The media are getting pretty "pissed off" with the secrecy surrounding the forthcoming Michael Jackson trial.
After all, celebrity and the media go hand in hand; without a story to publish the media and the celebrity cease to exist, as they disappear from the public consciousness.
Normally this Faustian pact works well, for both celebrity and media alike, as each feed off each other.
However, Michael Jackson and his defence team are currently "not playing the game"; and are trying to seek anonymity by sealing all documents, relating to his trial for alleged child molestation.
On Friday the media counter-attacked, Theodore Boutros (acting for the media) filed a 50 page appeal to "lift the veil" of secrecy. The rationale being that celebrity status is not enough reason to give you rights of secrecy. He must have been reading my earlier comments on this site!
The First Amendment found itself quoted liberally.
I have to admire Boutrous's pluck; he is opposed not only by Jackson's defence team, but also by Judge Rodney Melville and Tom Sneddon for the prosecution.
As I have already noted in earlier posts, Boutrous reasoned that the "gagging order" would create special rules for celebrities. He also noted that the public should be able to "serve its traditional role as a vigilant guardian of fairness in the criminal justice system".
Now I am sure that he is reading this site!
Judge Melville did release some documents on Friday. However, with echoes of Nixonian paranoia, there were many sections that had been heavily "blacked out".
I have said it before, and I will say it again, the US legal system is beginning to resemble the British one more and more.
Brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Saturday, July 24, 2004
Friday, July 23, 2004
Jackson's Lawyer to Quit
It seems that one of Michael Jackson's lawyers, involved in the myriad of legal cases that ebb and flow around Jackson like tides lapping on the beach, has threatened to quit.
The lawyer in question is Lance Spiegel, who has been acting for Jackson in the custody battle with Debbie Rowe (one of Jackson's ex wives).
Apparently, Spiegel feels that Jackson is just not as co-operative as he should be; in fighting Rowe's attempts to see Paris (the child, not the city) and Prince (Jackson's son, not the pop star or the future king of England).
It is reported that Jackson has gone into "silent running" mode, with regard to talking to Rowe; and does not return her phone calls.
The lawyer in question is Lance Spiegel, who has been acting for Jackson in the custody battle with Debbie Rowe (one of Jackson's ex wives).
Apparently, Spiegel feels that Jackson is just not as co-operative as he should be; in fighting Rowe's attempts to see Paris (the child, not the city) and Prince (Jackson's son, not the pop star or the future king of England).
It is reported that Jackson has gone into "silent running" mode, with regard to talking to Rowe; and does not return her phone calls.
Thursday, July 22, 2004
Slowing Things Down
There is something of a battle of wits going on between Theodore Boutrous, the media lawyer in the Michael Jackson trial, and the defence team.
Yesterday Boutrous opposed efforts by Michael Jackson's defence team and Judge Melville to slow down and stop a review of the secrecy rulings made by Judge Melville.
Judge Melville is of the opinion that to review his rulings now would take up too much time, and that the secrecy rulings have been put in place to give Jackson a fair trial.
Boutrous has countered this noting that it breaches the First Amendment, and that the actions themselves may well prejudice the case.
One thing is for sure, the legal teams on this case are going to do very well out this financially.
Yesterday Boutrous opposed efforts by Michael Jackson's defence team and Judge Melville to slow down and stop a review of the secrecy rulings made by Judge Melville.
Judge Melville is of the opinion that to review his rulings now would take up too much time, and that the secrecy rulings have been put in place to give Jackson a fair trial.
Boutrous has countered this noting that it breaches the First Amendment, and that the actions themselves may well prejudice the case.
One thing is for sure, the legal teams on this case are going to do very well out this financially.
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
No More Jacksons
In a follow up to the report that an "actress" is carrying four of Michael Jackson's embryos, his official website has issued a denial.
The denial has been denied by the paper that broke the story.
I guess that if the lady is carrying four wee Jackson's, it will become reasonably evident in the next few months.
The denial has been denied by the paper that broke the story.
I guess that if the lady is carrying four wee Jackson's, it will become reasonably evident in the next few months.
Tuesday, July 20, 2004
All Superstars Are Created Equal, Except Some Are More Equal Than Others
In an argument worthy of Orwell's Animal Farm; Michael Jackson's lawyers argued, on Monday, that papers relating to the forthcoming child molestation trial should remain sealed until after the trial.
It seems that they are of the belief that because Michael Jackson is a "superstar", he should be treated differently from others (I am sure Martha Stewart must be wishing the same).
When the First Amendment was written it did not, if Jackson's lawyers are to be believed, take into account the concept and burdens of "superstar" status.
Robert Sanger, one of Michael Jackson's defence team, is reported to have noted that the case in not important enough to merit special attention; the only interest in the case seemingly comes from voyeurs.
To my view many, if not all, trials attract voyeurs; were that not the case newspapers around the world would not have daily columns reporting the latest cases, ranging from sensational murders to mundane disputes between neighbours.
The public's right of unfettered access to open court is essential to maintain confidence, and trust in the justice system. Remove that access, by conducting trials in secret, and you are one step closer to dictatorship.
The question must now be, what information is in the files that the defence team are so desperate to hide?
It seems that they are of the belief that because Michael Jackson is a "superstar", he should be treated differently from others (I am sure Martha Stewart must be wishing the same).
When the First Amendment was written it did not, if Jackson's lawyers are to be believed, take into account the concept and burdens of "superstar" status.
Robert Sanger, one of Michael Jackson's defence team, is reported to have noted that the case in not important enough to merit special attention; the only interest in the case seemingly comes from voyeurs.
To my view many, if not all, trials attract voyeurs; were that not the case newspapers around the world would not have daily columns reporting the latest cases, ranging from sensational murders to mundane disputes between neighbours.
The public's right of unfettered access to open court is essential to maintain confidence, and trust in the justice system. Remove that access, by conducting trials in secret, and you are one step closer to dictatorship.
The question must now be, what information is in the files that the defence team are so desperate to hide?
Monday, July 19, 2004
Virgin Birth
It seems that Michael Jackson is happily living his life as "normal", despite the upcoming trial for alleged child molestation.
It is reported that he is to become a father again. It seems that an unknown "actress" has consented to be artificially inseminated with Jackson sperm, and carry the singer's child.
In choosing whose DNA should be mixed with his, Jackson based his decision on the fact that this "actress" wrote to him; expressing support for him in the upcoming trial.
It seems to me that given the amount of fans who have written similar letters, there could be quite a large gene pool for him to select from (assuming that this is his normal mating selection procedure).
By the way, the reports indicate that she could be carrying four embryos.
Call me old fashioned, but don't celebrities do it the "old fashioned way" anymore?
It is reported that he is to become a father again. It seems that an unknown "actress" has consented to be artificially inseminated with Jackson sperm, and carry the singer's child.
In choosing whose DNA should be mixed with his, Jackson based his decision on the fact that this "actress" wrote to him; expressing support for him in the upcoming trial.
It seems to me that given the amount of fans who have written similar letters, there could be quite a large gene pool for him to select from (assuming that this is his normal mating selection procedure).
By the way, the reports indicate that she could be carrying four embryos.
Call me old fashioned, but don't celebrities do it the "old fashioned way" anymore?
Sunday, July 18, 2004
Clash of The Titans
Those of you who feared that the trials of Robert Blake and Michael Jackson would clash, need fear no longer.
It is reported that the murder trial of actor Robert Blake has been postponed to November.
This allows the media to concentrate their resources on the start of Jackson's trial first, scheduled to commence on the 13th of September, enabling the public to "get their money's worth".
Sordid, isn't it?
It is reported that the murder trial of actor Robert Blake has been postponed to November.
This allows the media to concentrate their resources on the start of Jackson's trial first, scheduled to commence on the 13th of September, enabling the public to "get their money's worth".
Sordid, isn't it?
Saturday, July 17, 2004
Law or Showbiz?
It seems that even Tom Sneddon, who is leading the prosecution of Michael Jackson in his forthcoming child molestation trial, needs a little help with PR.
It is reported that Susan Tellem, a public relations expert, is offering her advice to Sneddon for free. She is reported to have felt that his first press conference, in November 2003, was badly handled; and that he could do with some help.
There I was, thinking that the trial was about truth and justice!
It is reported that Susan Tellem, a public relations expert, is offering her advice to Sneddon for free. She is reported to have felt that his first press conference, in November 2003, was badly handled; and that he could do with some help.
There I was, thinking that the trial was about truth and justice!
Friday, July 16, 2004
Suppression After Suppression
It is reported that Judge Rodney Melville, who is handling he pretrial hearings of the Michael Jackson child molestation case, has ordered the suppression of the details of an application by Michael Jackson's lawyers to postpone the trial.
The Judge did not give a reason, nor did he say how long a postponement has been sought.
The original date for trial has been set for 13 September; but now, who knows?
This makes the 12th suppression ordered by Melville.
The Judge did not give a reason, nor did he say how long a postponement has been sought.
The original date for trial has been set for 13 September; but now, who knows?
This makes the 12th suppression ordered by Melville.
Wednesday, July 14, 2004
What's In a Name?
In a bizarre irony, the mother of the child accusing Michael Jackson of molestation has got married; to a certain Jay Jackson.
The ceremony took place in Las Vegas on May the 29th, she is now called Janet Jackson.
Confused?
I am sure that there will be more twists and turns in this ongoing saga, to increase the sense of confusion.
The ceremony took place in Las Vegas on May the 29th, she is now called Janet Jackson.
Confused?
I am sure that there will be more twists and turns in this ongoing saga, to increase the sense of confusion.
Tuesday, July 13, 2004
The Jackson Letters
It is reported that the mother of the child, who is accusing Michael Jackson of molestation, has filed a legal action against Jackson and his colleagues.
She is alleging that letters, written by Michael Jackson to her son, have been stolen by employees of Jackson.
It seems that Bradley Miller, the investigator whose offices Tom Sneddon raided in 2003, is the central player in the "who stole the letters?" conspiracy.
Miller is alleged to have placed family possessions in storage, whilst the family hid to avoid the press, when the possessions were returned they came back minus the letters.
The question now on everyone's lips is "what is the contents of these letters?", if indeed they do exist.
She is alleging that letters, written by Michael Jackson to her son, have been stolen by employees of Jackson.
It seems that Bradley Miller, the investigator whose offices Tom Sneddon raided in 2003, is the central player in the "who stole the letters?" conspiracy.
Miller is alleged to have placed family possessions in storage, whilst the family hid to avoid the press, when the possessions were returned they came back minus the letters.
The question now on everyone's lips is "what is the contents of these letters?", if indeed they do exist.
Monday, July 12, 2004
Shut Your Mouth
It is reported that Judge Rodney Melville has given a verbal rebuke to Michael Jackson, for responding in public to child molestation allegations relating to an earlier case. This public response violates a gag order about the current child molestation case.
The issue centres on the 1993 child molestation case, where Jackson paid $23M to settle out of court.
Thomas Mesereau, Michael Jackson's lawyer, argues that the gag order is not relevant to an 11 year old case.
The issue here though, according to the judge, is whether evidence from the 1993 case will be used in the current child molestation case. Until that is decided, theoretically commenting on the 1993 case violates the gag on the current case.
Under these circumstances, the best thing that Jackson can do is keep his mouth shut; no matter how much he may wish to speak up.
The issue centres on the 1993 child molestation case, where Jackson paid $23M to settle out of court.
Thomas Mesereau, Michael Jackson's lawyer, argues that the gag order is not relevant to an 11 year old case.
The issue here though, according to the judge, is whether evidence from the 1993 case will be used in the current child molestation case. Until that is decided, theoretically commenting on the 1993 case violates the gag on the current case.
Under these circumstances, the best thing that Jackson can do is keep his mouth shut; no matter how much he may wish to speak up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)