| |
Revealed: Michael Jackson's Upcoming "Tattle Tale" Defense
Attorneys for singer and alleged boy tickler Michael Jackson are planning on employing a "fervent tattle defense" in his upcoming child molestation trial, set to begin later this month.
According to Fox News correspondent and Jackson playpal Geraldo Rivera, the strategy will not focus on Jackson's guilt or innocence. "Instead, they will contend that regardless of whether you believe his accuser, you must acquit Michael because the boy is a tattle tale," Rivera explained. "And how can you send a man to prison on the word of a tattle tale - unless you're a racist?"
The strategy confirms rumors that first emerged from the Jackson camp last month - that he and the boy had a "pinky swear" that nothing that went on in the singer's Neverland Ranch would ever be repeated to "poopy grown ups."
According to Rivera, the issue facing jurors will be whether the law enforcement authorities and the accuser's parents are in fact poopy grown ups. Rivera says that Jackson's lead attorney is ready to make his case. "Thomas Mesereau can show this jury that these individuals were both grown-ups and poopy - unless the jury is racist, that is," Rivera added.
The shocking insights into the pop superstar's defense come in spite of a gag order placed on participants in the case by Judge Rodney Melville.
Rivera, who joined Jackson on his recent vacation at Boys Town, claims the self-proclaimed King of Pop hasn't violated the gag order.
"Michael understands the judge's order, and he appreciates the seriousness of it, but the simple fact of the matter is that he had his fingers crossed when the judge issued it."
Legal analysts are divided as to whether crossed fingers really render one immune from such a ruling.
"It's an interesting issue - on one hand you have the power of Judge Melville," notes Court TV host Nancy Grace, "but on the other hand you have the sanctity of crossed fingers. I think we've grown up believing that crossed fingers provide us with a level of protection from any agreement into which we don't want to enter."
|
|
