Please enable JavaScript in your browser preferences and then Reload this page!!!

Michael Jackson Justice: Jermaine vs. Mesereau on TMZ?

God: Reconnect to Him

The Conspiracy against God is about "The Word", and the profaning of His Holy Name within us. Adam fell in the garden, breaking the direct connection to God. Jesus, the "last Adam" was a quickening Spirit, the Word made Flesh, and the only one with whom we can re-establish our relationship with God. Michael's story is still unfolding. He is the one who is, is not. But Jesus is the only name given under heaven by which we must be saved. Many are trying to rewrite HIStory. We were given a help to instruct us. Learn more "here".

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Jermaine vs. Mesereau on TMZ?


Jermaine Vs. Mesereau – Really?



William Wagener - Beat It


I still have reservations about William Wagener and there are some other inconsistencies I wanted to point out – coming strait from William Wagener himself.  I want to know what you all think.

I will tell you that in researching more about him he looks to be, on the surface, someone I would high-five because of his “record” of exposing corrupt government.  However he started out as part of the government with a long line of relatives in government.

While that doesn’t necessarily disqualify you as a good guy, the lying could put a big dent in your credibility, so read below and tell me what you think.


Rest assured that I am no fan of William Wagener, but since he put himself out there, I would like to draw your attention part two of his interview with Tom Mesereau.

Part 2 Interview Mesereau

The last quarter of that video, Tom discusses the amount of information they collected for each witness during the case . . . everything from news articles to interviews to t.v. appearances, court documents – 3,000 binders of information all chronologically organized – Gotta love the internet.  Flash drives are hard to file, trust me. :o)


Part four of same interview

At about 6:40 on this part of the interview, I listened as Wagener described one of the witnesses for the prosecution – a youth pastor, whom he said his son brought home from a church function.  Wagener tells Mesereau during this interview that this youth minister shows up at his house about a year before the trial – this youth pastor was one of Sneddon’s witnesses.  His mother used to work at Neverland.

Maybe I have a suspicious mind, but one of the witnesses for SNEDDON just SHOWS UP at Wagener’s house a year PRE-TRIAL?  He adds a lot of “non-info” to what this witness said, said he knew he was lying, but didn’t say what he was lying about.  And this public T.V. show host just happens to be one of the ones who get a pass to sit in on the trial when HUNDREDS of other journalists applied for these?

Wagener is arrested by Sneddon yet he manages to get a ticket to sit in with the press at Michael Jackson’s trial AND reports on it in Michael’s favor when he admitted another journalist who mistakenly said Macauley was “unflappable” in his witness to Michael’s innocence?  At 9:17 in that video you can tell it had been cut. Why we don’t know but the splicing was horrible.

On part 6 of this interview which I will not show here but will include the link at the end of this paragraph . . . at approximately 5:12 after Wagener shows the Clip of Mesereau at the Panel of trial Lawyers he attended, Wagener says he had two witnesses inside that were in that meeting (cause Wagener wouldn’t pay the $150, but he had witnesses . . . who?  Who was financed to go in there?)  I recall a certain Samantha Degosson was one that posted her typo-filled dissertation of that meeting last year.  Source

This is the element that Wagener is associated with . . . the TINI people?  Does Tom Mesereau know this?

I reported the other day that Wanger’s “charity” foundation is not registered as a charity or a 501c here - Source

Considering that very interesting information during that interview with Tom Mesereau, I am beginning to wonder why and how a witness for Michael Jackson’s 2005 trial would just miraculously end up at the house of William Wagener – a public T.V. show host and previous “malicious prosecution” victim of Tom Sneddon who just happens to be one of those LUCKY “press” people that gets a ticket to Michael’s trial considering he was SUPPOSEDLY not on Sneddon’s side?

Mekka-no-sense, does it?

This is William Wagener’s campaign Biography.  It does not mention his arrest in Wisconsin, but it was the only source I could found that would even come close to suggesting when his “On Second Thought” public access T.V. program began to air.  According to this source, it was supposed to begin to air in late October of 2000.  Source

By the way, California law states that NO Tom Sneddon CANNOT be convicted:

California Revised Code, Penal Code Sections 802-803

802.

(a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), (c), or (d), prosecution for an offense not punishable by death or imprisonment in the state prison shall be commenced within ONE year after commission of the offense.

(b) Prosecution for a misdemeanor violation of Section 647.6 or former Section 647a committed with or upon a minor under the age of 14 years shall be commenced within THREE years after commission of the offense.

(c) Prosecution of a misdemeanor violation of Section 729 of the Business and Professions Code shall be commenced within TWO years after commission of the offense.

(d) Prosecution of a misdemeanor violation of Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code shall be commenced as follows:

(1) With respect to Sections 7028.17, 7068.5, and 7068.7 of the Business and Professions Code, within ONE year of the commission of the offense.

(2) With respect to Sections 7027.1, 7028.1, 7028.15, 7118.4, 7118.5, 7118.6, 7126, 7153, 7156, 7157, 7158, 7159.5 (licensee only), 7159.14 (licensee only), 7161, and 7189 of the Business and Professions Code, within TWO years of the commission of the offense.

(3) With respect to Sections 7027.3 and 7028.16 of the Business and Professions Code, within THREE years of the commission of the offense.

(4) With respect to Sections 7028, 7159.5 (nonlicensee only) and 7159.14 (nonlicensee only), of the Business and Professions Code, within FOUR years of the commission of the offense.

(e) This section shall become operative on July 1, 2005, only if Senate Bill 30 of the 2003-04 Regular Session is enacted and becomes effective on or before January 1, 2005.

803.

(a) Except as provided in this section, a limitation of time prescribed in this chapter is not tolled or extended for any reason.

(b) No time during which prosecution of the same person for the same conduct is pending in a court of this state is a part of a limitation of time prescribed in this chapter.

(c) A limitation of time prescribed in this chapter does not commence to run until the discovery of an offense described in this subdivision. This subdivision applies to an offense punishable by imprisonment in the state prison, a material element of which is fraud or breach of a fiduciary obligation, the commission of the crimes of theft or embezzlement upon an elder or dependent adult, or the basis of which is misconduct in office by a public officer, employee, or appointee, including, but not limited to, the following offenses:

(1) Grand theft of any type, forgery, falsification of public records, or acceptance of a bribe by a public official or a public employee.

(2) A violation of Section 72, 118, 118a, 132, 134, or 186.10.

(3) A violation of Section 25540, of any type, or Section 25541 of the Corporations Code.

(4) A violation of Section 1090 or 27443 of the Government Code.

(5) Felony welfare fraud or Medi-Cal fraud in violation of Section 11483 or 14107 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

(6) Felony insurance fraud in violation of Section 548 or 550 of this code or former Section 1871.1, or Section 1871.4, of the Insurance Code.

(7) A violation of Section 580, 581, 582, 583, or 584 of the Business and Professions Code.

(8) A violation of Section 22430 of the Business and Professions Code.

(9) A violation of Section 10690 of the Health and Safety Code.

(10) A violation of Section 529a.

(11) A violation of subdivision (d) or (e) of Section 368.

(d) If the defendant is out of the state when or after the offense is committed, the prosecution may be commenced as provided in Section 804 within the limitations of time prescribed by this chapter, and no time up to a maximum of three years during which the defendant is not within the state shall be a part of those limitations.

(e) A limitation of time prescribed in this chapter does not commence to run until the offense has been discovered, or could have reasonably been discovered, with regard to offenses under Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the Water Code, under Chapter 6.5 (commencing with Section 25100) of, Chapter 6.7 (commencing with Section 25280) of, or Chapter 6.8 (commencing with Section 25300) of, Division 20 of, or Part 4 (commencing with Section 41500) of Division 26 of, the Health and Safety Code, or under Section 386, or offenses under Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 2000) of Division 2 of, Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 2 of, Section 6126 of, Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 7301) of Division 3 of, or Chapter 19.5 (commencing with Section 22440) of Division 8 of, the Business and Professions Code.

(f)

(1) Notwithstanding any other limitation of time described in this chapter, a criminal complaint may be filed within ONE year of the date of a report to a California law enforcement agency by a person of any age alleging that he or she, while under the age of 18 years, was the victim of a crime described in Section 261, 286, 288, 288a, 288.5, or 289, or Section 289.5, as enacted by Chapter 293 of the Statutes of 1991 relating to penetration by an unknown object.

(2) This subdivision applies only if all of the following occur:

(A) The limitation period specified in Section 800, 801, or 801.1, whichever is later, has expired.

(B) The crime involved substantial sexual conduct, as described in subdivision (b) of Section 1203.066, excluding masturbation that is not mutual.

(C) There is independent evidence that corroborates the victim's allegation. If the victim was 21 years of age or older at the time of the report, the independent evidence shall clearly and convincingly corroborate the victim's allegation.

(3) No evidence may be used to corroborate the victim's allegation that otherwise would be inadmissible during trial. Independent evidence does not include the opinions of mental health professionals.

(4)

(A) In a criminal investigation involving any of the crimes listed in paragraph (1) committed against a child, when the applicable limitations period has not expired, that period shall be tolled from the time a party initiates litigation challenging a grand jury subpoena until the end of the litigation, including any associated writ or appellate proceeding, or until the final disclosure of evidence to the investigating or prosecuting agency, if that disclosure is ordered pursuant to the subpoena after the litigation.

(B) Nothing in this subdivision affects the definition or applicability of any evidentiary privilege.

(C) This subdivision shall not apply where a court finds that the grand jury subpoena was issued or caused to be issued in bad faith.

(g)

(1) Notwithstanding any other limitation of time described in this chapter, a criminal complaint may be filed within one year of the date on which the identity of the suspect is conclusively established by DNA testing, if both of the following conditions are met:

(A) The crime is one that is described in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 290.

(B) The offense was committed prior to January 1, 2001, and biological evidence collected in connection with the offense is analyzed for DNA type no later than January 1, 2004, or the offense was committed on or after January 1, 2001, and biological evidence collected in connection with the offense is analyzed for DNA type no later than TWO years from the date of the offense.

(2) For purposes of this section, "DNA" means deoxyribonucleic acid.

(h) For any crime, the proof of which depends substantially upon evidence that was seized under a warrant, but which is unavailable to the prosecuting authority under the procedures described in People v. Superior Court (Laff) (2001) 25 Cal.4th 703, People v. Superior Court (Bauman & Rose) (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1757, or subdivision (c) of Section 1524, relating to claims of evidentiary privilege or attorney work product, the limitation of time prescribed in this chapter shall be tolled from the time of the seizure until final disclosure of the evidence to the prosecuting authority. Nothing in this section otherwise affects the definition or applicability of any evidentiary privilege or attorney work product.

June 2005 to June 2011 = six years. Too late to indict anyone. 
Thank you source!


Jermaine Tweeted last night (and the night before) in reference to the plan to flee were Michael convicted, that he had a plane ready to go but that neither Michael nor Tom Mesereau knew about the plan to get him out of the courtroom. :


jermjackson5 Jermaine Jackson - For the record, my book makes clear that neither Michael or Tom Mesereau were aware of my desperate thinking re Bahrain


I think we already see tabloid evidence pitting Mesereau against Jermaine.  Seems like Jermaine knew that was going to happen which is why he wanted to make sure that he stated that Mesereau did not know of any plan.

I have seen contradicting statements in the press (some of them allegedly quoted) where Tom Mesereau took credit for telling Michael he would not be safe in the U.S. after the trial, and Jermaine stating credit for talking Michael into leaving.

According to this old news item, Michael was out of the country only two weeks after the verdict and it was Jermaine that suggested/took him out.  Source

I could not find any such news coverage of Tom Mesereau being quoted as saying such even though I remember seeing it.  Either Mesereau told Michael after the trial that he needed to get away from Sneddon and Jermaine helped with connections, or Jermaine made the connections and Mesereau had to convince Michael it was the right choice . . . either way, Michael got out and got the rest he needed after that trial.

This was TMZ’s coverage of that contradiction:

MJ’s Lawyer Calls BS on Jermaine Jackson - Source

Nice spin job TMZ – I call BS on your little story’s headline.  Was your daddy a top maker?

Jermaine . . . I can’t wait to read your book . . . hurry up September 19th!!!

I don’t know why Tom Mesereau would agree to be interviewed by Wagener, especially since Wagener did mention getting fans to contribute to this non-existent charity.  Mesereau most certainly has to know the law on the statute of limitations on prosecuting a public official for malicious prosecution, especially since the victim is no longer with us?


I have some good news to announce . . . . Nahhhhh, I’ll wait until tomorrow. ;o)



13 comments:

  1. Bonnie,
    The thing I don't understand about this escape plan is, I thought that when someone was convicted, they were taken atraight from the courtroom to prison. So how was anyone going to get Michael onto a plane after a guilty verdict? Does this imply that people were prepared to break the law and release Michael in transit? If so, that adds strength to the 'hoax' theory, doesn't it? If people were prepared to do that for Michael in 2005, why not in 2009?
    I read that when Michael left the US after the acquittal, he went to Paris first, to discuss a docmentary to rebuild his image, then to Bahrain.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Princessglam - Yes, I agree with you, and we will have to read the rest of that in Jermaine's book because I believe he said it was a "rash" plan and something they thought they would be able to do. Planned out on one end but not on the other.

    "Break the law"? That was already done before the trial by SNEDDON. Falsifying evidence is breaking the law. Falsifying records is breaking the law. In MY BOOK if one party breaks the contract (to follow the "law") it is then null and void and I would have been behind them getting Michael out of here.

    Read the first blog I put up yesterday and it will explain what they have done. Our rights are gone. We don't have any according to them. Michael's not the only one sick of America.

    Hoax theory - I asked the same question to a friend of mine just two days ago when I first heard that . . . "is Jermaine talking about 2005 or 2009?" I remember the Australian interview, I haven't forgotten.

    That news Item in BBC said June 30th, and he was already there in Bahrain. I don't think he went to Paris first but it's possible.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mesereau/Jackson : Both made separately logical statements but TMZ messed with a low class title to raise controversy where there was not.

    If Mesereau & Wagener organize a dinner for Michael this month, would any member of the Jackson family attend at least ? If not, it would be strange.

    A new Jermaine Jackson report below (if true) :

    http://www.contactmusic.com/news/jermaine-jackson-shocked-by-skeletal-michael_1244905

    Jermaine never said any of this about Michael before. If someone can twit with Jermaine, I would really like to know from himself.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Bonnie,
    Of course I don't know if this is true, but here is the link re. the Paris trip in 2005:

    http://www.contactmusic.com/news-article/jackson-in-paris-to-plan-resurrection

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bonnie - Waggner collecting donation for how many years so far for whatever documentary and to sue Tom Sneddon? Thank you for letting us see California law that shows too late for Waggner to do anything to Sneddon.

    How long his documentary is going to take to come out? What is this all about anyway that takes all this years? I am doubting about it from the time I heard. Those who gave and continue to give donation, should insist asking why it’s taking time or whether they are going to see the fruit of their contribution.

    Well, I don’t know either why Tom Mesereau accepted the invitation to be one of the speaker on the fund raising event Waggner had for the documentary and to sue Sneddon on this year Michael’s second anniversary. I wish we know what motivate T. Mesereau to back Waggner. That would be interesting to know.

    Bonnie, do you remember on that documentary Aphrodite’s Jones had last year? In there and other interviews, Tom Mesereau said it was his idea for Michael to live USA. Who ever brought the idea, you are right “he got the rest he needed after that trial.”

    Mimi

    ReplyDelete
  6. Bonnie – throughout his life, Michael was never contested anyone for harming him. Do you think it is because what the Bible said “when someone slaps you turn the other one? The reason I ask this because you prove it to us how he was really a follower of the Bible and a servant of God in so many ways.

    By the way, what does it really means “when someone slaps you turn the other one?” Does that means tolerate all the abuse and don’t do or say anything to protect oneself?

    Mimi

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Bonnie: I'm happy to read your post. I've been troubled by the blatent misinformation being spread about Jermaine. I followed his tweets and sure enough he refuted the misinformation that was being spread. I saw him comment that it was a "rash" plan and a plan of desperation. He never said his brother was guilty as some have said. He saw how his brother was being framed and was wanting to protect him. Scared for his life I imagine. I have had thoughts like that when I wanted to protect someone I loved. Micheal sang about it "they don't really care about us". It's in his music.

    I heard Tom Messerau say that he thought Micheal should leave Neverland - leave the town. I don't remember if he said leave the country. I could be wrong.

    I am intrigued by Michael Bearden's response to another supposed quote from Jermaine's book. My own opinion is he spoke in a rather rash manner on his Facebook and Twitter account and fed into the "hate on the family" theme that seems to be prevelant. Certain people are calling Jermaine names that are equivalent to racist remarks as "Ja**o". Can they not see this?
    Bearden was threatening to take the book to his lawyer, etc. Yet, if Micheal B. hung around Micheal Jackson very much at all, he would want to be careful to leap to conclusions. He did later say that but only after the "attack the family/Jermaine" tyrant began. He no less accused the family of using Micheal's name for money, yet I'm sorry Micheal Bearden but you wouldn't have half the 4,0000 fans on your page, considering buying your music, if you weren't equated to Micheal Jackson. Hypocrisy is rampant these days. I am now figuring that he is on payroll or afraid to lose his reputation to be hired by Sony, etc. He wants to protect the Estate folks, Ortega, etc. and I am very very very suspicious. Geesh Bonnie - I don't always agree with the things you say but so much of what you spoke regarding the Estate and how the family is being divided is playing out. I can't help but feel that Jermaine is playing with the truth (getting too close) and anybody who gets too close to the truth get's attacked vehemently. Just thinking outloud. I've been wanting to write about this too someone. I was figuring you might understand where I am coming from. ~LorLor

    ReplyDelete
  8. Line said - "Jermaine never said any of this about Michael before. If someone can twit with Jermaine, I would really like to know from himself. "

    ........ I know - Australian interview. Jermaine said this was going to get rough. I can't comment on things said in that book taken out of context, but if he knew how many times I put my forehead on the computer screen version of Michael's forehead and did the same thing . . . I will read the book, but I am not going to do it without prayer. I still believe because truth doesn't change just because of new information. These books are coming out for a reason, so stay strong.
    --------------------------------------------

    @PrincessGlam - I would say probably NOT true considering who the source is and they've never been fans of Michael Jackson or his family. Notice "Sir Jackie Stewart"? Guess they had to have an establishment guy's permission to use their name. Funny that press release was posted the same day as the one about Michael being in Bahrain. He could have flown from Bahrain to Paris for that meeting, but what came of it? Nothing. Another distraction possibly.

    ReplyDelete
  9. BONNIE : "These books are coming out for a reason, so stay strong."

    With all I questioned on what revolved & still does around Michael, I'm turning NUTS instead :o). But I may very well buy this Jermaine's book after all. At least it will provide me with a nice souvenir of Michael & the Jacksons.

    Good Evening, Bonnie.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hi Bonnie. I just watched a video on YouTube and it made me cry. It gets to your ♥. The name of the video is : Michael Jackson....They Don't Know.wma Susanne

    ReplyDelete
  11. Mimi said - "How long his documentary is going to take to come out? What is this all about anyway that takes all this years?"

    ........ Oh, I don't know, if it ever comes out. I take note of the lack of mention from the Jackson family on it. Did any of Michael's brothers or sisters ask them about that on Twitter and did they respond? I don't know.

    I don't believe Mesereau backed Wagener. I just believe he agreed to be interviewed. Wagener did his own adding of their pictures to his Youtube video. That interview was last year. That's a long time between Wagener's pictures and this fundraiser dinner.

    I don't disagree with the fundraiser. I just disagree with the story WW put out there as to why he needs the money. He wants to break into film and is using Michael to do it? He can't bring charges against Sneddon on Michael's behalf first of all. Secondly, Michael cannot testify against Sneddon OBVIOUSLY and third statute of limitations is RUN OUT. So what is he doing?

    TM? I saw his face during WW's comments on that interview . . . you tell me.

    Mimi said - "Bonnie, do you remember on that documentary Aphrodite’s Jones had last year? In there and other interviews, Tom Mesereau said it was his idea for Michael to live USA."

    ....... I knew I heard it somewhere. Well TM and Jermaine can duke it out over that one. Maybe it was Tom's suggestion and Jermaine found the perfect place? Guess we'll see in the book.
    --------------------------------------------

    Mimi said - "Do you think it is because what the Bible said “when someone slaps you turn the other one? The reason I ask this because you prove it to us how he was really a follower of the Bible and a servant of God in so many ways."

    ........ It means "vengeance is mine" saith the Lord - It means we are not supposed to retaliate or seek revenge, leave it to God. It could also mean that we are to give someone the benefit of a doubt, not to close our hearts because one person hurts us.

    I can't answer for Michael on why he didn't seek to at least refute the rumors, but I don't believe for one second he didn't fight. He has children. What didn't make the press is not Michael's fault. There was only so much one man can address when he's attacked like that from all sides. He chose his battles and left the rest to God. God is working now, I truly believe that.

    ReplyDelete
  12. to Mimi - I said "Did any of Michael's brothers or sisters ask them about that on Twitter and did they respond? I don't know."

    Whoa but that didn't come out right! I meant to ask if you knew of anyone on Twitter ASKED the brothers or sisters about Wagener and that documentary. LOL! Sorry

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hi LorLor - You said "I heard Tom Messerau say that he thought Micheal should leave Neverland - leave the town. I don't remember if he said leave the country. I could be wrong."

    ........ I think Mimi answered that above. It was on the Aphrodite Jones documentary, if that helps. I couldn't remember where I heard it either.

    You said - "He no less accused the family of using Micheal's name for money, yet I'm sorry Micheal Bearden but you wouldn't have half the 4,0000 fans on your page, considering buying your music, if you weren't equated to Micheal Jackson. Hypocrisy is rampant these days."

    ....... I don't know whose side Bearden is on, but I do recall quotes of his in regard to Michael's faith. We can look at Bearden's remarks as a knee-jerk reaction, a planned response, or he's working for the other side. I'll defend Jermaine but I'm not going to attack Bearden on any of this. If he really knew Mike then he knows better. Who knows what pressure Bearden is under. Just support Jermaine and try not to give too much attention to some of this other stuff. There may be other, layered purposes to the behavior.

    What you said, LorLor about the family being divided you are right on target. It is by design and you can look at the family members being attacked the most who's closest to the truth.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.