BREAKING NEWS : Jackson Judge Based Bail Ruling on False Info?
News tonight from recently released court papers indicate that the judge in the Michael Jackson case may have based his argument to keep Jackson's unconstitutional $3M bail on false information. Sources who have seen the recently released documents say that the defense has cited huge holes in Judge Rodney Melville's argument to keep Jackson's bail at an incredibly high level. Apparently, the judge argued that Jackson was going to send the accuser's family to Brazil where he would later join them. However, sources say, nothing in the grand jury transcripts says anything about Jackson going to Brazil with them or flying to Brazil at all. The source says, of the documents:
"The interesting one is motion urging reconsideration of the order denying bail. Apparently Melville's ruling is not based on facts from the grand jury transcripts. Melville earlier based his ruling on 'that michael would join family in brazil'. However according to this motion nothing in the grand jury supports that statement. The defense also attacks the use of 93 case and state, despite two grand juries being convened, neither chose to indict. Apparently Melville also assumed allegations contained in the indictment to be true when denying bail reduction and the defence argues that this is (improper). The defense wants a hearing on this issue. Melville is going to have a hard time justifying his decision. "
News tonight from recently released court papers indicate that the judge in the Michael Jackson case may have based his argument to keep Jackson's unconstitutional $3M bail on false information. Sources who have seen the recently released documents say that the defense has cited huge holes in Judge Rodney Melville's argument to keep Jackson's bail at an incredibly high level. Apparently, the judge argued that Jackson was going to send the accuser's family to Brazil where he would later join them. However, sources say, nothing in the grand jury transcripts says anything about Jackson going to Brazil with them or flying to Brazil at all. The source says, of the documents:
"The interesting one is motion urging reconsideration of the order denying bail. Apparently Melville's ruling is not based on facts from the grand jury transcripts. Melville earlier based his ruling on 'that michael would join family in brazil'. However according to this motion nothing in the grand jury supports that statement. The defense also attacks the use of 93 case and state, despite two grand juries being convened, neither chose to indict. Apparently Melville also assumed allegations contained in the indictment to be true when denying bail reduction and the defence argues that this is (improper). The defense wants a hearing on this issue. Melville is going to have a hard time justifying his decision. "
Vastaukset 1
Vanhimmat
Jackson kohtaa syyttäjänsä äidin oikeudessa
16.09.2004 15:11
Michael Jackson kohtaa perjantaina ensimmäistä kertaa pidätyksensä jälkeen häntä hyväksikäytöstä syyttävän pojan äidin.
Jacksonin asianajajat ovat haastaneet pojan äidin todistamaan oikeuteen, sillä he yrittävät hylätä Neverlandista sekä Jacksonin entiselle asianajajalle työskennelleen yksityisetsivän toimistosta takavarikoituja todisteita. Jutun käsittely alkaa torstaina.
Puolustusasianajajat haluavat naisen vahvistavan, että hän tiesi yksitysetsivä Brad Millerin työskennelleen Jacksonin entisen asianajajan Mark Geragosin alaisena.
Santa Barbaran ylioikeuden tuomari Rodney Melville on alustavasti hyväksynyt jutun todisteiksi kolmisenkymmentä Neverlandista ja Milleriltä vietyä esinettä. Hän on kuitenkin lykännyt lopullista päätöstään todistusaineistosta tuleviin oikeuskäsittelyihin.
Vaikka Jackson ei yleensä ole oikeudessa läsnä kuin pakollisissa kuulusteluissa, hän on suunnitellut menevänsä kuuntelemaan pojan äidin todistajanlausunnon.
Lähde: MTV3