Local News
08/04/2004
Tigger Character Cleared Of Battery, Molestation Of Girl
ORLANDO, Fla. -- A Walt Disney World worker who portrayed the beloved character Tigger was acquitted Wednesday of touching the breast of a 13-year-old girl while posing for a photo at the Magic Kingdom.
Jurors found 36-year-old Michael Chartrand not guilty of misdemeanor battery and lewd and lascivious molestation, a felony, after deliberating for less than one hour. He had faced 15 years in prison if convicted.
Chartrand hugged his attorneys when he heard the verdict.
During closing arguments Wednesday, a defense attorney donned a Tigger costume in the courtroom in an effort to show jurors how difficult it is to maneuver and see in the outfit.
Defense attorney Jeffrey Kaufman first strapped on Tigger's tail and then put on a neck cloth, the enormous orange and black-striped head and two large orange mitts to show jurors how the costume limits peripheral vision and arm movements.
"This is my friend Tigger," Kaufman said while pulling the Tigger costume out of a box. "It might spoil the magic for most people, you know?"
Jurors smirked but kept their composure. They were given the chance to try on the costume themselves in the jury room.
Kaufman, who also moonlights as Tigger and Goofy at Walt Disney World, told jurors that Chartrand never touched the girl's breast, and if he did, it was purely accidental.
"There is no evidence that Michael did this on purpose," Kaufman said.
Earlier in the day, when Kaufman asked Chartrand on the witness stand if he had ever intentionally touched the breast of a Disney guest, Chartrand said "Never!"
Prosecutor Will Jay told jurors that Chartrand was guilty of a lewd act and that acquitting him would send the wrong message.
"This is an issue about the defendant, a 36-year-old man lewdly touching a 13-year-old while at work ... portraying an innocent character like Tigger, dragging Tigger through the mud as well," Jay said.
Chartrand testified that he wrote a letter of apology to the girl who he didn't remember, but only at the urging of a detective investigating the case. The detective told him it would make the girl feel better, Chartrand said.
"I believe (the detective) was trying to get me to admit to something I would never do, fondling or groping a female," Chartrand said.
Chartrand's defense attorney has contended that the girl's mother was merely after money and planned to sue Disney. The mother also claimed Tigger had touched her breast too during the visit to Disney World last February, although no criminal charges were filed on her allegation.
Under questioning from defense attorney Jeffrey Kaufman, the mother conceded that she had met with a lawyer about the case. But when asked if she thought she could make a lot of money from Disney, she told Kaufman, "C'mon. No, I didn't." (AP)
Source: http://www1.wsvn.com/news/articles_p/local/C49698/
Eli lyhyesti suomeksi: miestä syytettiin nuoren tytön ahdistelusta. Oikeus vapautti miehen, ja selvisi, että tytön äiti yritti vain saada rahaa haastamalla miehen ja Disney-yhtiön oikeuteen.
Tämä ei nyt liity Jacksonin tapaukseen, mutta toimii hyvänä muistutuksena siitä, että monet ahdistelusyytteet ovat vain kiristysyrityksiä.
08/04/2004
Tigger Character Cleared Of Battery, Molestation Of Girl
ORLANDO, Fla. -- A Walt Disney World worker who portrayed the beloved character Tigger was acquitted Wednesday of touching the breast of a 13-year-old girl while posing for a photo at the Magic Kingdom.
Jurors found 36-year-old Michael Chartrand not guilty of misdemeanor battery and lewd and lascivious molestation, a felony, after deliberating for less than one hour. He had faced 15 years in prison if convicted.
Chartrand hugged his attorneys when he heard the verdict.
During closing arguments Wednesday, a defense attorney donned a Tigger costume in the courtroom in an effort to show jurors how difficult it is to maneuver and see in the outfit.
Defense attorney Jeffrey Kaufman first strapped on Tigger's tail and then put on a neck cloth, the enormous orange and black-striped head and two large orange mitts to show jurors how the costume limits peripheral vision and arm movements.
"This is my friend Tigger," Kaufman said while pulling the Tigger costume out of a box. "It might spoil the magic for most people, you know?"
Jurors smirked but kept their composure. They were given the chance to try on the costume themselves in the jury room.
Kaufman, who also moonlights as Tigger and Goofy at Walt Disney World, told jurors that Chartrand never touched the girl's breast, and if he did, it was purely accidental.
"There is no evidence that Michael did this on purpose," Kaufman said.
Earlier in the day, when Kaufman asked Chartrand on the witness stand if he had ever intentionally touched the breast of a Disney guest, Chartrand said "Never!"
Prosecutor Will Jay told jurors that Chartrand was guilty of a lewd act and that acquitting him would send the wrong message.
"This is an issue about the defendant, a 36-year-old man lewdly touching a 13-year-old while at work ... portraying an innocent character like Tigger, dragging Tigger through the mud as well," Jay said.
Chartrand testified that he wrote a letter of apology to the girl who he didn't remember, but only at the urging of a detective investigating the case. The detective told him it would make the girl feel better, Chartrand said.
"I believe (the detective) was trying to get me to admit to something I would never do, fondling or groping a female," Chartrand said.
Chartrand's defense attorney has contended that the girl's mother was merely after money and planned to sue Disney. The mother also claimed Tigger had touched her breast too during the visit to Disney World last February, although no criminal charges were filed on her allegation.
Under questioning from defense attorney Jeffrey Kaufman, the mother conceded that she had met with a lawyer about the case. But when asked if she thought she could make a lot of money from Disney, she told Kaufman, "C'mon. No, I didn't." (AP)
Source: http://www1.wsvn.com/news/articles_p/local/C49698/
Eli lyhyesti suomeksi: miestä syytettiin nuoren tytön ahdistelusta. Oikeus vapautti miehen, ja selvisi, että tytön äiti yritti vain saada rahaa haastamalla miehen ja Disney-yhtiön oikeuteen.
Tämä ei nyt liity Jacksonin tapaukseen, mutta toimii hyvänä muistutuksena siitä, että monet ahdistelusyytteet ovat vain kiristysyrityksiä.
Vastaukset 3
Vanhimmat
Joo, ihan oikeassa olet!
Varsinkin silloin voi epäilykset herätä, kun toisena osapuolena on joku varakas tyyppi, tai iso firma kuten Disney.
Jackollahan tuota massia on tunnetusti vähän enemmän...
Olisi hienoa jos paljastuisi että koko nykyinen case on pelkkää huijausta. Ja Jackolla olisi puhtaat paperit.
ja hippo se jaksaa sekkantua toisten kirjoitelmiin vaikka ei ole mitään todisteita...
Ja näitä tekaistuja syytöksiä on paljon maailmassa. Millaista oikeutta nämä ihmiset saavat joita on syytetty peruusteettomasti?