieszac ciebie uzywajac tych samych standardow o których ty myslisz są „sprawiedliwą grą”, przez która sadzisz Michaela. Czy to jest standard, wedlug którego możesz zyc?
Michael Jackson. Czy ktos go lubi czy nie, w tym momencie procesu, nie ma to nic do rzeczy. By spojrzec w inny sposb na te Jakubową wersje sprawiedliwosci, ona jawnie uwydatnia, ze instytucjonalni dziennikarze wykonuja swoja prace odnosząc sukcesy przez dokarmianie ignorancji i wydawanie opinii. Ponure konsekwencje pokazywane swiatu są wieksze niz nam sie wydaje. W Ameryce, czy są tu prawdziwi prokuratorzy, profesorowie prawa i dziennikarze gotowi do oddania kroku naprzod i wymierzenia sprawiedliwosci tym, którzy zlosliwie molestowali konstytucje i perwersyjnie przeinaczyli swoje obowiazki jako oficerowie prawa? Oto nowa granica.
Mam tylko nadzieje ze tekst sie podoba.Miłego czytania
Panu S* musiała porzadnie zrzednąć mina po zeznaniach Debbie.Zobaczymy co dzisiaj jeszcze powie
Debbie.
John Kerry: Oczy Ameryki, nie sa juz szeroko zamkniete
“W tym momencie, ta sprawa wyglada jak kampania oszczerstw. To jest legalne pozwolenie na wszystko.” Była Prokurator, Laurie Levenson, Profesor Szkoly Prawnczej - Loyola. „Eksperci” z namaszczonych mediow nie mogliby sobie wyobrazic, nawet w najgorszych z możliwych scenariuszy, ze sprawa Prokuratora Generalnego – Toma Sneddona, moglaby utonąć w grzęzawisku znieslawiających ruchomych piaskow. Jeśli to nie jest kampania oszczerstw, to gdzie w takim razie są legiony oburzonych, moralnych orędownikow przeciw wykorzystywaniu dzieci wykrzykujących o publiczną ekzekucje przez powieszenie? Jeśli bylaby to legalna i budząca zaufanie, majaca podstawy i okolicznosci sprawa, nie pomyslalby kto, ze media przynajmniej to by oglosily? Cos nie wydaje się w porzadku z tym niepokojącym obrazkiem. Historia pokazala nam, przy wielu okazjach, ze zwiazek miedzy mediami i stanem jest ewidentny. Przyszla pora na nas wszystkich, by opuscic nasze bańki fantazji i wiedzy w tym momencie historii, nasze instytucje miejskie są na skraju niebezpiecznego urwiska. Cmentarze dudnią od ostrzegających syren od naszych przodkow, którzy cierpieli niemilosiernie w zwiazku z takim partnerstwem. Reklamowy homonim atakujący Michaela Jacksona i kogokolwiek, kto osmiela się go popierac, zintensyfikowal się jako ze media organizacji zmienily swoje taktyki, by uratowac swoja twarz i odbudowac rozpadającą się wiarygodnosc. Nie zapominajmy, ze Ameryka jest narodem narodzonym z braku zaufania do absolutnej wladzy Stanu, jak również jako ingerencja Stanu w zycie prywatne obywateli. Jeśli zyjemy w spoleczenstwie, gdzie sprawy takie jak ta sa badane w sądzie, z tymi źle wyćwiczonymi swiadkami, wobec tego pozwolcie nam wyznac, ze nie posiadamy zadnych prawdziwych standardow edukacyjnych. Nie posiadamy ani moralnej bazy, by uwydatniac prawnicze standardy, ani nie posiadamy zwyklych, przyzwoitych wartosci, by prowadzic dialog na temat moralnosci. Czy mamy uwierzyc, ze ten rodzaj prowadzenia sprawy jest akceptowany w naszych sądach? Czy jest to cos, z czego można być dumnym? Jakie zeznania przed Lawa Przysieglych, albo dowody racjonalnie przekonaly Sędziego Melville’a, ze to było dosc adekwatne, by nakazac proces? Gdzie jest odpowiedzialność?
To jest fasada i zaden profesor prawa nie osmieli sie, by inaczej to racjonalizowac. Jenak media to zracjonalizowaly, nieprawda? Swiadek po swiadku, media rzeźbią w naglowkach ostroznie wyćwiczone slogany albo wyrażenia, a jednak, opuszaczają kotekst i trywializują wplyw sprzecznosci. Ktokolwiek, kto studiuje historie, czy to polityczną, ekonomiczną, czy prawną, nie bylby zdziwiony, gdyby dowiedzial się, ze ta selektywna historiografia jest powszechnym zjawiskiem. Czy ktokolwiek mysli, ze dziennikarze relacjonują dokladnie to, co widzą bez: uprzedzen, fragmentarycznosci i wykluczania? Wiekszosc Amerykanow nie mysli tak, a wiekszosc uczonych to potwierdzilo. Szerząca się cenzura przez uniwersytety w przebraniu politycznej poprawnosci była skazana na przefiltrowanie do instytucjonalnych mediow masowych. Czy to dlatego, ze Michael Jackson uwydatnil swoje prawo, by nie być typową ikoną, która tak wielu rozwsciecza? Wybral by nie być stereotypowym idolem, który zostal nam zareklamowany jako chlodny i miał efekt na naszą psychike. Michael Jackson postanowil być bardziej samo- zrobiony, niż sfabrykowany. On oczywiście nie zabiega o to, by opinia publczna zdefiniowala kim on jest. Czyz nie? Czytajac same naglowki ktos moglby zostac przekonany by pomyslec, ze Tom Sneddon ma silna sprawe, lacznie z wiarygodnymi swiadkami i szkodliwymi zeznaniami. W rzeczywistosci jest tak, ze nie ma dat i czasu dla tych zarzucanych czynow związanych z molestowaniem i ze mamy bande kluczowych swiadkow, którzy sa ubodzy w kase i mają wiele powodow, by być zwabionymi do przypominania sobie nagle nowych zeznan. Jak ja zaluje, ze nie ma agencji, nie przeciwnie do Agencji do Obrony Konsumentow, dla dziennikarzy i mędrcow. Tam, widz i czytelnik moglby sprawdzic wskaznik wiarygodnosci i porownac z klamliwymi srednimi. Teraz byby dobry czas, by powolac podobną agencje do zycia. Miejmy jasnosc w jednej sprawie: wolny rynek pomyslow jest polem bitwy dla kontroli sfer wplywu na umysl. Tak jak spodziewamy się, ze Lawnik zastanawia się podczas logicznego procesu, gdy wydaje werdykt, każdy potrzebuje się nauczyc w jaki sposób radzic sobie z informacjami i wziąć pod uwage uprzedzenia narratora, porządki dzienne i wendety. To jest wojna i konsekwencje są prawie smiertelne. Ty myslisz, ze Michael Jackson jest winny? Zbadaj nature tego zarzutu. Czy zrodla są wiarygodne? Czy sa nawet podobne do szczegolowych dowody, by go skazac w sądzie prawa? Pomysl jak latwo zazdrosna i nikczemna osoba moze wmieszac ciebie uzywajac tych samych standardow o których ty myslisz są „sprawiedliwą grą”, przez która sadzisz Michaela. Czy to jest standard, wedlug którego możesz zyc?
Michael Jackson. Czy ktos go lubi czy nie, w tym momencie procesu, nie ma to nic do rzeczy. By spojrzec w inny sposb na te Jakubową wersje sprawiedliwosci, ona jawnie uwydatnia, ze instytucjonalni dziennikarze wykonuja swoja prace odnosząc sukcesy przez dokarmianie ignorancji i wydawanie opinii. Ponure konsekwencje pokazywane swiatu są wieksze niz nam sie wydaje. W Ameryce, czy są tu prawdziwi prokuratorzy, profesorowie prawa i dziennikarze gotowi do oddania kroku naprzod i wymierzenia sprawiedliwosci tym, którzy zlosliwie molestowali konstytucje i perwersyjnie przeinaczyli swoje obowiazki jako oficerowie prawa? Oto nowa granica.
Mam tylko nadzieje ze tekst sie podoba.Miłego czytania
Panu S* musiała porzadnie zrzednąć mina po zeznaniach Debbie.Zobaczymy co dzisiaj jeszcze powie Debbie.
Kultura umożliwia rozkwit najpiękniejszych zdolności człowieka
muszę przyznać, że mieliście rację... Debbie nie zeznała całkowicie na niekorzyść Michaela, a przy okazji ośmieszyła Snedzia
Ale... Asked by Zonen if her comments during the interview were truthful, Rowe -- after a long pause -- finally responded, "No."
Asked further if her comments about Jackson's parenting of their children were truthful, she said, "No."
Court ended for the afternoon shortly afterward, before she explained what was untruthful in her remarks about his parenting. She will be back on the stand when court resumes Thursday morning.
Nawet jeśli jej odpowiedzi nie były wcześniej przygotowane, to nie mówiła prawdy podczas wywiadu... a przynajmniej podczas wychwalania Michaela jako ojca...
Ale... Asked by Zonen if her comments during the interview were truthful, Rowe -- after a long pause -- finally responded, "No."
Asked further if her comments about Jackson's parenting of their children were truthful, she said, "No."
Court ended for the afternoon shortly afterward, before she explained what was untruthful in her remarks about his parenting. She will be back on the stand when court resumes Thursday morning.
Nawet jeśli jej odpowiedzi nie były wcześniej przygotowane, to nie mówiła prawdy podczas wywiadu... a przynajmniej podczas wychwalania Michaela jako ojca...
I tu możesz mieć rację! Czy chodzi o tą restaurację?MJPOWER pisze: Moja teoria jest taka, że kobietą, którą Michael darzy prawdziwymi uczuciami jest Karen Faye. Tylko raz widziałem w prasie z 10 lat temu, jak przyłapano ich gdzieś razem w restauracji ale obejrzyjcie uważnie program Take 2
Co do TAKE 2 to chyba oto chodzi?! Kurcze może jednak coś tam między nimi jest?!
Przy okazji jeszcze parę zdjątek MJ’a z Karen!
