Judge Rodney Melville has barred evidence from a domestic abuse expert, in the Michael Jackson trial, as to why there are contradictions in the testimony of Gavin Arvizo's mother.
The fact that she's nuts, and lying, may be two possible reasons.
The prosecution wished to call a specialist in the effects of spousal abuse, to explain to jurors why Janet Jackson (nee Arvizo) never called the police during the time that she claims she was held captive by Jackson and his cronies.
They told Judge Melville that the expert would talk about battered women's syndrome, that would also help explain why Janet Jackson lied under oath about details of her relationship with her ex-husband who she claims beat her.
The prosecution state that Janet's behaviour was "counter-intuitive".
I would be more sympathetic to this line of reasoning, if Janet had not proven herself perfectly capable of extracting $150K from JC Penney for alleged abuse by their security staff.
It seems to me that if she was capable of that, then she was quite capable of taking care of herself when allegedly "under house arrest" at Neverland; ie she would have called the police.
However, I am not a psychiatrist.
Judge Melville ruled:
"I think this type of evidence is valuable in domestic abuse case, but I'm not going to allow it in this case...It may or may not explain her".