FuNn
0
Yo también creo que esto viene por el articulo de Friedman de ayer.
Ayer quise postearlo pero el foro estaba out.
Os pasteo el original y mi cutre traducción:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Macaulay Culkin Won't Testify in MJ Case
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
By Roger Friedman
Culkin Will Refuse to Testify in MJ Case
Macaulay Culkin has not been subpoenaed in the Michael Jackson case and he's not going to testify in it either. That's what I've been told by those who know exactly what's happening with the "Home Alone" star. More on that in a minute.
Let's say that news reports from yesterday are correct and prosecutors in the Michael Jackson case are interested in the following seven young men and their former relationships with the pop star from about 10 or 12 years ago.
A news Web site describes a "famous child actor who denies anything sexual happened between him and Jackson; a son of a former Jackson employee; a friend of the Jackson family; a boy — now a young adult — who wrote a fan letter to Jackson in the early 1990s and became friends with him; a boy who met Jackson during the filming of a commercial; and an Australian who now works in Hollywood."
There's nothing like being coy, right? The Australian working in Hollywood is boy band choreographer Wade Robson. The son of a former employee is the child of Jackson's ex-maid Blanca Flores. The child star who says nothing inappropriate ever happened between him and Jackson is Macaulay Culkin.
And then there's the boy who met him during the filming of commercial; that would be Jimmy Safechuck, who has written about in many articles and in this column. He met Jackson during the filming of the Pepsi commercial in the 1980s and stayed close to him for a while before receiving a cash gift. I don't know who wrote Jackson the fan letter, but it's almost irrelevant.
If, of all the boys who passed through Neverland, this is whom Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon wants to talk to, Michael Jackson has nothing to worry about.
No matter what Sneddon does or what laws he invokes, Macaulay Culkin is not coming to his courtroom. My sources tell me that Culkin's representatives will make sure of that.
Despite reports in the British tabloids, Culkin — a Michael Jackson friend to this day — is not going to testify in his behalf. He's also not going to testify against Jackson. And Culkin, apart from all the others, has the financial resources to successfully block such an occurrence. You can take it to the bank.
Reading the report made me laugh because those who know the history — or is it HIStory — of the Jackson case have lots of other kids' names on our lists. Any one of them would be more damaging than those from this gang.
Tom Sneddon seems to not have much of a case with the current kid, so his plan is to bolster it with the gossip about other cases that never came to fruition. But he's not going to get very far with Culkin or Safechuck. Additionally, the young man from the 1993 case also has the financial resources to block testimony.
What's Sneddon going to do? Jail all these kids in contempt of court?
Sneddon probably doesn't read this column or he would know that since 1996 a young man from Norway named Omer Bhatti has been living intermittently at Neverland. I reported here exclusively that Jackson told friends that Bhatti, now 20, was his biological son. He's not and it's certainly more than a little odd that Bhatti spent his formative years going back and forth from Neverland.
There are others too. But Sneddon — looking for past malfeasance by Jackson — is so far looking up dead ends.
Fox News
Ayer quise postearlo pero el foro estaba out.
Os pasteo el original y mi cutre traducción:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Macaulay Culkin Won't Testify in MJ Case
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
By Roger Friedman
Culkin Will Refuse to Testify in MJ Case
Macaulay Culkin has not been subpoenaed in the Michael Jackson case and he's not going to testify in it either. That's what I've been told by those who know exactly what's happening with the "Home Alone" star. More on that in a minute.
Let's say that news reports from yesterday are correct and prosecutors in the Michael Jackson case are interested in the following seven young men and their former relationships with the pop star from about 10 or 12 years ago.
A news Web site describes a "famous child actor who denies anything sexual happened between him and Jackson; a son of a former Jackson employee; a friend of the Jackson family; a boy — now a young adult — who wrote a fan letter to Jackson in the early 1990s and became friends with him; a boy who met Jackson during the filming of a commercial; and an Australian who now works in Hollywood."
There's nothing like being coy, right? The Australian working in Hollywood is boy band choreographer Wade Robson. The son of a former employee is the child of Jackson's ex-maid Blanca Flores. The child star who says nothing inappropriate ever happened between him and Jackson is Macaulay Culkin.
And then there's the boy who met him during the filming of commercial; that would be Jimmy Safechuck, who has written about in many articles and in this column. He met Jackson during the filming of the Pepsi commercial in the 1980s and stayed close to him for a while before receiving a cash gift. I don't know who wrote Jackson the fan letter, but it's almost irrelevant.
If, of all the boys who passed through Neverland, this is whom Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon wants to talk to, Michael Jackson has nothing to worry about.
No matter what Sneddon does or what laws he invokes, Macaulay Culkin is not coming to his courtroom. My sources tell me that Culkin's representatives will make sure of that.
Despite reports in the British tabloids, Culkin — a Michael Jackson friend to this day — is not going to testify in his behalf. He's also not going to testify against Jackson. And Culkin, apart from all the others, has the financial resources to successfully block such an occurrence. You can take it to the bank.
Reading the report made me laugh because those who know the history — or is it HIStory — of the Jackson case have lots of other kids' names on our lists. Any one of them would be more damaging than those from this gang.
Tom Sneddon seems to not have much of a case with the current kid, so his plan is to bolster it with the gossip about other cases that never came to fruition. But he's not going to get very far with Culkin or Safechuck. Additionally, the young man from the 1993 case also has the financial resources to block testimony.
What's Sneddon going to do? Jail all these kids in contempt of court?
Sneddon probably doesn't read this column or he would know that since 1996 a young man from Norway named Omer Bhatti has been living intermittently at Neverland. I reported here exclusively that Jackson told friends that Bhatti, now 20, was his biological son. He's not and it's certainly more than a little odd that Bhatti spent his formative years going back and forth from Neverland.
There are others too. But Sneddon — looking for past malfeasance by Jackson — is so far looking up dead ends.
Fox News
, bien por ti
