Michael Jackson, Prosecutors Engage in Court Showdown

Feb. 28, 2005 — -- The much-anticipated courtroom showdown between Santa Barbara County, Calif., prosecutors and Michael Jackson is under way.

The 12-member jury has been seated, the eight alternates have been picked and opening statements have begun in the child molestation trial of "The King of Pop." Jurors are ready to hear testimony in the trial of Jackson, who is accused of molesting a now-15-year-old boy who spent time at his Neverland ranch. The boy, who was 13 at the time of the alleged molestation, is believed to be the cancer survivor who appeared with the singer in the 2003 British documentary "Living With Michael Jackson."

Jackson, 46, has pleaded not guilty to 10 charges that include felony conspiracy with 28 overt acts involving child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion. If convicted of all the charges, he faces up to 18 years in prison.

Since a court-imposed gag order forbids all parties from publicly discussing the case, very little is known about the evidence both sides will present. For Jackson, the trial is a chance to gain vindication through an acquittal and perhaps put behind the cloud of suspicion that has followed him since a 12-year-old boy made similar allegations against him in 1993. For Santa Barbara County prosecutors, the trial is a chance to convict and imprison Jackson.

Jackson's defense has suggested that prosecutors -- particularly Prosecutor Thomas Sneddon, who was involved in the 1993 investigation -- have a vendetta against the singer, a claim the prosecution has denied. Jackson has always denied wrongdoing in that scandal and has denied ever harming children. He was never criminally charged as prosecutors decided not to pursue the case after they said the alleged victim refused to testify.

But Jackson settled a civil suit filed by the boy's family for a reported $20 million, sparking questions that that have dogged him to this day. Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville, who is presiding over Jackson's trial, has yet to rule on whether prosecutors can present testimony about prior alleged wrongdoing by Jackson -- including the 1993 scandal -- even though the singer has never been criminally charged for the accusations. A change in California law following the 1993 Jackson investigation enables prosecutors to present the evidence.

Prosecutors believe the evidence shows an alleged pattern of bad behavior on Jackson's part toward children that they believe was duplicated in his current criminal case.

"The popular thinking with evidence [among jurors] is that, 'Well, if he was accused those other times, then he must have done it this time,'" said Ronald Carlson, professor of law at the University of Georgia.

However, Melville has ruled that Jackson's lawyers can present evidence at his child molestation trial that the alleged victim's mother has made abuse charges in the past. Jackson's lawyers have indicated that they plan to cast doubt on the credibility of the alleged victim's case and his family by focusing on his mother and arguing that she has coaxed her son into making false allegations against the star to get a monetary settlement.

In 2001, the family won a $137,500 out-of-court settlement from J.C. Penney stemming from a civil lawsuit where the mother claimed that a guard sexually assaulted her by groping her when she, Jackson's young accuser and his brother were allegedly beaten in a parking lot in 1998 after the boy left the store with clothes he hadn't paid for. Sources told ABC News that a paralegal who worked for the attorney representing the accuser's mother has told the Jackson defense team that the mother lied under oath and fabricated the charges against J.C. Penney security guards, and that she told her she coached her son to lie during his deposition against J.C. Penney.

Another potential obstacle for the defense will be the erotic material -- DVDs, magazines, books featuring naked pictures of boys -- seized from his Neverland ranch by investigators. Prosecutors have argued that Jackson seduced the alleged victim by giving him alcohol -- wine he reportedly called "Jesus Juice" that was sometimes served in Coke cans -- and showing him pornographic material.

The defense gained a pretrial victory when Melville ruled that prosecutors could not refer to the evidence as pornography, obscene or erotic, but as "adult material." The judge also ruled prosecutors could not refer to Jackson's accuser as a victim but as a "complaining witness."

However, despite the semantics, some experts believe jurors will not look favorably on Jackson when they hear that he may have shown his alleged victim "adult material."

"It's tough to defend against," said Steve Cron, a California defense attorney. "When prosecutors introduce photos, DVDs that Jackson allegedly showed boys to put them in a compromising position, that's not going to fly very well with the conservative middle class people in Santa Maria [Calif.]. That's the Achilles heel for Jackson."

Still, the testimony and credibility of Jackson's alleged victim will be key to the prosecution's case. According to grand jury testimony reviewed by ABC News, the alleged victim gave grand jurors a vivid account of how Jackson allegedly touched him inappropriately, helped him masturbate and gave him wine, despite his having only one working kidney. He is expected to repeat the explicit testimony to jurors at Jackson's criminal trial.

ABC News has reported that the alleged victim's younger brother and sister witnessed alleged wrongdoing by Jackson, and that prosecutors want to call them to the stand. Prosecutors allege that the sister witnessed Jackson giving her brother alcoholic beverages, and that the younger brother may have witnessed additional wrongdoing.

Courtroom observers expect Jackson's defense, led by attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr., gently attempt to undermine the testimony of the young witnesses, particularly the accuser.

But Jackson's lawyers will vigorously attack the credibility of the prosecution's case when it confronts the alleged victim's mother.

"They will attack the mother and say that the bringing of these charges was for monetary purpose, that this is all about getting Michael's money," Carlson said. "The mother and some of older members of [the accuser's] family will get raked over the coals pretty good [by the defense]. As with all cases involving children, the defense has use deft questioning with younger witnesses because they don't want to give jurors the impression they're bullying a child."

The defense may also try to undermine the allegations of the alleged victim and his family by confronting them with the favorable account of Jackson they gave to investigators from Los Angeles Department of Family Services.

ABC News and other media organizations have reported that the alleged victim told investigators after the broadcast of "Living With Michael Jackson" in February 2003 that he was not sexually abused by Jackson and had not slept in his bed. The family described Jackson as a father figure in a video made by a former Jackson videographer, ABC News has reported.

The Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services determined that "The King of Pop" had committed no wrongdoing. Santa Barbara County investigators initially agreed with Los Angeles officials' findings, sources told ABC News. However, the Santa Barbara Sheriff's Department took another look at the case, and that ultimately led to the first raid on Neverland and Jackson's arrest in November 2003.

In addition, the defense could call the father of the alleged victim -- the ex-husband of the boy's mother -- to cast doubt on the prosecution's case. In pretrial motions, Jackson's defense team cited a 2001 civil lawsuit the alleged victim's family filed against J.C. Penney and Tower Records as they attempted to portray them as "professional plaintiffs" who have a history of committing fraud.

In their lawsuit, the family alleged that Jackson's accuser, his mother and brother were beaten in a parking lot in 1998 after the boy left the store with clothes he hadn't paid for. The complaint was amended when the mother later claimed a guard sexually assaulted her by groping her during the alleged beating.

The family eventually received a $150,000 total settlement from J.C. Penney and Tower Records. But Jackson's team has suggested the mother made questionable allegations against the store's employees, just like she did against her son's father in the midst of their contentious custody battle.