Michael Jackson Trial Reaches Critical Point

April 4, 2005 — -- The child molestation trial of Michael Jackson arguably will reach its most crucial stage today as witnesses are scheduled to start testifying about prior similar allegations against "The King of Pop."

Santa Barbara County, Calif., prosecutors are expected to begin presenting witnesses who will testify about allegations that Jackson molested or behaved inappropriately with five other boys, including former child star Macaulay Culkin and two youngsters who reached multimillion-dollar settlements with the singer in the 1990s. Last week, Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville ruled the testimony was admissible in Jackson's trial.

"Sleeping in bed with children, underwear on the side of the bed, inappropriate touching in and outside the clothing -- that's what this jury is going to hear," said ABC News legal analyst Kimberly Guilfoyle, a former prosecutor. "This is powerful evidence that's going to be persuasive in front of a jury."

Jackson, 46, is on trial for allegedly molesting a now-15-year-old boy who spent time at his Neverland ranch and appeared with him in the 2003 British documentary "Living With Michael Jackson." The singer has pleaded not guilty to 10 charges that include felony conspiracy with 28 overt acts involving child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion.

Jackson has never been criminally charged for the other allegations and has denied any wrongdoing. A change in California law in 1996 regarding sex crime cases has allowed prosecutors to present testimony on alleged bad acts or propensity evidence in Jackson's trial. Melville's decision means Jackson's attorneys must now defend him against allegations that he behaved inappropriately with five other boys, in addition to the alleged victim in his trial. One of the witnesses expected to testify against Jackson is the son of a former Neverland maid who made accusations against the entertainer in 1990 and ultimately reached a reported $2.4 million settlement with him in 1994.

Some believe the testimony about the previous similar allegations against Jackson could decide whether he is ultimately convicted or acquitted.

"The judge's allowance of this testimony is clearly the most critical evidentiary decision in this case," said Ronald Carlson, professor at the University of Georgia School of Law. "There's no question about it that in cases like these, rulings like this are very often a case-breaker."

Jackson: An Alleged 'Pot of Gold'

However, some of the potential witnesses could be problematic for the prosecution.

Some of the witnesses the prosecution wants to present are former Neverland employees who unsuccessfully sued Jackson and were ordered to pay him more than $1 million for costs and legal fees. Some sold their stories to supermarket newspaper tabloids, while others have changed their accounts of the alleged incidents when questioned by authorities.

Lead Jackson defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr., experts say, can be expected to attack the credibility of these witnesses, arguing that Jackson has always denied wrongdoing, was never charged in connection with the prior allegations and that some of the witnesses have a grudge against his client. Money motives, Mesereau is expected to argue, have fueled the prior allegations. Melville has forbidden prosecutors from mentioning the specific monetary amount of the settlements in 1990s, but the defense can.

"What I can see Mesereau arguing is that [some of] these people didn't report Michael Jackson to police and that -- like he has argued in the current case against Jackson -- this was a shakedown of Michael Jackson," said California-based attorney Steve Cron. "Some of these people have benefited financially from these allegations and have been essentially rewarded for these allegations. He will argue that some people saw making these accusations as an easy way of getting money out of Michael Jackson. They saw him as their pot of gold."

The Potential 'Third Party' Problem

In addition, one potential problem for prosecutors is the absence of direct incriminating testimony from all but one of the boys Jackson allegedly molested or had designs for.

Three of the boys mentioned in the allegations -- including Culkin -- have publicly insisted that their friendships with Jackson involved nothing sexual or improper. Only one Jackson accuser -- the son of the former Neverland maid who made allegations in 1990 -- is expected to testify for the prosecution, along with his mother.

The boy at the center of the 1993 scandal who reached a reported $20 million settlement with Jackson in 1994 has told prosecutors he does not want to testify. (Santa Barbara prosecutors decided not to pursue the 1993 case after they said the alleged victim refused to testify.) However, his mother is on the prosecution's witness list.

Melville said he would allow only witnesses who could testify to alleged actual physical, sexual misconduct. But Mesereau could further attack the credibility of the witnesses if they contradict each other's testimony.

"The problem with the witnesses is that they're giving third-party accounts," Cron said. "When you have people testify about something that [allegedly] happened a long time ago, there are bound to be a lot of contradictions. People remember things differently. I expect Mesereau to exploit those contradictions extensively. Whether or not these contradictions reflect whether the person is telling the truth or can or cannot be trusted -- jurors will have to make that conclusion."

However, Jackson's defense could also attack the prosecution if the witnesses' testimony appears too similar, suggesting they may have tailored their stories from news reports on the 1993 case. When the alleged victim in Jackson's criminal trial took the stand, Mesereau accused him and his family of making up the allegations after they met with attorney Larry Feldman, who represented the 1993 accuser. The boy denied telling Feldman about his claims against Jackson.

"In cases like this, as a prosecutor, you're often damned if you do, damned if you don't," Cron said.

Still, despite the potential pitfalls, the testimony about the previous allegations against Jackson could work to the prosecution's advantage.

Though prosecutors are allowed to present testimony about allegations involving five other boys, they don't have to present all that evidence to jurors. They can present allegations about just two other boys if they feel that will be enough to win a conviction.

"Often in cases like these you don't need five separate examples of prior similar bad acts to persuade a jury. One is often enough," said Carlson. "If I were the prosecutor, I might want to pare down my evidence to witnesses who might be prone to the kind of tough impeachment of that some of the former Neverland employees might encounter. If jurors hear testimony about one or two other alleged incidents that all have something in common, it will be very difficult for them to escape the feeling that if he did it once before, he did it again."

Will Culkin Squash Pattern Behavior Allegations?

Prosecutors believe Jackson's alleged actions with his accuser in his molestation trial illustrate a pattern of bad behavior he showed with other boys.

District Attorney Tom Sneddon has argued that Jackson's inappropriate activities with the other boys included kissing, hugging and inserting his hands into their pants. He also said there was a pattern of "grooming" before the alleged molestation as Jackson encouraged his young friends to call him "Daddy Michael." Witnesses, Sneddon has said, will testify that on separate occasions they saw Jackson's underwear -- as well as those of four other boys -- lying next to the bed he would allegedly share with them at his Neverland ranch.

The prosecution has suggested that Jackson won the trust of his young accuser, a cancer survivor who was 13 at the time of the alleged molestation, by showering him with lavish gifts and accommodations. The singer then, prosecutors allege, took advantage of the boy after showing him adult magazines and Web sites and serving him wine, which he referred to as "Jesus juice," in soda cans.

Jackson's defense would receive a boost if one or more of the other boys he is accused of molesting or behaving inappropriately with would testify on his behalf and deny the prosecution's claims. Culkin's representatives said after Melville's ruling that he "is presently not involved with the proceedings, and we do not expect that to change." But sources have told ABC News that Jackson's defense plans to call the actor to the witness stand.

"It'll be interesting if he [Culkin] gets up there and says, 'Nothing happened,' " said Cron. "It'll be weird to see him say nothing happened while others say something did happen."