Who is it Samantha De Gossom
anotherpartofus
Posts: 2
And some time you heard a certain Samantha De Gassom.Oggi posted this report on a meeting-conference that there would be between the legal and judicial offices involved in the 1993 and 2005.
Los Angeles’ County Bar Association event “Frozen in Time: A Riveting Behind-the-Scenes View of the Michael Jackson Cases”.
The panel of speakers included all who were involved in the 1993 and 2005 cases plus a moderator.
Moderator: Seth M. Hufstedler. Judge Rodney S. Melville: Judge in the 2005 trial.
Carl E. Douglas (under Johnny Cochran at the time): Defense attorney during the 1993 case and who suggested Tom Mesereau as attorney for 2005 trial after J. Cochran got sick and moved to NYC.
Larry R. Feldman: Attorney for the civil case lawsuit case of 1993 but also the attorney the Arvizo family contacted prior to the 2005 trial.
Thomas A. Mesereau, Jr.: Defense attorney who represented Michael Jackson during the 2005 trial.
Ronald Zonen: Prosecution attorney and Chief Deputy District attorney during the 2005 trial.
What an amazing panel! All first-hand legal representation that all were involved in the 1993 civil case and the criminal 2005 trial!
The event which was closed to the public and consisted of 98% lawyers and judges and Country Bar Association members was at first intimidating. A posh conference room on the 27th floor of a building in Downtown L.A. With strict security rules where you could ride the elevators alone unless pre- locked to the 27th floor and no cell-phones or cameras seemed promising of something interesting. Was it as big as I expected it to be? Yes and no.
Sitting down in a full room filled with high-profiles attorney and judges felt at first intimidating. No-one spoke, a full room and no sound just sitting there reviewing the same documents I was given. 5.30pm and we were called to another room for dinner that we had to take and bring back to our seats in the original conference room. As we all ate same scenario: total silence, a few whispers here and there. Very unsettling and hard to digest in my opinion. 6pm, the panel comes in and sits down. Hard not to throw up my food at that point being face to face with some of the very people who tried SO hard to bring Michael down….but ultimately couldn’t, because as Michael said “Lies run sprints. Truth runs marathons”. Not so coincidental that I would mention that quote because the live slide-show picture prior to the conference and during the first 20 minutes of it was a picture of the huge banner outside the Santa Maria courthouse during the 2005 trial. The banner was that exact same Michael quote.
Turns out there will be no DVD of the event. I t wasn’t recorded as far as I understand and quite frankly, there probably wouldn’t be any great interest or revelation to be gotten out of one. What I got to experience out of the almost 4 hours of discussion was frustrating, annoying, painful and exhilarating. I won’t go into great detail but I will give you a very brief summary of every person on the panel and what their claims, opinions and renderings were for either the 1993 civil case and/or the 2005 criminal case. Bear in mind I am not going into great detail but making just very short summary. In fact, I was quite surprised at how little new information was given in this conference apart from more personal accounts of how the cases were brought forward and dealt with. There were no amazing legal terms for a room filled only attorneys and judges.
First up to the podium was moderator Seth M. Hufstedler. This person is in charge of being the “host” of the event. That person presents the case, the panel and announces the next topic or speaker. I honestly don’t remember who this person is in the field of Law, but I remember him being a retired attorney/judge who is well known in that field.
The first speaker called was Judge Rodney S. Melville. The judge in the 2005 trial. My first personal thought was of how bad of a speaker he was for a judge. He read his notes and it was obvious he wasn’t a man who could discuss anything naturally unless he read it and sounded like a middle-school student reciting an essay. He only spoke of how the media made the 2005 trial responsible for strict courthouse rules and how little the actual court room was and that their expansion budget was only $10 000 dollars and that they bought $46 seats on E-bay to add to the room for more jury seats and what a great saving they made. Everyone in the room thought it was hilarious. Not me. What came next shocked me the most! Remember the banner slide picture I told you about? Melville thought it would validate his high-security and courthouse rules by showing what “freaks” were out there with the media. He showed pictures of the most condescending kind on the screens in the conference room which everyone laughed at. A Jesus look- alike pouring wine in coke cans. A clown with an MJ puppet, religious groups with hateful banners, a woman selling veggie burgers and I’ll pass some! As this was going on I was cringing and wondering what kind of a well-recognized and honored judge would steep so low as to not include the other side of the picture by showing well-behaved supporters/fans from all over the world, gathered together in harmony and dignity and pain.
Next up came Larry Feldman. Attorney for the prosecution in the 1993 case and the attorney the Arvizos who contacted him before any authority department because they already knew Feldman settled with the Chandlers in 1993. This is probably the most disgusting display of ego and arrogance in the entire evening. He first talked about himself for a few minutes and was very clear to everyone that the Arvizos came to HIM in 2003 before going to anyone else, which would include the police, the Children’s Services or the D.A. Why he would even gloat about that is quite ironic but I got it right away, he felt important about HIM being the first one contacted considering his involvement in a 20 million civil law-suit in 1993. What he may have forgotten is that such a claim based on ego just discredits the reason why they would go to him in the first place: Money not Justice! But egos don’t get that. Feldman was saying that the 1993 case was settled because of the pro-Michael Jackson opinion in the media at the time, and that the media was talking too much about the case publicly and that thereby the defense had too much advantage and ammunition though public opinion and MJ celebrity friends. Next was Feldman exposing poor Jordan Chandler as a shy and exposed teen-ager. Those “reasons” put together is what led them to settle in a civil case, according to him. However, Feldman then blamed the D.A. for not going through with a criminal suit because the civil case has been too tiring and exposing at the beginning. Point and blame because you couldn’t get any criminal evidence, Feldman. Good one. Several times during the evening Feldman displayed himself as even more self-centered than at the beginning , taking the microphone to not answer the actual questions but rather to talk about himself and rambling on and on to the point where people were starting to look at each other and smiling. That especially happened at the end once Tom Mesereau was the final speaker and shut them all up one after one. Egos were hurt, Feldman just sat back picking his teeth and just had to try to comment on something he even lost track of himself after 20 minutes. That’s EGO for you.
Next up was Carl Douglas, defense attorney during the 1993 case. Very confusing character! A little off the wall during breaks. He kept going back and forth between camps during panel discussions too. A self proclaimed friend of Larry Feldman even though they fought against each-other but had Johnny Cochran as a mutual friend. Douglas agreed with Feldman about the Tabloid Journalism of the time when the 1993 case erupted. There was no Internet (or very limited), no blogs no real-time media and the magnitude of the Michael Jackson case at the time. However, he was quick to denounce Feldman for trying to get a RIDICULOUS settlement out of Michael Jackson in the civil case suit and remembers Feldman say behind closed doors “Let’s not figure out the worth of the case but Michael Jackson’s worth”!
Next up was Ronald Zonen, the prosecution attorney and Chief Deputy District attorney during the 2005 trial. This is where it gets ugly and after talking to Thomas Mesereau after the conference it made sense why Mesereau was angry and laid it out the way it was when his turn came up. Zonen spent the first 5 minutes out of his approximate 10 minutes talking about Gavin and what a poor victim he was and what wonderful 20 year-old man he was today. He began describing Gavin as a child soldier fighting a stage 4 cancer at the age of 10 and that the real problem in the 2005 trial was his mother. Zonen went on to say that Gavin’s mother, Janet, was totally unbalanced, unpredictable and a lose canon and the biggest problem for the prosecution and that the defense used that to their advantage. Zonen then claimed that the only reason Michael Jackson invited the Arvizo to Neverland during the Martin Bashir documentary was to take credit for Gavin’s cancer remission. According to Zonen, Michael’s “handlers” then re-invited the Arvizo family back to Neverland after the disaster effect of the documentary so that they could be “controlled” and sent to Brazil with one-way tickets and basically “disappear”. After portraying Michael as a stereotype child molester and Mafioso with “handlers” trying to get rid of a whole family, he went on to talk about how Gavin Arvizo lives his life today and what an amazing 20 year-old man he is. He gave a lot of personal information about Gavin and where he is and what he is doing. I choose NOT to disclose that information for safety reasons but what I can tell you is that this liar and immoral person now claims to be religious, which is ironic and a travesty considering he very well knows what he has done to an innocent man and the hell it put him though. But like Jordan Chandler, Gavin has walked away and chosen to change his identity and never be heard of again. How easy and cowardly when Michael couldn’t escape the lies and hurt they caused him, the most famous person on Earth. But Michael came back after all this humiliation and aggravation and pain and raised 3 beautiful children proud and strong until other vultures and liars finally took him out.
Fortunately the last speaker to take the podium was Tom Mesereau, all though there were some Q&As from the audience at the end which really could have and should have been ignored because it gave way to some speakers to not directly answer the actual given question but rather respond to Tom Mesereau’s amazing speech and conclusion which they couldn’t take.
Tom Mesereau came to the podium obviously upset. He had set there for 2 hours not having the opportunity to say a word and hear the prosecution attorneys in the 1993 and 2005 case and the judge for the 2005 case speak. Several times during the evening Larry Feldman kept hard to whisper to him and he would not even turn his head towards him. He waited his turn patiently. Now here is the interesting part. When I spoke to him AFTER the conference/event, Tom Mesereau said “I can’t believe what Zonen did. He wasn’t objective and that’s why I responded the way I did. Tom Mesereau began his speech by saying he was contacted by Randy Jackson who was very clear to explain to him how the media had always been out to get his brother who was a “big business” to the media and to anyone trying to make money off of him. Talking about the 2005 trial Meserau said he had never seen so many witnesses crumble so fast under examination and that the amount of fake witnesses was a circus. He went on to say that despite all that was said Michael was the nicest client he ever had and who never got in the way. That Michael was not ever capable of master-minding an Arvizo family “disappearance” to Brazil or ever hurt a child. That the Bashir documentary was exactly what the Rebuttal show was about, exposing a journalist who came in to tell his side of the story and purposely ignore the rest which was filmed by Michael’s camp and then aired on TV and which was allowed to be shown in court. Mesereau went on to say that the problem in Michael’s life was the people around him and who were getting in the way. People and employees who gave Michael Jackson wrong information and kept him scared and suspicious so that they could stay in his life and make a job out of it. What he exactly meant I don’t know but if you look at what happened to Michael during the last 8 months of his life and which I witnsesses, it sure makes sense! Tom Mesereau added that when Bashir sat under oath to answer questions, Bashir chose to not answer under his journalism confidentiality rights , despite the rebuttal that had been shown and so Mesereau chose to play along with it by asking every new question by saying “ Is it true that….” And displaying the obvious facts, with Bashir always declined to answer but were essential information to the jury. Mesereau ended up by saying that his cross-examinations were very lengthy in order to subject the accusers to so many facts that they could no longer stand their own lies.
This was the end of the individual panel talk but there were two more segments which revolved around Jury Selection and Q&As. I’ll make the rest brief.
First the question of Jury Selection. When the moderator asked about who wanted to answer the question Zonen was fast to raise his hand. He began by saying it was the fastest selection ever made that he knew of, a day and a half. He went on to say it was a bad choice because Judge Melville was quick to dismiss and relieve any potential juror who would suffer financially from a lengthy trial. According to Zonen all that was left were either unemployed or retired jurors. That statement alone made it clear he was very judgmental about the jurors’ social and academic statuses. When To Mesereau was asked to answer the same question he made it clear. No matter what the Jury selection was, all 13 jurors came back with the same innocent verdict on all counts. He was also quick to rectify Zonen’s claim about the social and academic statuses of some of the jurors. One was an engineer, one a math teacher, one a retired school principal and so on. Furthermore, none resembled Michael Jackson’s peers, nor any African American or celebrity. Tom Mesereau once again shut the rest of the panel swiftly.
Next and last was the Q&A segment. The audience got to submit questions to the moderator, which would be the last segment of the evening. I know for a fact very sensitive questions were submitted asking the panel if they ever regarded Michael Jackson as a person rather than a defendant and money machine. None of those questions were chosen by the moderator… However 2 questions were chosen. The first one was what did they all think of the Pajamas incident which erupted in laughter from the audience. I cringed and felt like screaming. Why? Because I knew the background of the story. I was inside the Santa Maria court room that day in 2005. I saw Melville give Mesereau 60 minutes for Michael to show up or all bail would be cancelled and Michael would go directly to jail of he didn’t arrive in that time span. We were all sent out to wait for Michael to show up until his fleet drove up. Once seated we were all terrified that Melville would have Michael hand-cuffed because the 60 minute limit was already up. Instead, 2 minutes before he walked in we could hear commotion and cheering outside. We knew he had arrived. Michael walked in, in pajama bottoms, a white v-neck t-shirt and a jacket. No makeup. As he made his way up the court room he still tried to acknowledge his fans by giving a very weak wave left and right. How he managed to do that is beyond is beyond me, but he did. Once Michael was sitting down facing Gavin he stayed composed and dignified. I saw Michael shaking his head several times while hearing Gavin’s account of the event and reaching out for tissues and wiping his face. During breaks Michael didn’t take bathroom breaks, instead I watched him hide behind a far right pillar talking to Meseareau and what too seemed to be crying, feeling obviously upset and in physical pain from the way he was walking. I honestly forget who got to address that issue first but someone on the panel claimed they didn’t notice anything different that day and thought that Michael’s outfit that day was one of his “more usual costumes” which once again resulted in the audience’s laughter. When the moderator asked who else might want to address that question, Tome Mesereau chose to answer. Mesereau gave a very clear explanation of it. He had heard Michael had been injured that morning and fell and went straight to a hospital. Mesereau called Michael once the 60 minute dead-line was given and told Michael he had to show up immediately. He told Michael not to bother going back home to get clothes and come as he was from the hospital. There was NO time to waste. This is the story of the pajama incident which the media ran with and humiliated him with. I was there, I am witness and I can verify all that Tom Mesereau claims about that incident. This is more or less where it ended. I have skipped some details and comments and conversations but kept the most of it to share with you. Since there will be no DVD of the event I chose to share with you the most of it. Samantha de Gosson
She has repeatedly said that Michael was hurt in June 2009, but then returned.Ha and also said he would decide not to return, arguing that these info he had received from a member of the Jackson family.
Souza, Mo, we can give explanations about this person? Why had the freedom to attend that meeting, although Randy was very upset with her?
Thank you!!!!
Los Angeles’ County Bar Association event “Frozen in Time: A Riveting Behind-the-Scenes View of the Michael Jackson Cases”.
The panel of speakers included all who were involved in the 1993 and 2005 cases plus a moderator.
Moderator: Seth M. Hufstedler. Judge Rodney S. Melville: Judge in the 2005 trial.
Carl E. Douglas (under Johnny Cochran at the time): Defense attorney during the 1993 case and who suggested Tom Mesereau as attorney for 2005 trial after J. Cochran got sick and moved to NYC.
Larry R. Feldman: Attorney for the civil case lawsuit case of 1993 but also the attorney the Arvizo family contacted prior to the 2005 trial.
Thomas A. Mesereau, Jr.: Defense attorney who represented Michael Jackson during the 2005 trial.
Ronald Zonen: Prosecution attorney and Chief Deputy District attorney during the 2005 trial.
What an amazing panel! All first-hand legal representation that all were involved in the 1993 civil case and the criminal 2005 trial!
The event which was closed to the public and consisted of 98% lawyers and judges and Country Bar Association members was at first intimidating. A posh conference room on the 27th floor of a building in Downtown L.A. With strict security rules where you could ride the elevators alone unless pre- locked to the 27th floor and no cell-phones or cameras seemed promising of something interesting. Was it as big as I expected it to be? Yes and no.
Sitting down in a full room filled with high-profiles attorney and judges felt at first intimidating. No-one spoke, a full room and no sound just sitting there reviewing the same documents I was given. 5.30pm and we were called to another room for dinner that we had to take and bring back to our seats in the original conference room. As we all ate same scenario: total silence, a few whispers here and there. Very unsettling and hard to digest in my opinion. 6pm, the panel comes in and sits down. Hard not to throw up my food at that point being face to face with some of the very people who tried SO hard to bring Michael down….but ultimately couldn’t, because as Michael said “Lies run sprints. Truth runs marathons”. Not so coincidental that I would mention that quote because the live slide-show picture prior to the conference and during the first 20 minutes of it was a picture of the huge banner outside the Santa Maria courthouse during the 2005 trial. The banner was that exact same Michael quote.
Turns out there will be no DVD of the event. I t wasn’t recorded as far as I understand and quite frankly, there probably wouldn’t be any great interest or revelation to be gotten out of one. What I got to experience out of the almost 4 hours of discussion was frustrating, annoying, painful and exhilarating. I won’t go into great detail but I will give you a very brief summary of every person on the panel and what their claims, opinions and renderings were for either the 1993 civil case and/or the 2005 criminal case. Bear in mind I am not going into great detail but making just very short summary. In fact, I was quite surprised at how little new information was given in this conference apart from more personal accounts of how the cases were brought forward and dealt with. There were no amazing legal terms for a room filled only attorneys and judges.
First up to the podium was moderator Seth M. Hufstedler. This person is in charge of being the “host” of the event. That person presents the case, the panel and announces the next topic or speaker. I honestly don’t remember who this person is in the field of Law, but I remember him being a retired attorney/judge who is well known in that field.
The first speaker called was Judge Rodney S. Melville. The judge in the 2005 trial. My first personal thought was of how bad of a speaker he was for a judge. He read his notes and it was obvious he wasn’t a man who could discuss anything naturally unless he read it and sounded like a middle-school student reciting an essay. He only spoke of how the media made the 2005 trial responsible for strict courthouse rules and how little the actual court room was and that their expansion budget was only $10 000 dollars and that they bought $46 seats on E-bay to add to the room for more jury seats and what a great saving they made. Everyone in the room thought it was hilarious. Not me. What came next shocked me the most! Remember the banner slide picture I told you about? Melville thought it would validate his high-security and courthouse rules by showing what “freaks” were out there with the media. He showed pictures of the most condescending kind on the screens in the conference room which everyone laughed at. A Jesus look- alike pouring wine in coke cans. A clown with an MJ puppet, religious groups with hateful banners, a woman selling veggie burgers and I’ll pass some! As this was going on I was cringing and wondering what kind of a well-recognized and honored judge would steep so low as to not include the other side of the picture by showing well-behaved supporters/fans from all over the world, gathered together in harmony and dignity and pain.
Next up came Larry Feldman. Attorney for the prosecution in the 1993 case and the attorney the Arvizos who contacted him before any authority department because they already knew Feldman settled with the Chandlers in 1993. This is probably the most disgusting display of ego and arrogance in the entire evening. He first talked about himself for a few minutes and was very clear to everyone that the Arvizos came to HIM in 2003 before going to anyone else, which would include the police, the Children’s Services or the D.A. Why he would even gloat about that is quite ironic but I got it right away, he felt important about HIM being the first one contacted considering his involvement in a 20 million civil law-suit in 1993. What he may have forgotten is that such a claim based on ego just discredits the reason why they would go to him in the first place: Money not Justice! But egos don’t get that. Feldman was saying that the 1993 case was settled because of the pro-Michael Jackson opinion in the media at the time, and that the media was talking too much about the case publicly and that thereby the defense had too much advantage and ammunition though public opinion and MJ celebrity friends. Next was Feldman exposing poor Jordan Chandler as a shy and exposed teen-ager. Those “reasons” put together is what led them to settle in a civil case, according to him. However, Feldman then blamed the D.A. for not going through with a criminal suit because the civil case has been too tiring and exposing at the beginning. Point and blame because you couldn’t get any criminal evidence, Feldman. Good one. Several times during the evening Feldman displayed himself as even more self-centered than at the beginning , taking the microphone to not answer the actual questions but rather to talk about himself and rambling on and on to the point where people were starting to look at each other and smiling. That especially happened at the end once Tom Mesereau was the final speaker and shut them all up one after one. Egos were hurt, Feldman just sat back picking his teeth and just had to try to comment on something he even lost track of himself after 20 minutes. That’s EGO for you.
Next up was Carl Douglas, defense attorney during the 1993 case. Very confusing character! A little off the wall during breaks. He kept going back and forth between camps during panel discussions too. A self proclaimed friend of Larry Feldman even though they fought against each-other but had Johnny Cochran as a mutual friend. Douglas agreed with Feldman about the Tabloid Journalism of the time when the 1993 case erupted. There was no Internet (or very limited), no blogs no real-time media and the magnitude of the Michael Jackson case at the time. However, he was quick to denounce Feldman for trying to get a RIDICULOUS settlement out of Michael Jackson in the civil case suit and remembers Feldman say behind closed doors “Let’s not figure out the worth of the case but Michael Jackson’s worth”!
Next up was Ronald Zonen, the prosecution attorney and Chief Deputy District attorney during the 2005 trial. This is where it gets ugly and after talking to Thomas Mesereau after the conference it made sense why Mesereau was angry and laid it out the way it was when his turn came up. Zonen spent the first 5 minutes out of his approximate 10 minutes talking about Gavin and what a poor victim he was and what wonderful 20 year-old man he was today. He began describing Gavin as a child soldier fighting a stage 4 cancer at the age of 10 and that the real problem in the 2005 trial was his mother. Zonen went on to say that Gavin’s mother, Janet, was totally unbalanced, unpredictable and a lose canon and the biggest problem for the prosecution and that the defense used that to their advantage. Zonen then claimed that the only reason Michael Jackson invited the Arvizo to Neverland during the Martin Bashir documentary was to take credit for Gavin’s cancer remission. According to Zonen, Michael’s “handlers” then re-invited the Arvizo family back to Neverland after the disaster effect of the documentary so that they could be “controlled” and sent to Brazil with one-way tickets and basically “disappear”. After portraying Michael as a stereotype child molester and Mafioso with “handlers” trying to get rid of a whole family, he went on to talk about how Gavin Arvizo lives his life today and what an amazing 20 year-old man he is. He gave a lot of personal information about Gavin and where he is and what he is doing. I choose NOT to disclose that information for safety reasons but what I can tell you is that this liar and immoral person now claims to be religious, which is ironic and a travesty considering he very well knows what he has done to an innocent man and the hell it put him though. But like Jordan Chandler, Gavin has walked away and chosen to change his identity and never be heard of again. How easy and cowardly when Michael couldn’t escape the lies and hurt they caused him, the most famous person on Earth. But Michael came back after all this humiliation and aggravation and pain and raised 3 beautiful children proud and strong until other vultures and liars finally took him out.
Fortunately the last speaker to take the podium was Tom Mesereau, all though there were some Q&As from the audience at the end which really could have and should have been ignored because it gave way to some speakers to not directly answer the actual given question but rather respond to Tom Mesereau’s amazing speech and conclusion which they couldn’t take.
Tom Mesereau came to the podium obviously upset. He had set there for 2 hours not having the opportunity to say a word and hear the prosecution attorneys in the 1993 and 2005 case and the judge for the 2005 case speak. Several times during the evening Larry Feldman kept hard to whisper to him and he would not even turn his head towards him. He waited his turn patiently. Now here is the interesting part. When I spoke to him AFTER the conference/event, Tom Mesereau said “I can’t believe what Zonen did. He wasn’t objective and that’s why I responded the way I did. Tom Mesereau began his speech by saying he was contacted by Randy Jackson who was very clear to explain to him how the media had always been out to get his brother who was a “big business” to the media and to anyone trying to make money off of him. Talking about the 2005 trial Meserau said he had never seen so many witnesses crumble so fast under examination and that the amount of fake witnesses was a circus. He went on to say that despite all that was said Michael was the nicest client he ever had and who never got in the way. That Michael was not ever capable of master-minding an Arvizo family “disappearance” to Brazil or ever hurt a child. That the Bashir documentary was exactly what the Rebuttal show was about, exposing a journalist who came in to tell his side of the story and purposely ignore the rest which was filmed by Michael’s camp and then aired on TV and which was allowed to be shown in court. Mesereau went on to say that the problem in Michael’s life was the people around him and who were getting in the way. People and employees who gave Michael Jackson wrong information and kept him scared and suspicious so that they could stay in his life and make a job out of it. What he exactly meant I don’t know but if you look at what happened to Michael during the last 8 months of his life and which I witnsesses, it sure makes sense! Tom Mesereau added that when Bashir sat under oath to answer questions, Bashir chose to not answer under his journalism confidentiality rights , despite the rebuttal that had been shown and so Mesereau chose to play along with it by asking every new question by saying “ Is it true that….” And displaying the obvious facts, with Bashir always declined to answer but were essential information to the jury. Mesereau ended up by saying that his cross-examinations were very lengthy in order to subject the accusers to so many facts that they could no longer stand their own lies.
This was the end of the individual panel talk but there were two more segments which revolved around Jury Selection and Q&As. I’ll make the rest brief.
First the question of Jury Selection. When the moderator asked about who wanted to answer the question Zonen was fast to raise his hand. He began by saying it was the fastest selection ever made that he knew of, a day and a half. He went on to say it was a bad choice because Judge Melville was quick to dismiss and relieve any potential juror who would suffer financially from a lengthy trial. According to Zonen all that was left were either unemployed or retired jurors. That statement alone made it clear he was very judgmental about the jurors’ social and academic statuses. When To Mesereau was asked to answer the same question he made it clear. No matter what the Jury selection was, all 13 jurors came back with the same innocent verdict on all counts. He was also quick to rectify Zonen’s claim about the social and academic statuses of some of the jurors. One was an engineer, one a math teacher, one a retired school principal and so on. Furthermore, none resembled Michael Jackson’s peers, nor any African American or celebrity. Tom Mesereau once again shut the rest of the panel swiftly.
Next and last was the Q&A segment. The audience got to submit questions to the moderator, which would be the last segment of the evening. I know for a fact very sensitive questions were submitted asking the panel if they ever regarded Michael Jackson as a person rather than a defendant and money machine. None of those questions were chosen by the moderator… However 2 questions were chosen. The first one was what did they all think of the Pajamas incident which erupted in laughter from the audience. I cringed and felt like screaming. Why? Because I knew the background of the story. I was inside the Santa Maria court room that day in 2005. I saw Melville give Mesereau 60 minutes for Michael to show up or all bail would be cancelled and Michael would go directly to jail of he didn’t arrive in that time span. We were all sent out to wait for Michael to show up until his fleet drove up. Once seated we were all terrified that Melville would have Michael hand-cuffed because the 60 minute limit was already up. Instead, 2 minutes before he walked in we could hear commotion and cheering outside. We knew he had arrived. Michael walked in, in pajama bottoms, a white v-neck t-shirt and a jacket. No makeup. As he made his way up the court room he still tried to acknowledge his fans by giving a very weak wave left and right. How he managed to do that is beyond is beyond me, but he did. Once Michael was sitting down facing Gavin he stayed composed and dignified. I saw Michael shaking his head several times while hearing Gavin’s account of the event and reaching out for tissues and wiping his face. During breaks Michael didn’t take bathroom breaks, instead I watched him hide behind a far right pillar talking to Meseareau and what too seemed to be crying, feeling obviously upset and in physical pain from the way he was walking. I honestly forget who got to address that issue first but someone on the panel claimed they didn’t notice anything different that day and thought that Michael’s outfit that day was one of his “more usual costumes” which once again resulted in the audience’s laughter. When the moderator asked who else might want to address that question, Tome Mesereau chose to answer. Mesereau gave a very clear explanation of it. He had heard Michael had been injured that morning and fell and went straight to a hospital. Mesereau called Michael once the 60 minute dead-line was given and told Michael he had to show up immediately. He told Michael not to bother going back home to get clothes and come as he was from the hospital. There was NO time to waste. This is the story of the pajama incident which the media ran with and humiliated him with. I was there, I am witness and I can verify all that Tom Mesereau claims about that incident. This is more or less where it ended. I have skipped some details and comments and conversations but kept the most of it to share with you. Since there will be no DVD of the event I chose to share with you the most of it. Samantha de Gosson
She has repeatedly said that Michael was hurt in June 2009, but then returned.Ha and also said he would decide not to return, arguing that these info he had received from a member of the Jackson family.
Souza, Mo, we can give explanations about this person? Why had the freedom to attend that meeting, although Randy was very upset with her?
Thank you!!!!
Comments
ter are lots of threads about her, she claims to be a photographer and that was one of her excuses to get closer to MJ. She is however just another stalker (one who think she is one of MJ's closest friends)...