Artículo de
ABC News . Traducciones abajo del artículo
Judge Says Leno Can Joke About Jackson
Judge Says 'Tonight Show' Host Jay Leno May Make Jokes About Accused Singer Michael Jackson
By TIM MOLLOY
The Associated Press
Mar. 11, 2005 - "Tonight Show" host Jay Leno may joke about Michael Jackson despite a gag order on the prospective witness in the molestation case, the judge ruled Friday at a hearing in which prosecutors also claimed the singer may be "on the precipice of bankruptcy" and sought access to his financial records.
Responding to a request by Leno's attorney, Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville clarified that the gag order would not prevent the comic from making jokes about Jackson in his monologues.
Leno, who may be called to testify about a phone call with Jackson's accuser, has been having other celebrities tell Jackson jokes on his show since being subpoenaed. Media attorney Theodore Boutrous Jr. argued for the clarification on grounds Leno's First Amendment rights were violated.
The judge said the gag order barred Leno from talking about the specific areas on which he may testify, but it wouldn't prevent him or anyone else covered by the gag order from commenting generally about Jackson.
He said he would not even try to make Leno stop telling jokes that assume Jackson is guilty.
"I am not attempting to prevent anybody from making a living in the normal way that they make their living," he said.
The judge also joked:
"I'd like him to tell good jokes ... but I guess I can't control that." :clo:
Jackson attorney
Robert Sanger said Leno has made "very cruel jokes" about Jackson that could affect how he might testify and he urged the judge to restrict Leno further.
"We're not putting him out of his business if he can't talk about Michael Jackson for a few weeks," Sanger said.
The judge said he didn't believe such a limit would be constitutional.
The defense is expected to call Leno as part of its effort to show that the accuser's family has sought money from many celebrities including the "Tonight Show" host. According to the defense, Leno called police after talking with the accuser because he thought accuser's family was looking for a "mark."
Sanger noted that Leno's testimony would be favorable to the defense.
The judge said that during questioning, Jackson's lawyers would be free to note that Leno has made jokes about Jackson if they think it's relevant.
The ruling came during a day of arguments on numerous motions. The accuser, who on Thursday testified in graphic detail about the alleged molestation and came under tough cross-examination, was scheduled to return to the stand on Monday for more defense questioning.
Jackson, who on Thursday came to court late and under threat of arrest after seeking hospital treatment of what was described as a serious back problem, did not have to attend Friday's session.
On other issues,
the judge listened to arguments over the prosecution's request to explore Jackson's finances but he did not immediately rule.
Assistant District Attorney Gordon Auchincloss said prosecutors believe financial problems may have motivated Jackson to take part in an alleged conspiracy to hold his accuser's family captive and try to get them to help rebut a February 2003 TV documentary that damaged the singer's public image.
Auchincloss first said prosecutors believe Jackson may be $300 million in debt, then said he may have $400 million in liabilities and that his financial troubles "will all come crashing down on him in December of 2005."
"All we are looking for is a concise snapshot of the defendant's financial condition," Auchincloss said.
Prosecutors want to review records from Jackson's accountants. The defense says the records aren't relevant.
Melville cautioned the lawyers that he didn't want to spend too much time focusing on Jackson's money.
"It's not an area that I wish to extend this trial by spending a lot of time on the details of his finances," he said
Jackson attorney Robert Sanger said that Auchincloss' statements, "whether they are accurate or not, and I don't believe they are, are totally irrelevant to this."
Sanger said that what was at issue was Jackson's financial picture in February and March 2003, the time of the alleged conspiracy. He said existing case law should prevent admission of evidence about any possible financial motive.
Sanger disputed the notion that examining Jackson's finances would clear up a possible motive for a conspiracy. He said it would make more sense to bring in an expert on entertainment to talk about whether the documentary in which Jackson acknowledged sharing his bed with children would hurt his image in the long term.
"Woody Allen had certain episodes that were repeated in the press and it didn't seem to hurt his career," Sanger said.
Auchincloss said Jackson was a "spend-aholic" who spent about $35 million a year between 1999 and 2003. That was about three times as much as he was earning in those years, Auchincloss said.
"He has a billionaire's spending habits but only a millionaire's budget," the prosecutor said.
Sanger objected, saying Auchincloss loves to have "sound bites for the media" but that his statements were irrelevant to the legal issues.
At the request of the defense, the judge said he would consider allowing Jackson to do an extensive rebuttal to last month's ABC-TV special by Martin Bashir, the same man who did the 2003 "Living With Michael Jackson" documentary that sparked the case against the singer.
"Mr. Jackson is free to submit to me a rebuttal if he wants to make one," the judge said.
Jackson lawyer
Brian Oxman told him: "What we would like to do is an in-kind rebuttal to what Mr. Bashir did."
The judge said he had expected a request for such an action and wanted both sides to confer about it before he approves it.
Oxman warned him: "This will be a more extensive request. ... We don't want some witness to be able to do it and Mr. Jackson has to just sit here and take it."
Bashir was called as a prosecution witness but refused to answer many questions.
AP Special Correspondent Linda Deutsch contributed to this report.
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.
------------------------------------------------------------
- Comentan lo que ya sabemos de Jay Leno, que puede gastar bromas de Michael en términos generales pero no metiéndose en aspectos de su posible declaración. Según el artículo, el juez incluso permite que haga bromas donde se impique la culpabilidad de Michael :vom:
- Robert Sanger se quejó diciendo que Leno había hecho "bromas muy crueles" sobre Michael y que podrían influir en cómo testifique. "No le vamos a sacar de sus asuntos por no poder hablar de Michael durante unas semanas", dijo Sanger. El juez dijo que esa limitación no le parecería constitucional. El juez dijo que durante su interrogatorio, si quieren pueden hacer referencia a que ha hecho bromas sobre Michael si piensan que es relevante.
- El juez escuchó argumentos por parte de la acusación sobre su petición de explorar en las finanzas de Michael pero no decretó nada inmediatamente. Dijo que no quería estar mucho tiempo centrándose en el dinero de Jackson. "No es un área por la cual me desearía que se extendiera este juicio por gastar mucho tiempo en sus finanzas"
- A petición de la defensa, el juez dijo que consideraría permitir a Jackson hacer un "rebuttal" extenso al especial de TV de Bashir del mes pasado. "El Sr. Jackson es libre de presentarme un rebuttal si quiere hacer uno" dijo Melville. Brian Oxman le dijo al juez "Lo que nos gustaría hacer es un 'in-kind rebuttal' a lo que hizo Bashir".
El juez dijo que quería que ambas partes lo consultaran antes de que él lo aprobara.
- Oxman le advirtió "Esta será una petición más extensa...No queremos que algún testigo sea capaz de hacerlo y que el Sr. Jackson tenga que sentarse aquí y aceptarlo" [No termino de entender bien esto, igual no he sabido traducirlo correctamente. Si alguien entiende otra cosa que lo diga]
