Latest on MJJC

Conference on the courts and the media. T-Mez is involved and MJ related/

elusive moonwalker said:
tbh i dont agree with that. because who else other than fans is gonna sit watching the testimony for 8 hrs a day? the media would be selective with what testimony they show on their news reports (which is where 99% of the gen public were gonna get info from regarding the case )as they were with the testimony they reported on. i dont really see much difference. its not as if the media were pro mj and would have shown pros witnesses being torn apart. they would have been totally selective and showed francia/arvizos etc on the stand during prosecution questioning and left it at that as they did with their written reports. at the end of the day the media would have been the ones who decided what clips for the days testimony were shown in news reports etc so its no different to selective written or reporters outside the courthouse chosing what to report in the nightly news clips
Click to expand...


Not exactly, the OJ Simpson case was shown in it's entirety on major networks (not just Court TV, CNN, etc.) and there were lots of people that were stay at home moms, or those just out of work would sit there and watch it. I wasn't a fan of OJ's, but I was curious and since I wasn't working, I watched alot of the testimony.
 
I guess it's impossible to say what might've changed or not with public perception had the trial been broadcast live. I do believe that many, many more people (aside from fans) would've tuned in to watch the testimony whenever they had a free moment; it was the most publicized trial ever starring the most famous person ever, and everybody had an opinion. Some networks like Court TV would, I'm sure, cut testimony out for commercial break or commentary during critical moments like they have done when airing other trials--I guess that'd be on par with the way Diane Dimond would duck out of court right as Mesereau began cross-examination. However, I'm sure that real news networks would air as much of the footage as possible without interruptions, like they did with the Saddam trial and such. Personally speaking, I would've welcomed a televised trial for many different reasons.

I agree with that cause that is exactly what they did even in the reinactment. I stopped watching that once I found out what they were doing. Linda sounded very angry with ToMez. She didn't even go after Sneddon who asked for the gag order in the first place.
Click to expand...
I actually felt that the E! reenactments and subsequent commentary was the most fair and balanced coverage of all the networks. Granted, the anchors did spend more time talking about the case than showing actual testimony reenactments, but the coverage was extremely fair and they saw the case as a scam early on.
 
I agree with you on that TSCM. People underestimate the interest the general public has in Michael, I think. People would have tuned in. Whether networks would have shown more footage then soundbites or not, I don't know, but I'm sure some of them would have at least. I mean, a lot of networks cut to the court house almost every day just to see Michael arrive, so I'm sure if cameras had been allowed, you would have had long hours of coverage and a lot of people would have watched.
 
Last edited:
I think we are arguing about 2 seapate issues here. The televised trial is a very different case from the gag order which Linda Deusch was arguing for. I don't think the lawyers were arguing against a televised trial. What fuelled Linda's anger was the gag order where everything was shut down and they were unable to see things way before the trial started. It was Sneddon who implemented the gag order after Geragos went on tv and claimed that he was there and nothing happened. When T-mez came in he supported the gag order to many fans surprise. Unfortunately we saw that what little were leaked to the media by the prosecution were embellished and twisted against MJ beofre the trial began with the intention of poisoning the jury pool.
 
I think Linda makes a good argument, but I'm not sure lifting the gag order would have made a difference. It would have made a difference with Linda, but she's just one fair journalist - the majority of the others would still have spun the info if there was no gag order imo.

The cameras are a different issue though: I can't help but wonder. I think that if the trial was broadcast in it its entirety, more people would have seen the truth. I'm not sure it could have done extra harm? But thinking about the possible positive effect it could have had just makes me depressed!
 
MJTLS said:
Not exactly, the OJ Simpson case was shown in it's entirety on major networks (not just Court TV, CNN, etc.) and there were lots of people that were stay at home moms, or those just out of work would sit there and watch it. I wasn't a fan of OJ's, but I was curious and since I wasn't working, I watched alot of the testimony.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Court TV would have shown the trial in is entirety just like they always do. And we would have seen the mother in all her crazy glory!

But Linda D is correct. Without the gag order, the cameras would have rolled in the courtroom. And that is what she is talking about. The media's access was cut short due to the gag order.

And Dats, I clicked in the box like you said, and it is still not working for me. Can you just give us the links, please?
 
Last edited:
AllTheLovelyFlowers said:
Exactly. Court TV would have shown the trial in is entirety just like they always do. And we would have seen the mother in all her crazy glory!

But Linda D is correct. Without the gag order, the cameras would have rolled in the courtroom. And that is what she is talking about. The media's access was cut short due to the gag order.

And Dats, I clicked in the box like you said, and it is still not working for me. Can you just give us the links, please?
Click to expand...

There are 2 different issues involved here, one doesn't necessarily hinder the other. The gag order has nothing to do with televising the programme. The gag was orignally requested by Sneddon after Geragos appeared on tv and claimed that MJ wasn't even at the ranch. The camera was a decision made by the judge, They are 2 different iussues and shouldn't be comfused. I don't agree with Linda because she didn't speak against the unfair reporting of the rest of the media.
I cant post the url cause when I do the square comes up instead. Try clicking on the square, not the play button. It just worked for me.
 
TMez is speaking the truth about how former Court TV reported on the MJ case.
I used to watch Court TV until I saw how they allowed those sleezy journalists to hijack the station and report propoganda instead of facts. I am elated that the jurors ruled on
the evidence that was presented to them and not what the biased media was reporting.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnozJ1UeS80

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnozJ1UeS80&eurl=http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49834#
 
Last edited:
Datsymay said:
There are 2 different issues involved here, one doesn't necessarily hinder the other. The gag order has nothing to do with televising the programme. The gag was orignally requested by Sneddon after Geragos appeared on tv and claimed that MJ wasn't even at the ranch. The camera was a decision made by the judge, They are 2 different iussues and shouldn't be comfused. I don't agree with Linda because she didn't speak against the unfair reporting of the rest of the media.
I cant post the url cause when I do the square comes up instead. Try clicking on the square, not the play button. It just worked for me.
Click to expand...

True, the gag order was first requested by Sneddon, challenged by Geragos and when agreed upon by TMez when he took over. Melville didn't want those cameras in there because he didn't want Court TV showing the public how weak this case really was. Can you imagine the public seeing Janet's crazy testimony and Gavin's unbelievable testimony? Melville was protecting the prosecution there. But I believe that Mez didn't want the camers in there because Michael probably felt that too much of his privacy was already on the line...his ex-wife and finances had been approved. Remember, Mez fought to limit her testimony until he realized that she was actually helping the defense.

And I still can't get into your videos.
 
And I still can't get into your videos.[/QUOTE]

Embedding has been disabled on these videos but if you go to youtube and type

"RNCCM DVD" in the serach field , you can pull up all the videos
 
I went to YouTube and typed in RNCCM dvd and found all of the videos.

Boy, Linda D was really attacking TMez. Looks like he just let it go. She was really whinning.
 
AllTheLovelyFlowers said:
I went to YouTube and typed in RNCCM dvd and found all of the videos.

Boy, Linda D was really attacking TMez. Looks like he just let it go. She was really whinning.
Click to expand...

Yes, I really didn't like her for that. She gave him no credit at all for what her was saying, and she didn't put any blame at all on the media. Then when she threw in that Michael called her, I felt that T-Mez winced. I got the feeling that MJ hasn't called him or didn't call him from Bharain. That could be battered ego there. Yes, Linda attacked T-Mez.
 
That was an interesting discussion. Thanks for posting.

Being a judge IRL, I have to say that I find it hard to understand the public's interest in court cases whether a celebrity is involved or not. Truthfully, I only take interest in the cases I'm directly involved in. As Mez says, a case should be deteremined in the courtroom and not in the media. Many cases are the result of some kind of personal tragedy. I don't feel it's my business to gloat, which is what the media seems to be doing most of the time.
 
I agree with you Judge. That is why I couldn't understand Linda's outrage when all T-Mez was doing was protecting his client.
 
Datsymay said:
Yes, I really didn't like her for that. She gave him no credit at all for what her was saying, and she didn't put any blame at all on the media. Then when she threw in that Michael called her, I felt that T-Mez winced. I got the feeling that MJ hasn't called him or didn't call him from Bharain. That could be battered ego there. Yes, Linda attacked T-Mez.
Click to expand...

Mesereau actually said in various interviews after the trial that he and Susan Yu kept in regular touch with Michael while he was in Bahrain, at least through 2005 or mid-2006.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad to hear it. I lope Mj continue to be friends with him cause he has done a wonderful job in fighting for Mj even after the trial. I have never seen a lawyer fight so hard for his client.
 
T-mez handled Michael's case perfectly.. gag order / no cameras and all...

Linda is just mad becuz she had to work harder to get her info... due to the gag order...

If cameras were in the courtroom..the whole JaLusional family would have had their 15mins of fame... every media outlet throughout the world would have been inviting them to shows and paying for their interviews.... because it would have made their faces known and given them some celeb status all off Michael's back.. and I know I would not have wanted that at all

its not just black & white.. in thinking cameras in the courtroom would mean people would see the truth.......no.. I believe cameras would have opened up a whole can of worms and it would have been more difficult for T-mez to control Mj's case..

Bravo, T-mez.... you won the case in the courtroom..

now let Michael's music and artistry win back the public...
 
Last edited:
I agree with you Rasta. The media saw the Bashire interview and they still twisted it. They are just bitter because they weren't in control.
 
Rasta Pasta said:
T-mez handled Michael's case perfectly.. gag order / no cameras and all...

Linda is just mad becuz she had to work harder to get her info... due to the gag order...

If cameras were in the courtroom..the whole JaLusional family would have had their 15mins of fame... veery media outlet throughout the world would have been inviting them to shows and paying for their interviews.... because it would have made their faces known and given them some celeb status all off Michael's back.. and I know I would not have wanted that at all

its not just black & white.. in thinking cameras in the courtroom would mean people would see the truth.......no.. I believe cameras would have opened up a whole can of worms and it would have been more difficult for T-mez to control Mj's case..

Bravo, T-mez.... you won the case in the courtroom..

now let Michael's music and artistry win back the public...
Click to expand...


i agree. this was the one time where the media didn't win. they won with oj and martha, but not mj. simple as that. and they are bitter about it and they are trying not to show it, as subtlety is their weapon they like to use. that's just one of many reasons why they put mj's name last in this series. lol..they see him as the biggest star, among other things. and tmez distinguished between good and bad media, so i don't know what she's griping about.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that. I will go and have a look now, have been off the net for a couple of days.
 
Watched the videos. I agree Rasta, it's a catch 22 really. T-Mez has all the information on the case as Michael's lawyer. There is private information that Michael won't want released either. I can understand what Linda says in relation to the witnesses as well. I agree with her on that, people would have seen the absurdity of it all. But then were the media going to show every second, the full 8 hours of testimony each day. No, they were not, it would be edited to suit them. And edited testimony and clips from the day would prove no purpose. You have to see it all in it's entirety to get a complete picture.
Sneddon wanted the gag order because he knew he had a bunch of shysters on the stand and it suited him, and that is what Linda was pointing out. But at the end of the day it would be a positive and a negative to have cameras in the court room. I also think it depends on the subject matter. This was child abuse allegations. Tom Mesereau did what was best for Michael and that was all that mattered despite the fact he would have liked the public to see who Sneddon had on the stands as accusers and witnesses. As my Mother said to me in recent times she said she wished that the public at large could have seen his innocence, his vindication more loudly. The likes of Dimond and others still popping up in documentaries pushing their lies. But again is the media scum. That is where Mesereau is right. Even after vindication the media downplayed it and tried to keep doubt in the minds of the public because they did not get what they wanted.
 
I agree with you on everything you said, but don't you think that the case cause ripples in both the media and the judiciary, that they felt the need to have this assembly? Obviously they saw what they had done and knew something was wrong, don't you think?
 
Definitely. That's one positive thing to come out of it. And Mesereau and Geragos and Linda have trumpeted that point. Good discussion with intelligent minds is a great thing. But the likes of Dimond and lower end of the market are still never going to give a damn. And as it was pointed out it the judiciary system and entertainment system have different agendas. Money and ratings. It will never change but at least maybe there will be some who will say hey wait a minute and speak a bit louder about it.
 
Last edited:
Very true. I was pleased that they showed their contempt for those people though, and that intelligent minds understood what was going on. They must have seen a lot of injustice meted iut in the Jackson case and are hoping that they could put a stop to it. The Jackson case was an embarassement to the Us Justice system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top