Jackson defence challenges photos of accuser's mother
The mother of Michael Jackson’s accuser has denied under questioning from the singer’s attorney that bruises she claimed to have received in an altercation with shopping centre security guards were actually inflicted by her former husband.
Thomas Mesereau asked Janet Arvizo about the injuries yesterday, a day after jurors were shown pictures of her bruised arms and thighs. The store incident is unrelated to the child-molestation case against Jackson, but the singer’s lawyers have seized on it to argue the family has a history of making false claims for money.
Janet Arvizo’s family received a settlement of more than $150,000 (€115,330) over the 1998 episode.
She told Mesereau the pictures were taken immediately after the altercation in a shopping centre car park because her then-husband had wanted to document her injuries.
“But didn’t you testify that you didn’t have these bruises immediately?” asked Mesereau.
Fumbling for words, she said she had been doing everything at the instruction of a defence attorney after she was arrested on suspicion of assault and battery, burglary and petty theft – charges that were eventually dropped.
Mesereau asked whether she told a woman at a law office that the bruises photographed were actually from a beating by her former husband.
“That’s incorrect,” Arvizo said.
Mesereau noted a photograph taken of her on the day of the incident showed no bruises on her face.
“I was wearing makeup,” she said.
Arvizo has previously testified her then-husband did not allow her to wear makeup. Other pictures used in the lawsuit showed her face scraped and bruised.
The testimony came during the her fifth and final day on the stand – a day in which District Attorney Tom Sneddon said he planned to complete the prosecution’s case by the end of next week.
The announcement came in the eighth week since opening statements. Today, jurors were expected to hear only a half-day of testimony because of an abbreviated court schedule.
Arvizo said although she claimed to have been beaten and sexually touched during the altercation with the store guards, she did not decide to sue until a year later. Mesereau suggested that was the pattern she was following in the Jackson case.
“During the time of the alleged events ... you said you weren’t going to sue anyone, and then you changed your mind,” Mesereau said.
Arvizo said at first she only wanted an apology from the store, but later decided to seek damages. She has testified she has no plans to sue Jackson over the molestation allegations once the criminal trial is over.
Asked about the case as he left court, Jackson simply said: “I think it’s going well, thank you.”
Jackson, 46, is accused of molesting one of the woman’s sons – teenage cancer patient Gavin Arvizo, then 13 – in 2003, giving the boy alcohol and conspiring to hold the boy’s family captive to get them to rebut a damaging TV documentary about Jackson.
Mesereau also asked the mother about her family’s encounters with other celebrities. She said she was never informed that fund-raisers were held for her son at a Hollywood comedy club. And she said she had no idea why money was being put in a bank account she opened for her son’s benefit.
“You had no idea why anyone put money in it. You just withdrew it?” asked Mesereau.
“I did what (my husband) told me,” Arvizo said.
She also maintained she never asked comedian George Lopez for money, nor did she approach Jay Leno.
At one point during the day the judge held a hearing with attorneys in chambers. News organisations filed a request fr a transcript of the meeting and asked that future hearings be held in public.
| Related Stories: |
|
