Court Transcript 3 02 2005

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
2 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA
3 SANTA MARIA BRANCH; COOK STREET DIVISION
4 DEPARTMENT SM-2 HON. RODNEY S. MELVILLE, JUDGE
7 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF )
8 CALIFORNIA, )
9 Plaintiff, )
10 -vs- ) No. 1133603
11 MICHAEL JOE JACKSON, )
12 Defendant. )
13
14
15
16 REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
17
18 TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 2005
19
20 8:30 A.M.
21
22 (PAGES 298 THROUGH 336)
23
24
25
26
27 REPORTED MICHELE MATTSON McNEIL, RPR, CRR, CSR #3304

28 BY: Official Court Reporter
298
1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:
3
For Plaintiff: THOMAS W. SNEDDON, JR.,
4 District Attorney
-and-
5 RONALD J. ZONEN,
Sr. Deputy District Attorney
6 -and-
GORDON AUCHINCLOSS,
7 Sr. Deputy District Attorney
-and-
8 GERALD McC. FRANKLIN,
9 1112 Santa Barbara Street
Santa Barbara, California 93101
10
11
12
13 For Defendant: COLLINS, MESEREAU, REDDOCK & YU

BY: THOMAS A. MESEREAU, JR., ESQ.
14 -and-
SUSAN C. YU, ESQ.
15 1875 Century Park East, Suite 700
Los Angeles, California 90067
16
-and-
17
SANGER & SWYSEN
18 BY: ROBERT M. SANGER, ESQ.
233 East Carrillo Street, Suite C
19 Santa Barbara, California 93101
20 -and-
21 OXMAN and JAROSCAK

BY: R. BRIAN OXMAN, ESQ.
22 14126 East Rosecrans Boulevard
Santa Fe Springs, California 90670
23
24
25
26
27
28
299
1
I N D E X
2
3
Note:
4 Mr. Sneddon is listed as "SN" on index.
Mr. Zonen is listed as "Z" on index.
5 Mr. Auchincloss is listed as "A" on index.
Mr. Franklin is listed as "F" on index.
6 Mr. Mesereau is listed as "M" on index.
Ms. Yu is listed as "Y" on index.
7 Mr. Sanger is listed as "SA" on index.
Mr. Oxman is listed as "O" on index.
8
10 PLAINTIFF'S
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS
11
12 KITE, Ann Marie 306-A

(cont'd)
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
300
1 E X H I B I T S
3 FOR IN
PLAINTIFF'S NO. DESCRIPTION I.D. EVID.
4
5 403 February 2003 e-mails - page 17,

Marc Schaffel's Fire Brewing
6 file from Kite to Konitzer 331
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
301
1 Santa Maria, California
2 Wednesday, March 2, 2005
3 8:30 a.m.
5 THE COURT: Good morning.
6 COUNSEL AT COUNSEL TABLE: (In unison)
7 Good morning, Your Honor. Good morning, Your Honor.
8 THE JURY: (In unison) Good morning.
9 THE COURT: Sorry we kept you waiting a short
10 time this morning. This is going to occur -- is the
11 mike -- can you hear me? Is that better?
12 A VOICE: Can't hear you.
13 THE COURT: Should be on now. They can't
14 hear. What I'm going to do --
15 Would the witness step down for a moment,
16 please?
17 Can you hear me now?
18 THE JURY: (In unison) Yes.
19 THE COURT: I sound like one of those
20 commercials for the cell phone; "Can you hear me
21 now?"
22 I want to talk to you a little bit about the
23 reason we were late this morning. We were -- we
24 really weren't late. The attorneys and I were
25 working on a legal problem that arose at the end of
26 the day yesterday.
27 And that's the nature of a lawsuit. It's a

28 work in progress. And it's not all determined
302
1 before you get here, and then it just happens. It
2 happens in front of you. And so there's a couple of
3 things that I want to tell you. And I think perhaps
4 the best thing to do is to talk to you about the
5 co-conspirator statements. And the best way to talk
6 to you about that is to read the law to you, as you
7 will hear again at the end of the case.
8 Evidence of a statement made by one alleged
9 conspirator other than at this trial shall not be
10 considered by you as against another alleged
11 conspirator unless you determine, by a preponderance
12 of the evidence; one, that from other independent
13 evidence that at the time the statement was made, a
14 conspiracy to commit a crime existed.
15 Two, that the statement was made while the
16 person making the statement was participating in the
17 conspiracy, and that the person against whom it was
18 offered was participating in the conspiracy before
19 and during that time.
20 And three, that the statement was made in
21 furtherance of the objective of the conspiracy. The
22 word "statement" as used in this instruction
23 includes any oral or written, verbal expression or
24 nonverbal conduct that a person -- intended by that
25 person as a substitute for an oral, written, verbal
26 expression.
27 So what is going to happen in this trial is

28 that certain statements are going to come in. And
303
1 you will later not be able to consider those
2 statements unless you determine, in accordance with
3 this instruction, that there was a conspiracy and
4 that those statements were in the furtherance of an
5 objective of the conspiracy. But the law allows the
6 parties to present statements before and after they
7 think the conspiracy is proved or disproved. So it
8 would be very difficult to handle the case in
9 another way. So you're going to hear statements and
10 later determine your use, as a jury, of those
11 statements in accordance with the law.
12 So I'm going to conditionally admit some
13 statements this morning and the condition is that
14 you will later determine how you're going to use
15 those statements.
16 Along those same lines, during the course of
17 the trial, the attorneys make objections. I rule on
18 those objections, and I'm following rules of
19 evidence.
20 Quite often it's not necessary that you know
21 why I make a ruling. If I sustain an objection, you
22 just -- you reject the question. You don't consider
23 the answer, if part of it came in or all of it. If
24 I overrule an objection, that doesn't mean that I'm
25 favoring that evidence. All I'm saying is that side
26 has the right to give you that evidence for you to
27 consider, and it has nothing to do with my feelings

28 about it. Okay?
304
1 In that regard, yesterday, the witness, who
2 just stepped down, her name --
3 MR. SNEDDON: Miss Gabriel.
4 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Gabriel Kite.
5 THE COURT: Ms. Kite, Miss Gabriel, said --
6 the question was asked, "And did you go to work for
7 Michael Jackson?" And the answer was, "Yes, I did."
8 Earlier, the question had been asked, "At
9 some time did Mr. LeGrand ask to employ you and come
10 to work for Michael Jackson?" And there was an
11 objection as hearsay.
12 Well, I overruled that objection, and the
13 reason I did is that the -- at that point in the
14 proceeding, it is my opinion that wasn't offered for
15 the truth of the matter; i.e., that she worked for
16 Michael Jackson. It was offered only to show you
17 why she came to work and what she thought she was
18 doing. So it wasn't the truth of the matter, that
19 she worked for Mr. Jackson. That, in fact, you will
20 have to determine whether or not she did. I don't
21 know the answer to that. That will be your
22 decision. But each side will present evidence on
23 that.
24 So as to yesterday, the question, "At some
25 time did Mr. LeGrand ask to employ you to come to
26 work for Michael Jackson?" She said, "Yes, he did."
27 The instruction I'm giving you is that's to be

28 considered only -- at this point only to show what
305
1 she thought she was doing. Not for the truth of the
2 matter that she was working for Michael Jackson.
3 Okay?
4 Very complicated. But I'll continue to
5 instruct you, as needed, to help you with this.
6 Very difficult area of dealing with statements and
7 conspiracies. Okay?
8 You may resume the witness stand.
9 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Thank you, Your Honor.
10 THE COURT: When you take the witness stand,
11 I'll remind you that you are still under oath.
12
13 ANN MARIE KITE
14 Having been previously sworn, resumed the
15 stand and testified further as follows:
16
17 DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)
18 BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS:
19 Q. Good morning, Ms. Kite.
20 A. Good morning.
21 Q. Yesterday, when we left off, we were talking
22 a little bit about your history, the chronology of
23 events in your employment. And let me revisit the
24 question of who you believed you were working for.
25 First of all, who was it that actually hired
26 you for this work that you did for Michael Jackson?
27 A. Who asked me to come to work for Michael

28 Jackson?
306
1 Q. Yes.
2 A. David LeGrand.
3 Q. Okay. And when did you -- was there a
4 period of time in which you discussed with Mr.
5 LeGrand working for Michael Jackson?
6 A. Yes --
7 Q. Prior to your employment, actual employment?
8 A. Yes, there was.
9 Q. And when was that -- when did that
10 discussion begin?
11 A. About the 27th of January.
12 Q. Okay. Were there further discussions --
13 when were you actually hired?
14 A. On the 9th of February, Mr. LeGrand sent me
15 an e-mail along with other people that were working
16 on the MJJ working group that said, "Welcome to the
17 team."
18 Q. Okay. And between that period of time when
19 you began discussions with Mr. LeGrand and the time
20 that you actually became a member of the team, did
21 you continue to have discussions with Mr. LeGrand
22 about the issues involved in being a PR person for
23 Michael Jackson?
24 A. Yes, I did.
25 Q. Were you paid for your employment?
26 A. Yes, I was.
27 Q. How much?
28 A. $10,000.
307
1 Q. Was that payment in advance or arrears of
2 your employment?
3 A. Well, it was supposed to be $20,000 for the
4 month. When I signed the contract on the 14th of
5 February, David gave me a $10,000 check, so that was
6 an advance.
7 Q. So you began your work on the 9th?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. You signed your contract on the 14th?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. What time did you sign that contract?
12 A. Late in the afternoon. It was between three
13 and four o'clock.
14 Q. And where did that take place, the signing?
15 A. At Mr. LeGrand's law office.
16 Q. And where is that?
17 A. In Las Vegas.
18 Q. Okay. As far as your background as a public
19 relations person, what do you consider to be your
20 greatest assets in that field?
21 A. I believe it's crisis management. Being
22 able to see a problem, and determine what needs --
23 steps can be taken to correct it.
24 Q. Are there any contacts or other qualities
25 that you possess that enable you to conduct that
26 type of work?
27 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; vague.

28 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Well, I can be a little
308
1 more specific.
2 Q. What is it that enables you to conduct
3 crisis management in terms of any abilities, any --
4 well, let me just leave it open. Let me leave it
5 open-ended. What do you do -- how do you go about
6 conducting crisis management work?
7 A. Well, other than being neurotic, which comes
8 in very handy, I think I have a very good grasp of
9 the media as a whole. Internet, television, radio,
10 newspaper. And an innate ability to be able to size
11 up the client or the product that I'm representing,
12 find out where their assets are, the best aspects
13 that they have to represent themselves to the
14 public, or the product, and to be able to move them
15 forward from there.
16 But regardless of if it's a crisis
17 management client or if it's just a client that
18 you're trying to do public relations for, I think
19 probably my greatest asset is being able to see the
20 total product or the total person, and to explore
21 other avenues of being able to bring them to
22 fruition.
23 Q. Do you have a philosophy about how to
24 approach crisis management?
25 A. Absolutely.
26 Q. What is that?
27 A. Very proactive.
28 Q. And what do you mean by "proactive"?
309
1 A. Being out in front of the media, having a
2 crisis plan just in case something happens. A lot
3 of times when people begin to promote themselves or
4 to promote a product, they like to think of the
5 good -- the upside, the good things that can come
6 out of promoting themselves or their product, and
7 they don't like to analyze the bad things that might
8 happen.
9 I have an ability to be able to do both
10 before I start with the client, so that they can be
11 comfortable and not panic if something happens. I
12 want them to know that I've been able to thoroughly
13 research both the ups and downs of everything they
14 do and that, you know, I can cover them on either
15 side.
16 Q. Is it important to confront the bad things?
17 A. Absolutely.
18 Q. Why do you believe that?
19 A. Because if you don't confront it, somebody
20 else is going to confront it for you, and then
21 you're going to be caught in a downward spiral.
22 Q. All right. When you were first in
23 discussions with Mr. LeGrand in late January, what
24 did you perceive to be Michael Jackson's status
25 issues, what have you, regarding public relations?
26 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; foundation.
27 THE COURT: Sustained.

28 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: When you began
310
1 discussions with Mr. LeGrand concerning working with
2 Michael Jackson or working on his behalf, did you do
3 some research into news media, Mr. Jackson's
4 background, anything of that nature, to better
5 understand the public relations issues involving Mr.
6 Jackson?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And based on that research, were you able to
9 form an opinion as to what PR issues needed to be
10 addressed or should be addressed if you were called
11 to become an employee?
12 A. Yes, I was.
14 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Your Honor, she is
15 testifying in some capacity as an expert witness in
16 this area.
17 THE COURT: The objection is overruled.
18 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right.
19 THE WITNESS: Yes, I was.
20 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right. How did you
21 evaluate Mr. Jackson from a PR point of view at that
22 point, late in January?
23 A. What was my evaluation and recommendation,
24 is that the question?
25 Q. Yes.
26 A. I believed that there was too much negative
27 exposure on Mr. Jackson's actions, and not enough

28 exposure on his strength as a musician. And so I
311
1 told Mr. LeGrand that I felt immediately the focus
2 needed to be taken off of him as a person, as a man,
3 and the things that the public may or may not like
4 about him, and put back on all of the years of
5 wonderful music that he had given to the public.
6 Q. Okay. And sometime between the time when
7 you were recruited and the time that you actually
8 became an employee, did something occur that changed
9 your perspective as to what the necessary issues
10 were dealing with PR?
11 A. Yes.
12 MR. MESEREAU: Objection, Your Honor. May I
13 402 the witness on her credentials, the basis for
14 her opinion?
15 THE COURT: No.
16 Go ahead.
17 THE WITNESS: Can you repeat the question?
18 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: The question was,
19 between late January and the time that you were
20 actually hired, I believe you said it was the 9th of
21 February, did something happen that changed your
22 perception of Mr. Jackson from a public relations
23 standpoint?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. What was that?
26 A. The Martin Bashir documentary.
27 Q. All right. What -- how did that -- the

28 Martin Bashir documentary present itself as an issue
312
1 for you, from a public relations standpoint?
2 A. As an absolute disaster.
3 Q. Why do you say that?
4 A. I felt that the documentary was put together
5 in a way that portrayed Mr. Jackson in an extremely
6 negative light.
7 Q. Were there particular issues with that
8 documentary that you believed presented problems for
9 Mr. Jackson from a PR point of view?
10 A. Yes, there were.
11 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Foundation;
12 relevance; 352.
13 THE COURT: Overruled.
14 You may answer.
15 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: What were those issues?
16 A. I believed that Mr. Jackson was portrayed in
17 a very negative light in his actions as far as the
18 shopping spree, as far as climbing the tree, as far
19 as statements made portraying himself as Peter Pan,
20 and the interaction that he had with the person that
21 was on the video.
22 Q. The young boy?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And how did -- did you monitor the
25 international media during this period of time?
26 A. Yes, I did.
27 Q. Is that part of your job?

28 A. Yes, it is.
313
1 Q. And what was the reaction of the
2 international media at this point?
3 A. Well, there was an immediate reaction, and
4 they jumped on exactly what I believed that they
5 would, which was to --
6 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; nonresponsive.
7 THE COURT: The question was, "What was the
8 reaction." And I'll sustain the objection.
9 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right. I'll reask the
10 question.
11 Q. In terms of the reaction of the
12 international media, how did you evaluate in your
13 role as a public relations person?
14 A. That it was extremely negative.
15 Q. All right. Was there any positive media?
16 A. Not to my knowledge.
17 Q. Okay. You have -- have you ever been asked
18 to characterize or measure this crisis on a scale of
19 1 to 10?
20 A. Yes, I have.
21 Q. And how did you characterize it?
22 A. A 25 --
25 THE WITNESS: A 25.
26 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: So you perceived this
27 to be a big problem?
28 A. Absolutely.
314
1 Q. Did you formulate a plan to deal with this
2 problem?
3 A. Yes, I did.
4 Q. Did you work with other people in
5 formulating this plan?
6 A. Somewhat, yes.
7 Q. Okay. Were they other members of the team?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Okay. Specifically, who?
10 A. Specifically Melanie Riley from Bell Yard.
11 Q. And tell me a little bit more about Bell
12 Yard, if you would.
13 A. Bell Yard is a crisis management public
14 relations firm in the United Kingdom.
15 Q. Are they a small firm, large firm, medium?
16 A. I don't know.
17 Q. And was there just Melanie that you dealt
18 with from Bell Yard, or other people as well?
19 A. I believe Richard was the other gentleman
20 that I dealt with from Bell Yard.
21 Q. Do you know their last names?
22 A. Melanie is Riley. And I don't remember
23 Richard's last name.
24 Q. Okay. So in the beginning, when you were
25 formulating this plan, what was your -- what was
26 your idea, what was your goal?
27 A. Well, my goal was to immediately speak with

28 someone and assess all of the negative impacts from
315
1 the Bashir documentary, addressing each one.
2 Because my fear was that while one media source
3 might pick up on one thing, another media source
4 would pick up on another thing, so there would be
5 multiple angles coming at us.
6 And I felt and believed that unless we had a
7 clear plan of attack to be able to address each one
8 of these issues, we were not going to be as
9 proactive on Mr. Jackson's behalf as we needed to
10 be.
11 Q. Were there any other goals other than
12 attacking the current media problem?
13 A. Yes. My goal was to begin an immediate
14 rehabilitation on his image.
15 Q. So how did you plan to go about these goals?
16 A. Well, I needed to address, first of all, the
17 negative items that were coming out in the press.
18 And then once that was taken care of, I wanted to
19 begin to do the rehabilitation on his image.
20 Q. So in terms of the nuts and bolts of public
21 relations, how do you go about doing that?
22 A. How would I personally go about doing that?
23 Q. Yes.
24 A. I would write out a list of questions,
25 decide how people wanted to respond or to react. I
26 would look at what was potentially coming up in the
27 media. Because you have to understand, with the

28 media, they don't call you up politely and say,
316
1 "We're going to write a story about your client, and
2 we'd love to give you an opportunity to respond and
3 please tell us your side." They send you a very
4 short e-mail or give you a call and say, "Look, this
5 is what we're printing about your client, and I'm on
6 a deadline, so if you don't get back to me, too
7 bad." I mean, that's pretty much what it was.
8 And so I believed that we needed to
9 immediately sit down and assess all of the negative
10 things that could have come out of this documentary
11 for Mr. Jackson, and decide how we wanted to respond
12 so that we didn't get stuck in a downward spiral of
13 people printing things because they didn't get a
14 response quickly enough.
15 Q. Did Martin Bashir figure in in any way to
16 your plan of attack?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. In what way?
19 A. I wanted to look at the credibility of the
20 other documentaries that he had done.
21 Q. Was Bell Yard in agreement with that?
22 A. Yes, they were.
23 Q. Generally speaking, was Bell Yard's approach
24 to the problem of Mr. Jackson's PR consistent with
25 your own?
26 A. Yes, it was.
27 Q. Did you participate in conference calls with

28 Bell Yard with any of the members of the team?
317
1 A. Yes, I did.
2 Q. Which members?
3 A. I believe one or two times Mr. Geragos and
4 Mr. Konitzer were on the calls. The other times it
5 was mostly the team from the UK; Andrew Hochhauser,
6 Hamish Porter, Peter and Janie Castle.
7 Q. Okay.
8 A. John Genga, too, also was on those phone
9 calls. And then David LeGrand.
10 Q. What was Mr. Castle's and Genga's duties?
11 Who were they?
12 A. They were other attorneys. I don't know
13 specifically what their duties were, other than I
14 believe they were involved in the litigation that
15 was -- that Mr. Jackson had undertaken against
16 Granada and ITV.
17 Q. So I believe yesterday you testified that
18 one of the people you reported to was Marc Schaffel?
19 A. Yes, that's correct.
20 Q. Did you also report to Ronald Konitzer?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. And what about Mark Geragos?
23 A. Yes, I did.
24 Q. When did Mark Geragos become part of the
25 team?
26 A. I believe it was around the 7th of February.
27 Q. Okay. During the time -- or the month of

28 February, early February, did the problem of Mr.
318
1 Jackson's PR become exacerbated in any fashion?
2 A. Yes, it did.
3 Q. Specifically why?
4 A. Besides the documentary?
5 Q. Yes.
6 A. There was some information released about
7 Mr. Jackson in the public that I felt also
8 negatively impacted his image.
9 Q. Okay. What? What was it?
10 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. 352; foundation;
11 and hearsay.
12 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: This is also offered to
13 explain her conduct as well as the conduct of the
14 team and the level of the crisis.
15 MR. MESEREAU: Your Honor, I would object.
16 She's not qualified as an expert.
17 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: She's not offering an
18 opinion at this point.
19 THE COURT: I'm not considering her testimony
20 as expert testimony. She's a percipient witness as
21 to what happened during this time period, and that's
22 the only way that I'm considering her testimony.
23 That's why I denied your 402 request, because she's
24 just a percipient witness.
25 So -- and on your 352 objection, was that
26 over a time -- I'm not sure -- which of the many
27 specific areas were you objecting under 352?

28 MR. MESEREAU: Well, Your Honor, she worked
319
1 for less than two --
2 THE COURT: No, which of the legal
3 subsections of 352 are you relying on --
4 MR. MESEREAU: All of them.
5 THE COURT: -- for your objection?
6 MR. MESEREAU: All of them.
7 THE COURT: All right. Overruled.
8 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Okay.
9 Q. So I'll back up a little bit. You've said
10 that there were additional problems that arose in
11 the media. Did you have to perceive it as your
12 duties to deal with these problems as a PR
13 representative for Mr. Jackson?
14 A. Yes, I did.
15 Q. So these problems became your problems?
16 A. Absolutely. I felt it was my position to
17 address anything that affected Mr. Jackson
18 negatively.
19 Q. So what was coming out in the media at this
20 point?
21 A. There were documents that were released on a
22 website, thesmokinggun.com, that, in conjunction
23 with the Bashir documentary, I felt was just
24 absolutely beyond a disaster for Mr. Jackson.
25 Q. Okay. And what did those documents concern?
26 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Hearsay;
27 foundation; 352.
28 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: As reported in the media,
320
1 is the question.
2 MR. MESEREAU: Same objection, Your Honor.
3 THE COURT: I'll overrule the objection, but
4 advise the jury, again, that this area is not being
5 offered for the truth of the matter asserted; that
6 whatever she's going to testify to that appeared on
7 The Smoking Gun is being offered strictly to show
8 why she took her next action.
9 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: And I'm not asking you
10 specifically what was written in those documents.
11 I'm just asking in general terms, what was that
12 document about?
13 A. It addressed another PR issue that Mr.
14 Jackson had in 1993.
15 Q. What was that PR issue?
16 MR. MESEREAU: Objection.
17 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: That's my question.
18 MR. MESEREAU: 352; foundation; hearsay; no
19 personal knowledge.
20 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I believe she has personal
21 knowledge --
22 THE COURT: I've already ruled on this. The
23 objection is overruled. Go ahead.
24 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: You may answer the
25 question.
26 A. They involved Mr. Jackson having
27 inappropriate actions with a young boy.

28 Q. Okay. The '93 case?
321
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Okay. What else was there? What other
3 problems, other than the '93 case, did you -- that
4 came up? You said there were several.
5 A. Besides the documentary, the things that
6 were contained in the documentary?
7 Q. Yes, uh-huh.
8 A. Well, the media then began to pick up on any
9 number of things about Mr. Jackson. Pediatricians
10 were weighing in about the way that he fed his baby
11 on the documentary. There was just several -- they
12 were attacking him personally from every angle.
13 Q. Okay. Were there any other news --
14 purported news programs that were coming?
15 A. Yes, there were.
17 A. NBC was doing a program about Mr. Jackson's
18 purported plastic surgeries.
19 Q. Just that, or did that include other things?
20 A. Also included other things.
21 Q. Okay. Was that actually aired?
22 A. Yes, it was.
23 Q. Was that positive or negative for Mr.
24 Jackson, in general terms?
25 A. In general, I felt it was very negative.
26 Q. What about members of the team specifically?
27 Were there ever any members of the team that became

28 problems or burdens in terms of the media and Mr.
322
1 Jackson's image?
3 Q. Who?
4 A. Mr. Schaffel.
5 Q. Marc Schaffel?
6 A. Marc Schaffel, yes.
7 Q. And why was he a problem?
8 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. 352; foundation;
9 hearsay.
10 THE COURT: Vague; sustained.
11 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: What was it
12 specifically that was reported in the media? And
13 I'm just asking you -- well, let me just say
14 generally, why was Mr. Schaffel a problem in the
15 media concerning Mr. Jackson?
17 hearsay; vague; 352.
18 THE COURT: The objection's overruled.
19 THE WITNESS: Mr. Schaffel had a very
20 negative image and I felt very strongly that that
21 image might taint Mr. Jackson.
22 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right. Who else
23 had a problem?
24 A. With Mr. Schaffel?
25 Q. No. Was there any other member of the team
26 that presented a problem for Mr. Jackson, I should
27 say?
28 A. Not of the team per se. But there were --
323
1 there was someone else that Mr. Jackson's name was
2 associated in the press that I felt would be a
3 problem.
4 Q. Okay. Who else was that?
5 A. Mr. Malnik. Al Malnik.
6 Q. Okay. You say you were hired by Mr.
7 Jackson. Have you ever met Mr. Jackson?
8 A. No, sir, I have not.
9 Q. And why did you believe that you were
10 working for him?
11 A. Because David LeGrand told me that I was.
12 And the contract that I signed said "MJJ
13 Productions" on it.
14 Q. All right. And did you, in fact, work on
15 Mr. Jackson's behalf?
16 A. Yes, sir, absolutely.
17 Q. Okay. Who did you understand was paying
18 your $10,000 retainer?
19 A. Mr. Jackson.
20 Q. What proactive measures, if any, did you
21 want to take to address these issues?
22 A. Well, I believed that immediately there
23 should be a very strong on-camera statement from
24 Mr. Jackson himself. I wanted to be able to explore
25 the documentary that Mr. Bashir had created to see
26 if there were any technical inconsistencies. I
27 wanted to be able to use everything at my disposal

28 to try to find a way to address the issues that
324
1 Mr. Jackson was experiencing and give the other side
2 of the story.
3 Q. Have you ever heard of the organization
4 called "Fire Mountain"?
5 A. Yes, I have.
6 Q. What is Fire Mountain?
7 A. Fire Mountain is a corporation --
10 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Was there a film that
11 was being prepared to help address the PR issues?
13 Q. Whose idea was that?
14 A. I don't know the answer to that --
15 Q. Okay.
16 A. -- specifically.
17 Q. But it wasn't your idea?
18 A. No, sir.
19 Q. Was there a member of the team that was
20 preparing this film?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Who was that?
23 A. Mr. Schaffel.
24 Q. Do you know what the subject matter of this
25 film was?
26 A. It was to be a rebuttal to Martin Bashir's
27 documentary.
28 Q. Did you have any discussions with the team
325
1 concerning what network or what broadcast medium
2 would be used to show this film?
3 A. Yes, I did.
4 Q. Do you know whether it was ultimately aired?
5 A. Yes, it was.
6 Q. On which network?
7 A. FOX.
8 Q. Do you know why FOX was chosen?
9 A. Yes, I do.
10 Q. Why is that?
11 A. Because they would give Mr. Schaffel an
12 element of creative control.
13 Q. Were there any other networks that were
14 bidding for it?
16 Q. Who?
17 A. NBC.
18 Q. Did you have any input into whether or not
19 certain people would be included on this rebuttal
20 film?
21 A. I had a discussion with Mr. Schaffel about
22 the rebuttal film, yes.
23 Q. Did you provide him some -- your insights as
24 to what should be presented?
25 A. He told me some things that he thought --
26 some people that he thought he was going to put on
27 the film and asked me what I thought. And I told

28 him --
326
1 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay.
2 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: This is offered to explain
3 conduct and -- actually, I can -- I can move on and
4 get more to the point. So I'll withdraw the
5 question and allow the striking of the answer.
6 THE COURT: I'll strike the answer. But she
7 never got to say anything about what was said.
8 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Very well.
9 THE COURT: Go ahead.
10 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you have -- did you
11 have a discussion about Mr. Jackson's ex-wives with
12 Mr. Schaffel?
13 A. Yes, I did.
14 Q. Did you have a suggestion for him about
15 whether one of these -- one or both of these
16 ex-wives should be presented on the rebuttal film?
17 A. Yes, I did.
18 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. 352; foundation.
19 THE COURT: The question calls for hearsay.
20 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: The question -- Your
21 Honor, I haven't asked for a statement. I've just
22 asked whether she had a discussion.
23 THE COURT: All right. I'll overrule the
24 objection.
26 Q. Did you have a discussion with Mr. Schaffel
27 about that?
28 A. Yes, I did.
327
1 Q. And did you make a suggestion?
2 A. Yes, I did.
3 Q. What did you suggest?
4 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. 352; foundation.
5 THE COURT: Calls for hearsay.
6 MR. MESEREAU: Hearsay.
8 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did Mr. Schaffel ever
9 make any comments to you concerning his influence
10 over Debbie Rowe?
11 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Leading;
12 foundation; hearsay; 352.
13 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I'll be happy to give you
14 an offer of proof, Your Honor.
15 THE COURT: The leading is sustained.
16 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Ms. Kite --
17 (Laughter.)
19 BAILIFF CORTEZ: Try it again?
20 THE COURT: Yes.
21 BAILIFF CORTEZ: It's back on, Judge.
22 THE COURT: All right. Go ahead.
23 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you have a
24 discussion with Mr. Schaffel about proposed -- any
25 proposed individuals that would appear on the
26 rebuttal film?
27 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Leading;

28 foundation; hearsay; 352.
328
1 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Hardly leading.
2 THE COURT: Objection is overruled.
3 THE WITNESS: Yes, I did.
4 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Okay. Who did you
5 discuss?
6 A. Debbie Rowe.
7 Q. Okay. And did you have a feeling about
8 whether or not, from a PR standpoint, she would be a
9 good candidate for this rebuttal film?
11 foundation; 352; leading.
12 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: The question is, did she
13 have a feeling.
14 MR. MESEREAU: Relevance; and vague.
16 You may answer.
17 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, you're going to
18 have to ask again after all that.
19 THE COURT: I'll have the question read back.
20 (Record read.)
22 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: What was that?
23 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. 352; relevance;
24 foundation; hearsay.
26 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.
27 THE COURT: I can have it read back.

28 THE WITNESS: Please.
329
1 (Record read.)
3 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: And what was that
4 feeling?
5 A. I didn't think she was the strongest
6 candidate.
7 Q. And what was Mr. Schaffel's response?
8 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Hearsay; 352.
9 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: This is offered in
10 furtherance of the conspiracy.
11 MR. MESEREAU: Foundation.
12 THE COURT: All right. I'm taking the --
13 this testimony subject to the proving up of the
14 conspiracy. I'll allow the question.
15 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: What did Mr. Schaffel
16 tell you?
17 A. He said that he could get Debbie Rowe to say
18 whatever he wanted her to say.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 This notebook is coming apart, Your Honor.
21 If I can have just a moment.
22 During the course of your work with the
23 team, I believe you testified that you used the
24 Internet to communicate through e-mails?
26 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I previously provided
27 counsel with copies of all these documents, Your

28 Honor, that I'm going to be showing the witness.
330
1 And for the record, this is document
2 number -- from original exhibits, Schaffel files,
3 and appears to be a document itemized under 403,
4 page 17. It appears to be a three-page e-mail from
5 Ronald at High Tech America to Marc in L.A. dated
6 2-16-03.
7 THE COURT: Is it marked?
8 MR. MESEREAU: May we see that for a second,
9 please? Thank you.
10 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I provided you with
11 copies.
12 (Off-the-record discussion held at counsel
13 table.)
14 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right.
15 THE COURT: Now, this is a formally marked
16 exhibit?
17 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It is, Your Honor.
18 THE COURT: 403 is the exhibit number?
19 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It is the exhibit number.
20 and it is beginning on page 17 of Exhibit No. 403.
21 Q. If you could take a moment and just look at
22 page four -- or Exhibit No. 403, what I've
23 identified, pages 17, 18, and 19.
24 MR. SANGER: Could we just have a moment?
25 MR. MESEREAU: Excuse me. We don't have the
26 second page of that exhibit. Maybe we could --
27 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It's in the packet I gave

28 you.
331
1 MR. MESEREAU: It's in the back?
2 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It's in the packet I gave
3 you yesterday. Do you have that?
4 MR. MESEREAU: It's not in the binder. Is
5 it somewhere else?
6 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Yes.
7 MR. MESEREAU: It appears to say page one of
8 two, but there's no page two.
9 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Is it in --
10 MS. YU: The individual packet?
11 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Yeah, it's in there.
13 table.)
14 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Have you had a moment
15 to look at that?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Can you identify that for me?
18 A. Yes.
19 MR. MESEREAU: I'm not blaming anybody. We
20 don't seem to have page two of the exhibit.
21 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I'm sorry. I'll take a
22 moment and show counsel.
24 table.)
25 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right. Have you
26 had a chance to look at that?
27 A. Yes, I have.
28 Q. Can you identify it for me?
332
1 A. Yes, it's an e-mail that I sent to Ronald
2 Konitzer with --
3 Q. Okay. What was the date of the e-mail that
4 you sent to Ronald Konitzer?
5 A. It was the 14th of February.
6 Q. And what was -- I'm not going to ask you to
7 read it to the jury at this time. We're going to
8 lay some additional foundation with this exhibit at
9 a later time. But I'm going to ask you to tell me
10 what was the substance of that e-mail, and what was
11 your purpose in sending it. And let's start with,
12 what was -- what was the concern you expressed in
13 that e-mail?
14 A. I expressed great concern that there were
15 many things that were preparing to break negatively
16 against Mr. Jackson over the next 72 hours, which
17 would have been between the 14th of February and the
18 17th. And I just did not understand why there
19 wasn't anyone --
20 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Narrative and
21 nonresponsive.
22 THE COURT: Sustained as to the last sentence
23 is stricken.
25 Q. So I was asking you what your concerns were.
26 What concerns specifically did you express in that
27 e-mail?
28 A. That --
333
2 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Your Honor, this is
3 offered to show knowledge on behalf of the
4 co-conspirators, the reasons for the part of the
5 motive of this case, the nature of the crisis, and
6 the action that were taken on behalf of this witness
7 to alert --
8 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. That is a
9 speaking objection, Your Honor.
10 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Goes to the objection.
11 THE COURT: Are you offering this -- are you
12 offering this to explain a response from the
13 recipient of this e-mail?
14 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I am offering it, Your
15 Honor, to explain -- it's offered to explain the
16 conduct as well as the information that was conveyed
17 by this witness to the co-conspirators regarding the
18 degree of the crisis that existed at that time.
19 Now, it is not being offered into evidence
20 at this time, but I'm laying foundation for its
21 offering that will provide additional foundation at
22 a later date.
23 MR. MESEREAU: May I object, Your Honor?
24 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Her purposes in sending
25 this e-mail and the fact that she did send it to
26 Mr. Konitzer and provided him with this information
27 is relevant as to Mr. Konitzer's knowledge of the

28 events.
334
1 MR. MESEREAU: I object on hearsay and
2 foundation. And there's no evidence whatsoever
3 Mr. Jackson's involved in any conspiracy.
4 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: That remains to be seen.
5 THE COURT: Any of the conspiracy evidence is
6 being received subject to the proving up of the
7 conspiracy, as I've indicated.
8 The Court will allow the question here with
9 the admonition that the information that is being
10 conveyed in the e-mail is not offered for the truth
11 of the matter asserted, but to show that the
12 recipient received this information. Or not that he
13 received it; that it was sent to him.
16 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: So, back to my
17 question. I'll rephrase it. Why don't we -- what
18 was your purpose in sending this e-mail? Why don't
19 I ask it that way.
20 A. To advise Mr. Konitzer that over the next 72
21 hours Mr. Jackson was going to face another barrage
22 of extremely negative publicity, and it needed to be
23 addressed immediately.
24 Q. Were the --
25 THE COURT: All right. Let's take our
26 morning break.

28 (Recess taken.)
335
1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
4 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE )
5 OF CALIFORNIA, )
6 Plaintiff, )
7 -vs- ) No. 1133603
9 Defendant. )
10
11
12 I, MICHELE MATTSON McNEIL, RPR, CRR,
13 CSR #3304, Official Court Reporter, do hereby
14 certify:
15 That the foregoing pages 302 through 335
16 contain a true and correct transcript of the
17 proceedings had in the within and above-entitled
18 matter as by me taken down in shorthand writing at
19 said proceedings on March 2, 2005, and thereafter
20 reduced to typewriting by computer-aided
21 transcription under my direction.
22 DATED: Santa Maria, California,
23 March 2, 2005.
24
25
26
27 MICHELE MATTSON McNEIL, RPR, CRR, CSR #3304

28
336
1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
2 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA
3 SANTA MARIA BRANCH; COOK STREET DIVISION
4 DEPARTMENT SM-2 HON. RODNEY S. MELVILLE, JUDGE
7 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF )
8 CALIFORNIA, )
9 Plaintiff, )
10 -vs- ) No. 1133603
12 Defendant. )
13
14
15
16
17 REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
18
19 WEDNESDAY, MARCH 2, 2005
20
21 8:30 A.M.
22
23 (PAGES 337 THROUGH 528)
24
25
26
27 REPORTED MICHELE MATTSON McNEIL, RPR, CRR, CSR #3304

28 BY: Official Court Reporter
337
1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:
3
For Plaintiff: THOMAS W. SNEDDON, JR.,
4 District Attorney
-and-
5 RONALD J. ZONEN,
6 -and-
GORDON AUCHINCLOSS,
7 Sr. Deputy District Attorney
-and-
8 GERALD McC. FRANKLIN,
9 1112 Santa Barbara Street
10
11
12
For Defendant: COLLINS, MESEREAU, REDDOCK & YU
13 BY: THOMAS A. MESEREAU, JR., ESQ.
-and-
14 SUSAN C. YU, ESQ.
1875 Century Park East, Suite 700
15 Los Angeles, California 90067
16 -and-
17 SANGER & SWYSEN

BY: ROBERT M. SANGER, ESQ.
18 233 East Carrillo Street, Suite C
19
-and-
20
OXMAN and JAROSCAK
21 BY: R. BRIAN OXMAN, ESQ.
14126 East Rosecrans Boulevard
22 Santa Fe Springs, California 90670
23
24
25
26
27
28
338
1 I N D E X
3 Note:
Mr. Sneddon is listed as "SN" on index.
4 Mr. Zonen is listed as "Z" on index.
Mr. Auchincloss is listed as "A" on index.
5 Mr. Mesereau is listed as "M" on index.
Ms. Yu is listed as "Y" on index.
6 Mr. Sanger is listed as "SA" on index.
Mr. Oxman is listed as "O" on index.
7
9 PLAINTIFF'S
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS
10
11 KITE, Ann Marie 363-M 490-A 513-M
12
13 LAFFERTY, Albert 516-S
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
339
1 E X H I B I T S
3 FOR IN
PLAINTIFF'S NO. DESCRIPTION I.D. EVID.
4
5 4 Map of Santa Ynez Valley 520 521
6
5 Map of Los Olivos, Figueroa
7 Mountain Road and Ranch location 520 521
8 6 Aerial photo showing Neverland

Ranch
9
7 Aerial photo showing security office,
10 arcade, main house and guest house on
Neverland Ranch 520 521
11
8 Aerial photo showing main house,
12 guest house, train station at
13
9 Aerial photo showing theater,
14 race track and amusement area at
15
10 Aerial photo showing theater at
16 Neverland Ranch 520 521
17 11 Aerial photo showing zoo at

18
12 Aerial photo showing train station
19 at Neverland Ranch 520 521
20 405 2-8-03 Bell Yard embargoed statement

of Janet Arvizo 341
21
410 List of phone numbers 343
22
412 Appearance, Consent and Release form 345
23
24
25
26
27
28
340
2 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Thank you, Your Honor.
3 Madam Reporter, could I have a read-back on
4 the last question? I think we left on a question.
5 (Record read.)
6 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right. Thank you.
7 Q. Showing you at this time Exhibit No. 405,
8 page one. It appears to be a statement from Bell
9 Yard regarding Janet Arvizo, dated February 8th,
10 2003.
11 Ms. Kite, did you prepare that statement?
12 A. No, sir, I did not.
13 Q. Did you have anything to do with the
14 preparation of that statement?
16 Q. Are you familiar with that type of statement
17 in the capacity of being a PR --
18 A. Yes, I am.
19 Q. -- person?
20 What does it mean when a statement is
21 embargoed?
22 A. It means that the statement is prepared and
23 sent out to the news wires, but that the media isn't
24 allowed to release the statement until the time
25 that's stated on the press release. That's what
26 embargoed means. It means we'll send you the
27 information, but you need to hold it until the time

28 we've specified before you can put it out.
341
1 Q. So this statement would be -- it would not
2 be allowed to be printed in the media until what
3 time, according --
5 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Assuming this statement
6 is a statement for -- that is embargoed until
7 February 8th, midnight.
8 A. 22 --
9 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; leading and no
10 foundation. She's not familiar with the document,
11 Your Honor.
12 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: These are expert
13 questions, Your Honor.
14 THE COURT: I haven't been accepting her
15 testimony at this point as an expert.
16 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Well, I do think she had
17 familiarity sufficient to talk about the nature of
18 embargoed documents when they are released to the
19 media.
20 THE COURT: And she has. But the question
21 now you asked was specifically as to this document.
22 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I can talk hypothetically,
23 if you'd like.
24 THE COURT: All right.
25 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right.
26 Hypothetically speaking, if a document was embargoed
27 for a date, let's say January 1st, at twelve noon,

28 what does that mean in terms of its production in
342
1 the media?
2 A. Well --
3 MR. MESEREAU: I'm going to object, Your
4 Honor. She's not qualified as an expert.
5 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: This is an area where she
6 has knowledge, Your Honor. It's beyond the -- it's
7 beyond the scope of a layperson's understanding in
8 these areas.
10 You may answer.
11 THE WITNESS: What it means is that the
12 person producing the document puts the information
13 together, and sends it out to the media. The media
14 has it in their hands, but they cannot release it
15 for public consumption until the time that's stated
16 on the document.
17 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right. Moving on
18 to Exhibit No. 410, page one. It appears to be a
19 list of phone numbers. First name is Mark Geragos,
20 Criminal Lawyer, in the upper left-hand side.
21 Is your name on that list of phone numbers?
22 A. Yes, sir, it is.
23 Q. Are there any other members of the team on
24 that list of phone numbers?
25 A. Yes, there are.
26 Q. Which ones?

28 hearsay.
343
1 THE COURT: The foundation is sustained. And
2 what I'm thinking of -- I'm not sure what Mr.
3 Mesereau was thinking of, but what I'm thinking of
4 is "the team" is vague.
5 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: As to members of the team.
6 THE COURT: You said that, yes. That was
7 your question. And I don't know what you're
8 referring to.
10 Q. You mentioned that there was a number of
11 people that were on a PR team; is that correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. To deal with the issues, the PR problem that
14 you previously identified, regarding Michael
15 Jackson?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Are there any other members of that PR team
18 that are on that phone sheet that is before you?
19 A. Yes, there are.
20 Q. Which ones?
21 A. Mark Geragos, Ronald Konitzer, Richard
22 Elsen, Stuart Backerman, David LeGrand, and myself.
23 And these are the people that I dealt with directly.
24 Q. Is there a phone number associated with your
25 name?
26 A. Yes, there is.
27 Q. Is it correct?
28 A. Yes, it is.
344
1 Q. Are there any other names on that list that
2 were the subject of the PR issues that you were
3 addressing?
4 A. Yes, there is.
5 Q. What names?
6 A. Gavin Arvizo.
7 Q. Any others?
8 A. Yes. Debbie Rowe.
9 Q. All right. Is that it?
10 A. Yes, as far as I can tell.
11 Q. All right. Thank you.
12 Finally, I'll show you what appears to be a
13 release form, Exhibit No. 412, page number two.
14 Have you ever seen that document?
15 A. Yes, I have.
16 Q. Did you prepare that -- a portion of that
17 document?
18 A. Yes, I did.
19 Q. Was there a portion of that document that
20 was not prepared by you?
22 Q. Where did you get that document from, that
23 portion that you're describing?
24 A. David LeGrand.
25 Q. Okay. First of all, describe for me what
26 they have here as that exhibit.
27 A. This is an appearance, consent and release

28 form.
345
1 Q. And it came to you from David LeGrand?
2 A. Yes, it did.
3 Q. On what date; do you know?
4 A. I believe it was around the 10th of
5 February.
6 Q. And were you instructed to do something with
7 this document?
8 A. Yes, I was.
9 Q. What was that?
10 A. I was instructed to take out the words "MJJ
11 Productions Inc." and put in "Gabriel Media, Inc."
12 Q. Did you do that?
13 A. Yes, I did.
14 Q. What did you do with the document then?
15 A. I sent it back to Mr. LeGrand.
16 Q. Do you know what the purpose of that action
17 was?
19 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It's a yes or no question.
20 MR. MESEREAU: Foundation for elements.
21 THE COURT: Foundation; sustained.
22 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right. During your
23 work for Mr. Jackson, at some point, did you become
24 aware of a problem involving the Arvizo family?
25 A. Yes, I did.
26 Q. How did you become aware of that problem?

28 foundation; 352.
346
1 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Offered in furtherance of
2 the conspiracy.
4 THE WITNESS: Mr. Schaffel called me.
5 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Do you remember the
6 approximate date or the date that that call took
7 place?
8 A. Yes, it was the 13th of February.
9 Q. And what did Mr. Schaffel tell you?
12 the conspiracy.
14 THE WITNESS: He told me that Janet had
15 taken the kids and left the ranch either late at
16 night or early in the morning.
17 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you express any
18 concern to him?
19 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; leading.
20 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: At that time?
21 THE COURT: You may answer.
22 THE WITNESS: Well, I didn't understand what
23 it was that he was trying to say to me. I mean, I
24 knew what he said, but I wasn't understanding where
25 he was going with it.
26 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Was Mr. Schaffel --
27 what was his demeanor when he was telling you this?

28 A. He was extremely agitated.
347
1 Q. Did you understand what was the source of
2 his agitation?
3 A. Yes. That Janet had taken the kids and left
4 the ranch.
5 Q. Sometime later, did you receive another
6 phone call or have another phone conversation with
7 Mr. Schaffel concerning this subject?
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. When was that?
10 A. It was later that day.
11 Q. And what was said?
14 the conspiracy.
15 THE COURT: All right. The objection's
16 overruled.
17 THE WITNESS: He said that the situation had
18 been contained.
19 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did that concern you?
20 A. Yes, it did.
21 Q. Okay. Why?
22 A. Because I believed that if somebody had
23 taken their children and left the ranch, there must
24 be some type of problem. And the way that he
25 answered me by saying the situation was contained
26 made me very uncomfortable.
27 Q. Did you ask him any other questions about

28 that?
348
1 A. No, I did not.
2 Q. Did you have any further conversations with
3 Mr. Schaffel about this subject?
4 A. During the -- one of the two conversations,
5 and I believe it was the last one when he said the
6 situation had been contained, he told me that he --
8 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: You can answer the
9 question yes or no, first of all.
10 THE WITNESS: Yes.
11 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: And what was said in
12 that conversation?
15 the conspiracy
17 THE WITNESS: That he was going to fax me a
18 letter; that he wanted me to put it away for
19 safekeeping.
20 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you ask him any
21 further questions about that?
23 Q. Did he ever say anything to you about the
24 ranch, about the family?
26 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Offered to refresh
27 recollection.
28 THE COURT: The objection is sustained.
349
2 Q. Did he make any further statements to you
3 about the Arvizo family?
4 A. Yes, he said that they had been brought back
5 to the ranch.
6 Q. Did this conversation concern you?
7 A. Yes, it did.
8 Q. Why?
9 A. Because I didn't understand why he would be
10 so upset about them leaving the ranch and then
11 telling me the situation had been contained and that
12 they had been brought back to the rather all within
13 a span of approximately 12 hours or so.
14 Q. Did you have any conversations with other
15 members of the team regarding this issue?
16 A. Yes, I did.
17 Q. Who else?
19 Q. When did that conversation take place?
20 A. It was later that same day, on the 13th.
21 Q. Did you call him or did he call you?
22 A. I called him.
23 Q. And what did you ask him?
24 A. I said, "Did I hear right, what Marc
25 Schaffel said to me; that Janet left the ranch?"
26 And I said, "Don't make me believe --

350
1 THE WITNESS: I said, "Don't make me believe
2 that these people were hunted down like dogs and
3 brought back to the ranch."
4 THE COURT: Okay. I'm going to strike that
5 answer in response to the nonresponsive objection.
6 The jury's to disregard the answer.
8 Q. When did you tell Mr. LeGrand -- well, let
9 me rephrase that.
10 Did you tell Mr. LeGrand -- express to Mr.
11 LeGrand your concern about the Arvizos?
12 A. Yes, I did.
14 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: What did you say?
15 THE COURT: Just a moment. Overruled.
16 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: What did you say? How
17 did you express your concern to Mr. LeGrand?
18 A. What words did I use?
19 Q. Yes.
20 MR. MESEREAU: It's hearsay, Your Honor.
21 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: The response is what is
22 being offered. The responses to the question is
23 being offered in advance of the conspiracy.
24 THE COURT: All right. I'll allow the
25 answer.
26 Do you need the question read back?
27 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor. I don't

28 understand the --
351
1 THE COURT: All right. She doesn't
2 understand. You need to rephrase your question. We
3 won't read it back.
4 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I need you to answer
5 this question one more time for me. What did you
6 say to Mr. LeGrand concerning -- well, you
7 previously said that Mr. LeGrand -- well, no. Let
8 me strike that.
9 What did you say to Mr. LeGrand expressing
10 your concern about the Arvizos, specifically? What
11 did you say?
12 A. Do you want my verbatim?
13 Q. Yes.
14 MR. MESEREAU: Hearsay and foundation.
16 THE WITNESS: I said, "Don't make me believe
17 that these people were hunted down like dogs and
18 brought back to the ranch."
19 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did Mr. LeGrand answer
20 your question directly?
21 A. Yes, he did.
22 Q. What did he say?
23 A. He said, "I can't discuss this right now."
24 Q. Then what happened?
25 A. Um, we continued to discuss what happened on
26 the morning conference call with Bell Yard, and hung
27 up.
28 Q. Did you ever express your concern or ask any
352
1 questions about this subject to any other members of
2 the team?
3 A. Yes, I did.
4 Q. Who was that?
5 A. Ronald Konitzer.
6 Q. How did you express your concern to Ronald
7 Konitzer? Let me back up.
8 First of all, when did this conversation
9 take place?
10 A. It was later in the day of the 13th.
11 Q. And how did you express your concern to Mr.
12 Konitzer?
14 foundation.
15 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Same purpose, Your Honor.
16 THE COURT: To explain the response that's --
18 THE COURT: -- that's in the furtherance of a
19 conspiracy?
21 THE COURT: All right. I'll overrule the
22 objection.
23 THE WITNESS: I asked him about Marc
24 Schaffel's comment about the situation being
25 contained.
26 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: And do you recall
27 specifically what you asked him?

28 A. Yes. I said, "What was" -- "What was the
353
1 situation with Janet and Gavin leaving the ranch?"
2 Q. And what did he tell you?
3 A. He told me that --
6 the conspiracy.
7 THE COURT: The objection's overruled
8 THE WITNESS: He told me that the situation
9 had been taken care of.
10 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did he offer any other
11 explanation?
12 A. No, sir, he did not.
13 Q. Did anyone ever provide you with any further
14 explanation of the Arvizo issue?
15 A. No, sir.
16 Q. Did this cause you concern?
17 A. Yes, it did.
19 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I'll rephrase.
20 THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection.
21 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: How did you feel about
22 that?
23 A. Very concerned.
24 Q. Okay. So during your tenure working with
25 the team, how did you feel, or did you agree with
26 how the team was conducting itself in terms of the
27 PR --
354
1 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: -- addressing the PR
2 issues that you were hired to address?
4 THE COURT: Compound. Sustained.
5 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you agree with the
6 team, how the team was handling the PR problem?
7 A. No, I did not.
8 Q. Why not?
9 A. Because I believed that they were leaving
10 Mr. Jackson exposed in a way that was extremely
11 negative for him.
12 Q. How were they leaving him exposed?
13 A. By not addressing the issues that were being
14 raised by the press.
15 Q. Were they being proactive?
16 A. No, not at all.
17 Q. When were you terminated as a PR
18 representative?
19 A. On the 15th of February.
20 Q. Were you given an explanation as to why you
21 were terminated?
22 A. I received an e-mail, if that's your
23 question.
24 Q. Did they explain why -- the reason for your
25 termination?
26 A. No. There was no explanation. I can tell
27 you what the e-mail said.

28 Q. What did the e-mail say?
355
1 A. The e-mail said Ronald --
4 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Okay. I'll go back to
5 the question. Did the e-mail explain -- it didn't
6 explain the reason for your termination?
7 A. No, sir. It didn't.
9 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It's not a statement.
10 THE COURT: It's not a statement. It's an
11 unstatement. Sustained.
12 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you -- were you
13 ever provided, by anybody, with an explanation --
14 A. No, sir, I was not.
15 Q. -- as to why you were terminated?
16 A. No, sir.
17 Q. At some point did you prepare to make a
18 statement, while you were still employed, on
19 television?
20 A. Yes, I did.
21 Q. What was the television show?
22 A. Access Hollywood.
23 Q. And when was that?
24 A. When was it scheduled?
25 Q. Yes.
26 A. For the 14th of February.
27 Q. Were you ever told to clear such appearances

28 before any member of the team?
356
1 A. Not when the preparations for Access
2 Hollywood were being made, no.
3 Q. Did you clear your appearance on Access
4 Hollywood with any member of the team?
5 A. Yes, sir.
6 Q. Who?
7 A. I spoke with Mr. Schaffel, I spoke with Mr.
8 Geragos and I spoke with Mr. Konitzer.
9 Q. Did you tell them what you were going to
10 say?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. Did they agree with you to go ahead?
13 A. Yes, sir.
14 Q. And did you go to Access Hollywood and
15 prepare to make that statement?
16 A. Yes, I did.
17 Q. I take it this was a pro Jackson statement
18 on Mr. Jackson's behalf?
19 A. Yes, sir.
20 Q. Did something unusual happen while you were
21 on the set?
22 A. Yes.
24 A. I was pulled off the set by Mr. Geragos.
25 Q. In what fashion?
26 A. He called Access Hollywood and told them to
27 not do the interview with me.

28 Q. How much time before the expected filming of
357
1 the set were you pulled off?
2 A. I was actually miked and sitting on the set
3 with Pat O'Brien.
4 Q. Okay. Did that cause you some concern?
5 A. Yes, it did.
6 Q. Why?
7 A. Because I was of the belief that Mr. Jackson
8 had been barraged by so much negative publicity, and
9 I wanted to be able to get back into a proactive
10 cycle for him.
11 Q. Did Mr. Geragos's involvement in this action
12 cause you any concern?
13 A. Yes, it did.
14 Q. Why?
15 A. Because he was a criminal attorney.
16 Q. Why would that cause you concern?
17 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Relevance;
18 hearsay
20 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you subsequently
21 have a conversation with Mr. Geragos about your
22 employment --
24 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: -- for Mr. Jackson?
26 You may answer.
27 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, I don't understand

28 your question.
358
1 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: After you were pulled
2 off the set of Access Hollywood, did you
3 subsequently have any conversations with Mr. Geragos
4 about your employment with Mr. Jackson?
5 A. I had a conversation with Mr. Geragos, yes.
6 Q. When did that take place?
7 A. On the set of Access Hollywood.
8 Q. So you spoke to him then?
9 A. Yes, on the phone.
10 Q. All right. And what was that conversation
11 about?
14 a conspiracy.
15 THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection,
16 because it's vague, "What was the conversation
17 about?" It calls for a conclusion of the witness.
18 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I can be more specific.
19 Did Mr. Geragos make any request of you?
20 A. Yes, he did.
21 Q. What was the request?
22 A. He --
25 the conspiracy.
27 THE WITNESS: He asked me to stay in town

28 overnight and come into his office the next morning
359
1 and meet with him.
2 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: For what purpose?
3 A. To sign a private --
4 MR. MESEREAU: Same objection.
6 THE WITNESS: To sign a private
7 investigator's confidentiality agreement.
8 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Are you a private
9 investigator?
10 A. No, sir.
11 Q. Do you understand what that would have done
12 to you if you had signed such an agreement?
13 A. I had an idea, sir.
14 MR. MESEREAU: Calls for speculation, Your
15 Honor.
17 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you have an
18 understanding as to the effect, the legal effect of
19 that agreement, if you signed it?
20 MR. MESEREAU: Foundation; speculation.
21 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Goes to her intent as to
22 whether she wanted to sign the agreement or not.
23 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I can ask another
24 foundational question.
26 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did you sign that
27 agreement?
28 A. No, sir.
360
1 Q. Why not?
2 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Relevance;
3 hearsay; foundation.
5 You may answer.
6 THE WITNESS: Because I believed that it
7 would negatively impact me.
8 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Why? In what way?
9 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Speculation;
10 relevance; foundation; hearsay.
12 You may answer.
13 THE WITNESS: I believed it was designed to
14 shut me up.
15 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Based on your
16 performance as a PR person for Michael Jackson, how
17 would you evaluate your attempted performance or
18 your attempt to help him in a PR sense?
20 relevance, foundation; calls for speculation;
21 hearsay.
22 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: How is this hearsay? I
23 don't see any -- this is her evaluation. This is a
24 spurious objection.
25 MR. MESEREAU: An opinion.
26 THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection and
27 relevancy. An opinion of her own performance.

361
1 Q. Did you ever form an opinion, based on
2 everything that happened during this period of time
3 that you were working for Mr. Jackson and the time
4 immediately preceding it, as to why they terminated
5 you? Based on all the conduct of the parties, based
6 on all you knew about this case and your job, did
7 you ever form an opinion as to why you were
8 terminated?
9 A. Yes, I did.
10 Q. What was your -- what's your opinion on
11 that?
12 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Opinion;
13 relevance.
15 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Not a proper lay opinion?
16 THE COURT: The objection was sustained.
18 Q. After your termination, Ms. Kite, did you
19 have a conversation with David LeGrand about Janet
20 Arvizo?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Leading; hearsay.
23 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It's -- it's a yes or no
24 question. It is not hearsay. And it's hardly
25 leading. It's just an open-ended question, whether
26 she had a conversation.
27 THE COURT: Objection is overruled. She did

28 answer. She said, "Yes, I did."
362
2 Q. When did this conversation take place?
3 A. Approximately a week to ten days after I was
4 terminated.
5 Q. Were you in a room with him? Telephone?
6 You tell me.
7 A. We were on the telephone.
8 Q. And did he convey some information to you
9 about Janet Arvizo?
10 A. Yes, he did.
11 Q. What did he say to you?
13 foundation; relevance.
15 the conspiracy.
17 THE WITNESS: He said that they no longer
18 had to worry about Janet Arvizo because they had her
19 on tape and they were going to make her look like a
20 crank whore.
21 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Thank you, Ms. Kite. No
22 further questions.
23 THE COURT: Cross-examine?
24 MR. MESEREAU: Yes, please, Your Honor.
25
26 CROSS-EXAMINATION
27 BY MR. MESSEREAU:
28 Q. Good morning.
363
1 A. Good morning.
2 Q. Ms. Kite, my name is Thomas Mesereau and I
3 speak for Mr. Jackson.
4 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I'm going to object to
5 counsel's preamble concerning who he represents.
7 (Laughter.)
8 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Ms. Kite, I'd like to
9 refer you to Exhibit 410, which is a document the
10 prosecutor showed you, which has names and phone
11 numbers on it. Do you see that document? I think
12 it's labeled as 410 in the book you have.
13 A. Yes, sir, I do.
14 Q. And just for the record, that is a document
15 you referred to while the prosecutor was asking you
16 questions, correct?
17 A. Yes, sir.
18 Q. And it's a document that appears to have
19 names and phone numbers on it only, correct?
21 Q. And you looked at that document when you
22 were testifying and you gave the names of people who
23 were on the team, correct?
25 Q. And this was the team that you worked with
26 for purposes of public relations, right?
27 A. Yes, sir.
28 Q. Does Mr. Jackson's name appear on that
364
1 document?
2 A. No, sir, it does not.
3 Q. Does Mr. Jackson's phone number appear on
4 that document?
5 A. No, sir, it does not.
6 Q. And while you were working with this team,
7 you never met Mr. Jackson, correct?
9 Q. And you never spoke with Mr. Jackson,
10 correct?
11 A. No, I did not, that's correct.
12 Q. You never met any of the Arvizos, correct?
13 A. That's correct, sir.
14 Q. And at that time you never spoke to the
15 Arvizos, correct?
17 Q. Have you ever been to Neverland?
19 Q. How long were you employed by this team?
20 A. From the 9th of February to the 15th of
21 February.
22 Q. So you were brought on board on the 9th?
23 A. Officially, yes.
24 Q. You were terminated on the 15th?
25 A. Yes, sir.
26 Q. So you worked for less than a week?

28 Q. Now, while you worked on this team for less
365
1 than a week, did you have other clients?
2 A. Yes, sir, I did.
3 Q. How many other clients were you working for
4 during this six-day period?
5 A. Just one.
6 Q. Okay. Who was that?
7 A. Webcaster Alliance.
8 Q. And you have represented that client for a
9 long time; have you not?
10 A. At that time, no, I had not.
11 Q. Well, did you have a position with that
12 client as well?
13 A. Yes, I did.
14 Q. What was your position with that client?
15 A. The president.
16 Q. Okay. You were president of the Webcaster
17 Alliance, correct?
18 A. Yes, sir.
19 Q. Would you please tell the jury what the
20 Webcaster Alliance is?
21 A. The Webcaster Alliance is an organization
22 that supports Internet-related webcasters, support
23 services, manufacturers, anything to do with
24 broadcasting music over the Internet.
25 Q. And how many people are members of that --
26 or excuse me, let me rephrase that.
27 How many people were members of that

28 alliance at this particular time?
366
1 A. At that time I don't remember specifically.
2 I think it was a little bit over 100, but I'm not
3 sure.
4 Q. In the six days that you represented Mr.
5 Jackson, as you described it, and were president of
6 this alliance, did you think you became an expert on
7 Mr. Jackson's life?
8 A. Oh, no, sir, I would never profess to be an
9 expert on anybody's life.
10 Q. Please answer my question.
11 A. No, sir.
12 Q. During the six days you claim you worked for
13 this team, did you think you became an expert on Mr.
14 Jackson's music?
15 A. No, sir.
16 Q. Okay. During the six days that you worked
17 with this team, and at the same time were president
18 of the Webcaster Alliance, you didn't really become
19 an expert on anything associated with Mr. Jackson,
20 did you?
21 A. No, sir.
22 Q. Okay. Now, you told the Santa Barbara
23 sheriffs that you were very concerned that these
24 people were ripping off Mr. Jackson, didn't you?
25 A. I don't remember saying that, sir.
26 Q. Did you ever tell anything to the Santa
27 Barbara sheriff that suggested you thought these

28 people were taking advantage of Mr. Jackson?
367
1 A. I don't remember saying anything like that,
2 sir.
3 Q. Okay. You met with the Santa Barbara
4 sheriffs approximately when; do you know?
5 A. I believe it was in March of 2004.
6 Q. Okay. It was approximately March 11th,
7 correct?
8 A. Yes, sir.
9 Q. And you gave them a lengthy statement, did
10 you not?
11 A. Yes, I did.
12 Q. To your knowledge, was that statement
13 recorded?
14 A. Yes, I believe it was.
15 Q. And were you told that your statement was
16 going to appear in the form of a police report?
17 A. I don't remember, sir.
18 Q. Have you discussed your statement with
19 anyone on the prosecution team at any time?
20 A. The statement in the police report?
21 Q. Yes.
22 A. Yes, I did.
23 Q. And when did you last discuss that with any
24 member of the prosecution team?
25 A. I don't remember. Sometime probably in the
26 last couple weeks.
27 Q. Who did you talk to about that?

28 A. To Gordon, Mr. Auchincloss.
368
1 Q. Okay. And that's the prosecutor who just
2 asked you questions, correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Did he give you a copy of that police report
5 to look at?
6 A. Yes, he did.
7 Q. Did you read it?
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. Did you discuss its contents with Mr.
10 Auchincloss?
11 A. I don't understand your question.
12 Q. Did you discuss the contents of that police
13 report with Mr. Auchincloss?
14 A. I discussed --
15 Q. Let me rephrase the --
16 A. Okay.
17 Q. Maybe I'm being --
18 A. Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm not trying to be
19 stupid.
20 Q. No, you're not. Don't worry.
21 Mr. Auchincloss gave you a copy of the
22 police report, correct?
24 Q. He asked you to read it, correct?
25 A. Yes, he did.
26 Q. And it's a pretty long report, isn't it?
27 A. Yes, it is.
28 Q. And, in fact, it goes for many pages,
369
1 correct?
2 A. Yes, it does.
3 Q. And it is a narrative summary about what you
4 told the police, true?
5 A. Yes, it is.
6 Q. What you told the sheriffs?
7 A. Yes, it is. That's correct.
8 Q. And it actually -- you had an approximately
9 90-minute conversation with the sheriffs in March
10 when you were interviewed, true?
11 A. Yes, somewhere around there. I don't
12 remember the time. But it was lengthy.
13 Q. You told them a lot of things you haven't
14 said today, correct?
15 A. Yes, I did.
16 Q. You told them a lot of things that you felt
17 about the way the so-called team was handling Mr.
18 Jackson --
19 A. Yes, I did.
20 Q. -- correct?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. Okay. Now, you are referred to as Ann
23 Gabriel in the report, correct?
25 Q. That was your name at the time, right?
26 A. That's the name I used professionally.
27 Q. Okay. Was your name Kite at the time, your

28 legal name?
370
1 A. My legal name is still Kite, but I go
2 professionally by Ann Gabriel.
3 Q. Okay. And your understanding was that you
4 would be referred to as "Gabriel" in the police
5 report, true?
6 A. Yes, sir.
7 Q. You told the sheriffs that you are the owner
8 of Gabriel Media, Inc., right?
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. And you were asked how you got involved in
11 this matter, right?
12 A. Yes, sir.
13 Q. Okay. And you told the police that you were
14 hired by Attorney David LeGrand, correct?
15 A. Yes, sir, that's correct.
16 Q. And you had previously dated David LeGrand,
17 right?
18 A. Yes, sir.
19 Q. You didn't tell that to the police at that
20 time, correct?
22 Q. Okay. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, did you
23 stop dating Mr. LeGrand when you were hired by the
24 team?
26 Q. Okay. So you and LeGrand had a professional
27 relationship only at that time?

371
1 Q. And are you telling the jury that you ended
2 the dating relationship just as you began this
3 professional task?
5 Q. Okay. Did you and Mr. LeGrand talk about
6 the fact that it might not look good if you guys
7 were dating while you took this job?
8 A. No, sir, we did not.
9 Q. Did you ever disclose to other members of
10 this team that you and Mr. LeGrand had dated before?
12 Q. You both agreed to keep that hidden, right?
13 A. No, sir. We never agreed on anything. We
14 never discussed it. We never agreed or disagreed or
15 talked at all about hiding it or not hiding it.
16 Q. Okay. Now, let me just explore that a
17 little bit. You and Mr. LeGrand are dating, and
18 suddenly you decide to be hired as a professional
19 public relations person, true?
20 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; argumentative.
22 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You and Mr. LeGrand were
23 dating right up until the very moment that you were
24 hired as a professional by this team?
25 A. No, sir, not right up until the very moment.
26 Q. Okay. How much time was there between your
27 relationship ending and you being hired to do public

28 relations for this team?
372
1 A. My relationship with Mr. LeGrand on a
2 personal level --
3 Q. Yes.
4 A. -- stopped for that moment at the end of
5 January, but it was always hanging out there.
6 Q. Okay. And I'm not trying to pry into the
7 nature of your relationship at all.
8 A. No, I have no problem answering your
9 question. I just want you to understand
10 specifically, that for that moment in January, when
11 we decided not to see each other personally
12 anymore --
13 Q. Right.
14 A. -- it had nothing to do with any
15 professional performance that he may engage me in in
16 the future.
17 Q. Okay. Now --
18 A. We were involved in other projects together
19 on the professional side.
20 Q. When you were dating up until -- is it the
21 9th of January, is that what you said?
22 A. No, the end of January.
23 Q. The end of January. When you were dating
24 Mr. LeGrand up until the end of January, did you
25 ever discuss the possibility of your being hired to
26 do public relations for this team?
27 A. Yes, sir.
28 Q. And at some point, you must have both
373
1 agreed, '"We're going to terminate the relationship
2 and I'm going to be hired on the team," right?
4 THE COURT: It's asked and answered.
5 Sustained.
6 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Needless to say, you never
7 told Mr. Jackson that you had had this prior
8 relationship, right?
9 A. Oh, no, sir, I never spoke to Mr. Jackson.
10 Q. Never wrote him either?
11 A. No, I did not.
12 Q. Okay. Okay. Now, when the prosecutor was
13 asking you questions about the people you were
14 working with, remember you said you thought Mr.
15 Jackson was at the top?
16 A. I don't remember the prosecutor asking me
17 anything about if I thought Mr. Jackson was at the
18 top.
19 Q. Well, during his questions of you yesterday,
20 do you remember he sort of tried to emphasize that
21 Mr. Jackson was at the top of some structure?
22 A. I don't remember him bringing Mr. Jackson's
23 name up at the top of a structure. I believe he
24 asked me about the team that I worked with.
25 Q. Well, at no time when you were interviewed
26 by the police or the sheriffs did you ever say Mr.
27 Jackson was on this team, right?

374
1 Q. Because based upon your experience, Mr.
2 Jackson wasn't on this team, correct?
4 Q. You described the team to the Santa Barbara
5 sheriffs as composed of the following individuals:
6 Mr. LeGrand, right?
7 A. Yes, sir.
8 Q. Mark Geragos, right?
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. Stuart Backerman, right?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. Ronald Konitzer?
13 A. Yes, sir.
14 Q. And Dieter Weizner, right?
15 A. Yes, sir.
16 Q. You told the Santa Barbara sheriffs there
17 were also attorneys from the UK, correct?
18 A. Yes, sir.
19 Q. But you told them you had not spoken with
20 them or met them, true?
21 A. No, I never said I had not spoken with them.
22 I'm sure I had said I had not met them since they
23 were in the UK. But I couldn't say I had not spoken
24 with them when I had been on conference calls with
25 them.
26 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I just
27 show you this page in the report?

28 A. Sure. Absolutely, you can.
375
1 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. May I approach, Your
2 Honor?
3 THE COURT: Yes.
4 MR. MESEREAU: Thank you.
5 THE WITNESS: Oh, yes. I had not spoken with
6 them or met them up until the point that Mr. LeGrand
7 sent me the e-mail welcoming me to the team. That's
8 what that's about.
9 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Doesn't say that there,
10 does it?
11 A. Yes, that's what that paragraph says.
12 Q. Let me just -- for the record --
13 THE COURT: Counsel, you've showed her
14 something to refresh her recollection.
15 MR. MESEREAU: Okay.
16 Q. Mrs. Kite, early in your interview with the
17 Santa Barbara sheriffs, you told them you had not
18 spoken with or met with attorneys from the UK, true?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Okay. You told the Santa Barbara sheriffs
21 that you had been brought in by Mr. LeGrand because
22 Mr. LeGrand was not PR savvy, true?
23 A. That's correct. Yes.
24 Q. And you told them there was a huge media
25 crisis due to the Martin Bashir interview, right?
27 Q. You told the Santa Barbara sheriffs you

28 believed you had the ability to read what was going
376
1 on, in connection with the press, right?
3 Q. You thought your connections with the press
4 were pretty good, correct?
5 A. Yes, I did.
6 Q. And you told the Santa Barbara sheriffs you
7 had been involved in public relations for
8 approximately 20 years?
10 Q. And that's correct, right?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. Excuse me, it was at the time, right?
13 A. Yeah. I'm a little older now, yes.
14 Q. All right. And you also told them you had
15 done broadcasting, right?
16 A. That's correct, that's correct.
17 Q. What broadcasting had you done?
18 A. I had done Internet broadcasting.
19 Q. Can you please explain what that is?
20 A. Sure, absolutely. It's just like
21 television, but it's done over the Internet.
22 Q. How long had you done that at that time?
23 A. At that time, since 1997. So whatever year
24 it was that I spoke with the police. 2004.
25 Q. Were you doing Internet broadcasting while
26 you were working with this team?
27 A. No, sir, I was not.

28 Q. Okay. Please tell the jury what you were
377
1 doing as president of the Webcasters Alliance?
2 A. Well, at that point, we were working toward
3 legislation for webcasters to help them be allowed
4 to play music on the Internet. It was more working
5 on the political side.
6 Q. Now, who was opposing your efforts to play
7 music on the Internet?
8 A. The Recording Industry Association of
9 America.
10 Q. Okay. And who does that comprise, if you
11 know?
12 A. That comprises the five major labels --
13 well, there were five at the time. There's three
14 now, so....
15 Q. And are you saying it's composed of record
16 labels?
18 Q. What record labels were opposing you at that
19 time?
20 A. The ones that belonged to the Recording
21 Industry Association of America.
22 Q. Okay. Do you know who they were?
23 A. I can give you the majors, which would be
24 Warner Music, Universal, BMG, Sony.
25 Q. Okay. They were opposing you, right?
26 A. Yes, sir.
27 Q. Now --
28 A. They were opposing webcasters.
378
1 Q. Webcasters. All right. Okay.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. They were opposing them pretty vigorously,
4 right?
5 A. Yes, sir, they were.
6 Q. Do you know why they were opposing you so
7 vigorously?
8 A. Are you asking me personal opinion or are
9 you asking what they said to the public? They're
10 two different things.
11 Q. Okay. They gave -- actually, in the course
12 of your work to get legislation passed, the record
13 labels hired lobbyists, didn't they?
14 A. Yes, they did.
15 Q. And the lobbyists went around to various
16 politicians opposing what you were trying to do,
17 correct?
19 Q. To your knowledge, they did that because
20 they felt it would hurt the music industry, at least
21 as far as they're concerned, if you could play this
22 music on the Internet, right?
24 Q. In fact, they made a pitch that they could
25 lose a lot of money if this music was played on the
26 Internet, right?
27 A. That was their pitch, yes.

28 Q. And you felt, and the members of your
379
1 organization felt, that you should be free to take
2 these songs generated by these music companies and
3 play them on the Internet, right?
4 A. Well, no, sir, not the way that you're
5 stating it, that's not correct.
6 Q. How would you state it?
7 A. We felt that Internet broadcasters should
8 fall under the same realm as traditional terrestrial
9 radio stations did. And we believed that Internet
10 broadcasting was every bit, if not more so, valuable
11 to performers and artists, especially independent
12 artists who might not have a chance to be heard on
13 traditional terrestrial radio stations.
14 Q. Now, you certainly knew, while you were
15 doing this, that Mr. Jackson had business
16 arrangements with some of these major record labels,
17 right?
18 A. I knew that Mr. Jackson had spoken out
19 vigorously against the labels earlier. And I knew
20 that he also still had an existing contract or
21 believed that he still had an existing contract with
22 Sony.
23 Q. But your position as president of the
24 Webcasters Alliance was against Sony, right, at
25 least as far as that issue was concerned?
26 A. Well, I wouldn't market against Sony. Our
27 position was to try to explain to the labels that we

28 could be every bit as friendly to them as a
380
1 terrestrial radio station would.
2 We certainly didn't want to be against them.
3 We wanted to help them promote their artists' music
4 and sell more music.
5 Q. You knew Mr. Jackson had a relationship with
6 Sony at that time, correct?
8 Q. Did you ever make any effort to advise Mr.
9 Jackson that you might have a conflict of interest,
10 if you were taking this position against Sony while
11 Mr. Jackson was in a business relationship with
12 Sony?
13 A. No, not Mr. Jackson. But Mr. LeGrand was
14 aware of it because Mr. LeGrand was working on the
15 legislation with me.
16 Q. Did he tell you there was no problem?
17 A. Well, if Mr. LeGrand was working on the
18 legislation with me and went to the Recording
19 Industry Association of America with me while he was
20 also representing Mr. Jackson, I wouldn't have any
21 reason to think there would be a conflict on my
22 part.
23 Q. So correct me if I'm wrong. What you're
24 saying is you never actually discussed a possible
25 conflict, but you assumed, because Mr. LeGrand hired
26 you, it must be okay with Mr. Jackson, correct?
27 A. Yes, sir, you're absolutely right.

28 Q. All right. All right. You told the Santa
381
1 Barbara sheriffs that you were contacted by
2 telephone by Mr. LeGrand regarding your being hired
3 to do public relations work, correct?
4 A. That was not my initial contact with Mr.
5 LeGrand about doing public relation for Michael
6 Jackson; nor was that how I found out that Mr.
7 LeGrand hired me.
8 Q. Didn't you tell the Santa Barbara sheriffs
9 that you had actually spoken with LeGrand in
10 Washington D.C., but you were contacted by telephone
11 regarding the public relations work?
12 A. I had spoken face to face with Mr. LeGrand
13 about doing public relations for Mr. Jackson in
14 Washington D.C.
15 Q. Okay. Would it refresh your recollection if
16 I just show you the report?
17 A. Yes, you can show it to me. That's fine.
18 MR. MESEREAU: May I, Your Honor? Thank
19 you.
21 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you had a chance to
22 look at that report, Ms. Kite?
23 A. Yes, I have.
24 Q. And is the report accurate or inaccurate?
25 A. Yes, I did speak with Mr. LeGrand in
26 Washington D.C. about working for Mr. Jackson. But
27 my recollection is -- as I sit here right now, was

28 receiving an e-mail from Mr. LeGrand on the morning
382
1 of the 9th of February that said, "Welcome to the
2 team."
3 Q. Okay. But -- I showed you the report. Does
4 that appear to be slightly inaccurate, as far as
5 you're concerned?
6 A. I don't -- I don't know, sir.
7 Q. Okay.
8 A. I'm telling you, sitting here right now, my
9 recollection is that I received an e-mail from Mr.
10 LeGrand --
11 Q. Okay.
12 A. -- on the morning of the 9th.
13 Q. Well, you received an e-mail welcoming you
14 to the team, correct?
16 Q. But you told the police that you were
17 contacted by telephone before that about taking the
18 job, right?
19 A. I guess so, sir.
20 Q. Okay. Sound right to you?
21 A. I guess, if you say so.
22 Q. No, I'm asking you.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. All right. Had you represented any
25 celebrities before?
26 A. Yes, I have.
27 Q. Who had you represented?

28 A. Well, I'm sure you wouldn't consider him a
383
1 celebrity, but he considers himself one. Would be
2 Mr. Sylver, Marshal Sylver, who lives in Las Vegas.
3 Q. Who is he?
4 A. He's an entertainer. He also has done a lot
5 of commercials, infomercials. And he did, you know,
6 television. He was very much into self-hypnosis and
7 things like that.
8 Q. Okay. Any other celebrities?
9 A. I have interviewed celebrities, yes.
10 Q. Correct me if I'm wrong. The question
11 was --
12 A. No, sir.
13 Q. The question was, "Did you represent any
14 other celebrities?"
15 A. No, sir, not in the way that I did Mr.
16 Sylver.
17 Q. Really, I think what you're saying, he was
18 the only celebrity that you had actually represented
19 as a PR spokesperson --
21 Q. -- before you joined this team?
23 Q. Okay. Now, you said you were an expert at
24 media crisis management, right?
25 A. Are you asking me what I believe?
26 Q. Well, I'm asking you what you said.
27 A. Yes, sir.
28 Q. Correct me if I'm wrong --
384
1 A. Yes, sir.
2 Q. -- didn't you tell the jury you were an
3 expert on media crisis management at this point in
4 time?
5 A. Yes, sir.
6 Q. All right. Did you do media crisis
7 management for Mr. Sylver?
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. So, actually, you had only done media crisis
10 management for one person you consider a celebrity
11 before you joined this team?
12 A. For one person that I would consider a
13 celebrity, yes, sir.
14 Q. Okay. You really weren't very experienced
15 in handling media crisis management for celebrities,
16 were you?
17 A. Are you asking me what I believe or are you
18 making a statement?
19 Q. I'm asking you to answer a question. You
20 really weren't very experienced in handling media
21 crisis management for celebrities before you joined
22 this team, right?
23 A. I believed I was.
24 Q. Because you represented one?
25 A. Because I've seen a lot.
26 Q. I'm not asking you what you've seen; I'm
27 asking you what you've done. Okay?

28 A. Yes, I have represented one person that was
385
1 a celebrity, sir.
2 Q. Okay. His name was Sylver?
3 A. Marshal Sylver, yes. S-y-l-v-e-r.
4 Q. To your knowledge, is he on television a
5 lot?
6 A. He had been at the time. I don't believe he
7 is anymore, no.
8 Q. He had been in television in what capacity?
9 A. He had produced infomercials.
10 Q. Did he appear himself on television?
11 A. Yes, sir, he did.
12 Q. Where did these info commercials appear, do
13 you know?
14 A. I don't remember. This was several years
15 ago, and I don't -- I mean, they appeared in a lot
16 of markets.
17 Q. Okay. And were you helping him do the
18 infomercials?
19 A. I was helping him promote himself on the
20 Internet. He had an Internet radio talk show. I
21 was helping schedule other appearances for him on
22 television shows. And we were working on another
23 book for him, and other infomercials that he had in
24 the future, yes.
25 Q. Okay. And just how long did your
26 representation of Mr. Sylver go for?
27 A. I think it was about a year, but I don't

28 remember. This was a while ago.
386
1 Q. And what year was that?
2 A. Maybe around 98 or '99.
3 Q. Okay. So before you joined the team to
4 handle crisis management for Mr. Jackson, you had
5 done this kind of work for one person you considered
6 a celebrity for one year, right?
7 A. Yes, sir.
8 Q. And you believed that one of your duties was
9 to help the team put together a plan, correct?
11 Q. And it was supposed to be a plan that would
12 be consistent with your philosophy of being
13 proactive, right?
15 Q. Okay. I'll break it down.
16 Correct me if I'm wrong, you testified that
17 you wanted to be proactive?
19 Q. With respect to the response to the Bashir
20 recording, correct?
22 Q. And that also was just your general
23 philosophy when it comes to dealing with crisis for
24 celebrities, correct?
26 Q. Had you been proactive with Mr. Sylver?
27 A. Yes, sir, I had.

28 Q. Okay. Did he have a crisis?
387
2 Q. And did you feel that you handled the crisis
3 pretty well?
4 A. Did I feel that he handled it very well?
5 Q. That you did.
6 A. Yes, I felt that I did. I didn't believe
7 that he did, but I felt that I did.
8 Q. Okay. Is there any reason why you only
9 spent a year with him?
10 A. Yes, I moved on to other things.
11 Q. Like what?
12 A. More Internet broadcasting. I began to get
13 into more technical aspects of promoting products
14 and services.
15 Q. Okay. And out of crisis management?
16 A. No, never out of it. But just -- technology
17 was very fascinating for me, and so I began to do a
18 lot of productions from conventions in Las Vegas.
19 Consumer electronic show, the National Association
20 of Broadcasting. Those types of things. Comdex.
21 Q. But your proactive philosophy meant what?
22 A. Did you say "meant what"?
23 Q. Yes, please.
24 A. The proactive philosophy meant that I
25 would -- in terms of taking care of a client, is
26 that what you're asking me?
27 Q. Yes.
28 A. That I would assess their assets and
388
1 vulnerabilities and map out a plan for them to be
2 able to address any issues that might come up in the
3 future and to be able to promote themselves in the
4 manner that they aspire to.
5 Q. Now, with all due respect, how do you assess
6 the assets and vulnerabilities of Mr. Jackson if
7 you've never met him?
8 A. Mr. Mesereau, there are millions of people
9 in the world that have never met Mr. Jackson and
10 judge him based on what they read in the media.
11 I believe, for myself, as someone who
12 handles public relations - and I'm not going to term
13 myself as an expert in deference to you - what those
14 people read in the media directly reflects to them
15 who Mr. Jackson is. They have never met him either.
16 So what better way to try to connect with the
17 public's thinking than to read what's printed in the
18 media about him and try to counteract it to his
19 benefit?
20 Q. But -- let me repeat my question: You can't
21 really know a person if you haven't met them, right?
24 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: When you put this plan
25 together, you didn't know the person called Michael
26 Jackson at all, right?
27 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; asked and

28 answered numerous times.
389
1 THE COURT: Asked and answered; sustained.
3 Q. You told the Santa Barbara sheriffs that one
4 of the goals of the team was to put together a plan
5 of action, right?
6 A. Yes, sir.
7 Q. And you said another goal of the team was to
8 sue Granada, the company that had produced the
9 Martin Bashir program, correct?
11 Q. And, to your knowledge, Granada was a
12 British company, right?
13 A. Yes, sir, to my knowledge.
14 Q. And it was your understanding that there was
15 a lawsuit going on in England, right?
17 Q. Now, was that lawsuit going on when you were
18 hired for those six days, or were you discussing
19 filing a suit?
20 A. I believe it had already been filed, sir.
21 Q. Okay. And is that why you were on the phone
22 call with the British attorneys?
23 A. Yes, sir.
24 Q. Okay. And did Mr. LeGrand want you on that
25 phone call?
27 Q. Were you mostly reporting to LeGrand at this

28 period of time?
390
1 A. No, sir.
2 Q. Okay. Well, you're hired for six days,
3 right?
4 A. Yes, sir.
5 Q. And during those six days, you're talking to
6 various members of the team, right?
7 A. Yes, sir.
8 Q. Now, what members of the team did you speak
9 to during those six days you were hired?
10 A. You want me to rename them to you?
11 Q. Yes, please.
12 A. Mr. Backerman. Mr. Schaffel. Mr. Konitzer.
13 Mr. Geragos. David LeGrand. And the team in the
14 UK. And you if allow me to look at one of these
15 e-mails, I can read their names off to you, too.
16 Okay?
17 Q. Okay. Sure. Thank you.
18 A. I'm sorry, I'm looking for the three-page
19 e-mail here.
20 Q. That's all right. Take your time. As long
21 as Judge Melville doesn't mind.
22 A. I'm sorry. This is a thick book. Do you
23 have a copy of that three-page e-mail that Gordon
24 showed me earlier? Because the names were listed on
25 there.
26 Q. Let me see. I think I do.
27 MR. SNEDDON: It's 43, Gordon. Page 43.

391
1 Q. All right. You mentioned Backerman,
2 Konitzer, Geragos, LeGrand? And who else?
3 Schaffel?
4 A. Yes, sir.
5 Q. And the British lawyers, correct?
6 A. Yes, sir, and the British -- and the UK
7 crisis management team, Bell Yard.
8 Q. Okay. Okay. And Bell Yard, you had
9 mentioned one woman's name, right?
10 A. Melanie Riley and also Richard. I believe
11 Richard's name is on that e-mail too.
12 Q. These are all members of the team that you
13 worked with, right?
14 A. Yes, sir.
15 Q. For those six days?
16 A. Yes, sir.
17 Q. Did you have any conference calls where
18 every member of the team was on the phone?
19 A. No, sir, I can't remember that we had any
20 conference call when every single member of the team
21 was on the phone.
22 Q. Did you have face-to-face conversations with
23 the various team members?
24 A. With Mr. LeGrand.
25 Q. Anyone else?
26 A. No. Not that I remember.
27 Q. Have you ever personally met Mr. Schaffel?

392
1 Q. Have you ever personally met Mr. Konitzer?
3 Q. Never personally met Mr. Geragos?
5 Q. Never personally met any of the British
6 lawyers?
8 Q. Ever personally met Mr. Backerman?
10 Q. So one member of the team only you had
11 face-to-face conversations with, right?
12 A. Yes, sir, because Mr. LeGrand was in Las
13 Vegas.
14 Q. Okay. That's where you were?
15 A. Yes, sir.
16 Q. Okay. Now, is your office near his?
17 A. It was about 20 minutes away. 25 minutes
18 away.
19 Q. Okay. During those six days, did you have a
20 lot of meetings with Mr. LeGrand face to face about
21 the team?
22 A. No, I did not.
23 Q. How many meetings did you have with Mr.
24 LeGrand during those six days regarding the team?
25 A. Face to face?
26 Q. Yes, please.
27 A. Just one.
28 Q. Did you have a lot of phone calls with Mr.
393
1 LeGrand during those six days?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. About the team?
4 A. I did.
5 Q. How many phone calls do you think you had
6 with Mr. LeGrand during those six days where you
7 discussed the team?
8 A. I don't understand your question. Are you
9 talking about where we discussed the team as -- as
10 far as it relates to what the team has discussed or
11 where we discussed the team as far as it relates to
12 my objections to things that were going on?
13 Q. Well, anything what have so far about the
14 team. So let me restate the question.
15 A. Oh.
16 Q. During the six days you were on this team,
17 you've indicated Mr. LeGrand is the only person you
18 ever saw face to face, right?
19 A. Yes, sir.
20 Q. And you've indicated that you had a lot of
21 phone calls with Mr. LeGrand during those six days
22 to discuss team business?
23 A. Yes, sir.
24 Q. Approximately how many phone calls do you
25 think you had with Mr. LeGrand during those six days
26 to discuss team business?
27 A. Probably more than 50.

28 Q. Okay. How many phone calls did you have
394
1 with Mr. Backerman during those six days, if you can
2 guess. Or not guess; if you know.
3 A. As few as possible.
4 Q. How many?
5 A. Maybe seven. Between five and seven.
6 Q. Okay. Mr. Backerman really was a competitor
7 of yours, wasn't he?
8 A. No, sir. He wasn't.
9 Q. He was in the public relations business, was
10 he not?
11 A. Mr. Backerman was hired as the official
12 spokesperson. It was my understanding that Mr.
13 Backerman was hired as Mr. Jackson's spokesperson.
14 Q. Okay. What was your official title while
15 you were a member of the team?
16 A. I never asked for an official title, sir.
17 Q. What did you consider yourself to be?
18 A. Just someone who would handle public
19 relations for Mr. Jackson.
20 Q. Okay. Okay. Did you ever speak to the
21 media directly during those six days?
23 Q. Who did you speak for?
24 A. I don't remember. I couldn't tell you. I
25 do remember that I was on a couple of phone calls
26 with people from the media. Overflow calls I got
27 directed to me, or calls that Stuart wasn't

28 answering and Bell Yard was concerned about, they
395
1 wanted me to speak to them directly. And I did
2 speak with Claudia Eaton with NBC.
3 Q. And when you spoke to these people, you must
4 have identified yourself as having some role
5 involving Mr. Jackson?
6 A. I believe I just said I handled public
7 relations for Mr. Jackson. I couldn't -- I mean, I
8 couldn't tell you exactly. But I am pretty sure
9 that I didn't identify myself with a grandiose
10 title.
11 Q. Did you have any business cards printed
12 up --
13 A. For Mr. Jackson?
14 Q. -- that identified you as a spokesperson for
15 Mr. Jackson?
16 A. No, sir, never.
17 Q. Any kind of stationery printed up to
18 identify yourself as a spokesperson for Mr. Jackson?
20 Q. Any kind of name tag or anything?
22 Q. Okay. Did you have any role in the lawsuit
23 against Granada?
25 Q. Well, you've indicated you were on a phone
26 conversation with British lawyers, correct?
27 A. Yes, sir.
28 Q. And that concerned the lawsuit against
396
1 Granada, right?
2 A. Yes, sir.
3 Q. Did you have any role in that lawsuit, of
4 any kind?
5 A. In how the lawsuit was being portrayed in
6 the press, yes, I did.
7 Q. And what did you do during those six days
8 about that?
9 A. I don't understand your question. What
10 actions did I take during those six days, or what
11 considerations were had?
12 Q. Well, what did you ever do during the six
13 days you were on the team to effect the Granada
14 lawsuit?
15 A. Spoke with the other members of the team as
16 far as the public relations were concerned, to put
17 out information about the lawsuit with Granada.
18 Q. Did you actually put out information,
19 yourself?
21 Q. Did you ever issue any press release
22 yourself?
23 A. No, sir, I wasn't allowed to.
24 Q. Ever issue any type of statement anywhere
25 during those six days?
26 A. Not that I can remember, no.
27 Q. Did you think during those six days you had

28 learned enough to really understand that litigation
397
1 in England?
2 A. I wasn't trying to understand the litigation
3 in England, sir.
4 Q. Now, you were asked by the Santa Barbara
5 sheriffs if you had any say-so in the
6 decision-making of the team. And you said, "Yes and
7 no." Do you remember that?
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. And you reviewed this report before you came
10 in to testify today, right?
12 Q. When did you last review it?
13 A. I don't know. It was probably about a week
14 or so ago.
15 Q. Do you have a copy in your possession?
16 A. No, sir, I don't.
17 Q. Were you sent a copy and given an
18 opportunity to read it?
19 A. Yes, sir.
20 Q. Then did you have to return the copy?
21 A. No, sir, I didn't.
22 Q. Where did the copy go; do you know?
23 A. Yes, it's in Louisiana. I didn't bring it
24 with me.
25 Q. Someone sent you the police report in
26 Louisiana?
27 A. Yes, sir.
28 Q. Do you know who did that?
398
2 Q. Did Mr. Auchincloss do that?
3 A. I'm not --
5 answered.
7 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Have you shown that report
8 to anyone?
10 Q. All right. Have you discussed your
11 testimony today with anyone before you came in?
12 A. I don't understand your question. The
13 testimony that I'm giving right now?
14 Q. Yes.
16 Q. You haven't discussed it with anyone before
17 testifying today?
18 A. I don't understand you. Are you asking if I
19 spoke with Mr. Auchincloss? You need to ask me
20 specifically, because I don't understand your term
21 of "anyone."
22 Q. You don't know what "anyone" means?
23 A. I do know what "anyone" means, but I don't
24 know what you mean by -- when you say it.
25 Q. Let me break it down slowly.
26 A. Okay.
27 Q. Did you discuss what you were going to say

28 in court today with anyone before you came in and
399
1 testified?
2 A. No one had told me what to say in court.
3 But Gordon did tell me in general what to expect of
4 the questions from him.
5 Q. How long was your meeting with Gordon?
6 A. Yesterday, when I was here?
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. You didn't give him much time. I don't
9 know, maybe ten minutes. I don't remember. I don't
10 remember.
11 Q. How long was your prior meeting with Gordon?
12 A. The night before?
13 Q. Yes.
14 A. A couple of hours.
15 Q. And in a couple of hours with Gordon, the
16 night before, you never discussed what you were
17 going to say in this courtroom?
18 A. No. Mr. -- Gordon told me generally what
19 questions he was going to ask me.
20 Q. Okay.
21 A. He said that it would be about the same type
22 of things that he went over with me in the grand
23 jury testimony, and that was it.
24 Q. Okay. So why did it last two hours?
25 A. Well, I think probably because I had a lot
26 of questions for him also.
27 Q. So you were discussing what you were going

28 to say today, right?
400
1 A. No. That doesn't mean that I was trying to
2 ask him questions about what we were going to
3 discuss today. I was very curious about this whole
4 process and the process of the lawsuit.
5 Q. Did you ever tell Mr. Auchincloss what you
6 intended to say in this courtroom during that
7 meeting that lasted a number of hours the day before
8 yesterday?
9 A. No, sir, I don't remember that I ever told
10 him what I intended to say during any of my
11 testimony.
12 Q. So, Prosecutor Auchincloss told you what he
13 was going to ask you, and you never commented on
14 what you were going to say at any time during that
15 meeting which lasted a couple of hours, right?
16 A. I wouldn't have needed to, sir, because he
17 told me basically it was the same questions that he
18 had already asked me in the grand jury testimony,
19 and I knew what my answers were.
20 Q. So why did it take so long, if you know?
21 A. Because, like I said, I was curious about
22 the whole process of the lawsuit. I was asking
23 questions about what the courtroom looked like, and
24 that type of thing.
25 Q. Okay. So you didn't ever respond to any of
26 his questions, true?
27 A. Any of what questions?

28 Q. When Prosecutor Auchincloss met with you and
401
1 I said, "I'm going to ask you," whatever the
2 question was, you just didn't comment, right?
3 A. There was no need for me, sir, because he
4 said it would be basically the same questions that
5 he asked me in my grand jury testimony.
6 He didn't say that he was going to ask me
7 anything different, and he didn't say that it was
8 going to deviate.
9 Q. Well, let's take the timing. Prosecutor
10 Auchincloss meets with you for a couple of hours.
11 He tells you, "I'm going to ask you the same
12 questions I asked you for the grand jury," which
13 takes about five seconds. What else did you talk
14 about?
15 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; this is
16 argument.
18 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Ms. Kite, you did discuss
19 with Prosecutor Auchincloss things you were going to
20 say in court today, didn't you?
21 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; these questions
22 have been asked and answered numerous times.
24 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: How many conference calls
25 with attorneys from the United Kingdom did you
26 have -- excuse me. Let me rephrase that.
27 How many conference calls did you

28 participate in with attorneys from the UK during the
402
1 six days you were hired?
2 A. With just the attorneys, or with the Bell
3 Yard also?
4 Q. Just with the attorneys.
5 A. I don't know. Maybe five or six. One a
6 day.
7 Q. And how many conference calls did you have
8 with other people employed in the United Kingdom
9 during those six days?
10 A. At least double or triple that, because I
11 talked to Bell Yard several times a day.
12 Q. Okay. Now, were you giving Bell Yard your
13 ideas about public relations issues in England?
14 A. Is your question was I giving Bell Yard
15 information about how I felt they should handle
16 public relations issues in England? No, sir --
17 Q. Sure.
18 A. -- I did not.
19 Q. Were they calling you for advice on what to
20 do in England?
21 A. No. They weren't calling me for advice on
22 what to do in England. We were talking together to
23 be able to coordinate the same type of public
24 relations effort between the United Kingdom and the
25 United States.
26 Q. Was it your understanding that Bell Yard was
27 issuing press releases in England during those six

28 days?
403
1 A. I believe they issued one or two, but I
2 don't know how many. They -- I don't know.
3 Q. Did you ever see the one or two statements
4 that they issued?
5 A. Yes, I believe I did.
6 Q. Did they fax them to you?
7 A. E-mailed them to me, I believe.
8 Q. Did they ask you for your thoughts on the
9 content?
10 A. Yes, sir.
11 Q. Did you give them the thoughts on the
12 content?
13 A. Yes, sir.
14 Q. Did you feel they followed your advice?
15 A. Yes, sir.
16 Q. So you never had any dispute with Bell Yard
17 in England with respect to public relations,
18 correct?
19 A. No, sir. Bell Yard and I agreed very much
20 on how we felt that the public relations effort
21 should be handled for Mr. Jackson.
22 Q. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, you've
23 testified that you thought these team members -- not
24 including Mr. Jackson, because he wasn't on the
25 team -- these team members overruled your ability to
26 be proactive; is that correct?
27 A. Yes, sir. That's correct.

28 Q. But you felt they didn't overrule Bell
404
1 Yard's efforts to be proactive, correct?
2 A. No, sir, that's not correct. I believed
3 that they did overrule Bell Yard also.
4 Q. Did you think the statements that you saw
5 issued by Bell Yard during those six days were
6 proactive?
7 A. There was an issue with Bell Yard when I was
8 brought on.
9 Q. And you had an issue with them?
10 A. No, there was an issue within the team with
11 Bell Yard when I was brought on.
12 Q. Here's what I'm getting at: And if I
13 misstate something, just tell me.
14 A. Uh-huh.
15 Q. You told the jury you were overruled in your
16 desire to make a public statement on behalf of the
17 team, right?
18 A. Okay. Then I understand where you're going.
19 And let me answer you this way: The press releases
20 that were put out by Bell Yard during that time
21 mainly had to do with the lawsuit against Granada,
22 and didn't at all affect the crisis issues that I
23 felt were negatively impacting Mr. Jackson's
24 reputation.
25 Q. But the crisis involving Bell Yard was a
26 crisis concerning the Bashir program, right?
27 A. It was concerning the program itself. It

28 didn't concern the attacks that were being launched
405
1 against Mr. Jackson about everything else.
2 Q. The lawsuit was filed by attorneys for Mr.
3 Jackson, true?
4 A. Yes, that's correct, sir.
5 Q. And Mr. Bashir was sued, correct?
6 A. I don't remember, sir. I believe so.
7 Q. And Granada was the company that produced
8 the Bashir show, correct?
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. To your knowledge, the lawsuit had to do
11 with their not meeting their obligations --
12 A. To my --
13 Q. -- to Mr. Jackson, right?
14 A. To my knowledge, I believed that the lawsuit
15 was launched to stop the distribution of additional
16 footage. Not to attack the integrity of the
17 lawsuit, or the integrity of the documentary.
18 Q. Did you ever read any of the legal documents
19 filed in the lawsuit?
20 A. I don't remember, sir. I don't remember.
21 Q. After your conference calls with the
22 attorneys in England, did anyone ever send you
23 copies of the legal documents that were filed in
24 that lawsuit, if you remember?
25 A. I don't remember if there were copies that
26 were sent to me. But I do believe that there were
27 snippets of issues that needed to be addressed or

28 things that were going to be put into the lawsuit,
406
1 yes.
2 Q. Okay. When were you first -- let me strike
3 that.
4 Did you have a conference call with those
5 attorneys the first day you were hired?
6 A. I don't remember. I remember having several
7 calls, but I don't remember if it was the attorneys
8 that were on the call or not. That short six-day
9 period of time, as you classify it, was basically 24
10 hours a day for me, and there was so much that
11 happened. And I couldn't tell you exactly if there
12 was anything that first day.
14 sheriffs that you were on a conference call with Mr.
15 Konitzer and Mr. Geragos, correct?
18 were on two conference calls to the United Kingdom
19 that included Konitzer and Geragos, right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did you believe you were reporting to Mr.
22 Geragos?
23 A. I believed that Mr. Geragos was one of the
24 persons that I did speak to. But as far as the
25 hierarchy is concerned, Mr. Konitzer told me that
26 Mr. Schaffel was in charge of public relations for
27 Michael Jackson. There were times that Mr. Geragos

28 called me and spoke to me about certain issues
407
1 regarding public relations; there was times that Mr.
2 Konitzer called me; and there was times that I spoke
3 with Mr. Schaffel or I spoke with Mr. LeGrand. So,
4 I mean, there wasn't a direct pecking order that I
5 had to report to. It depended on what it was that
6 they were looking for.
7 Q. Well, was it your understanding, if Mr.
8 Geragos asked you to do something, that you were
9 supposed to do it?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Was it your understanding, if Mr. Konitzer
12 asked you to do something, that you were supposed to
13 do it?
14 A. Generally, if Mr. Konitzer asked me to do
15 something, I called Mr. LeGrand.
16 Q. Okay. Let me just rephrase the question.
17 Was it your understanding -- and either it was or it
18 wasn't -- that you were supposed to do what Mr.
19 Konitzer asked you to do?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Okay. Was it your understanding that,
22 during those six days, you were supposed to do what
23 Mr. Schaffel asked you to do?
24 A. Yes, sir.
25 Q. Was it your understanding that you were
26 supposed to do whatever Mr. Backerman asked you to
27 do?
408
1 Q. Did you ever feel you reported to Backerman?
3 Q. Did you ever try to replace Mr. Backerman?
5 Q. Okay. Did you think you were supposed to do
6 what the British lawyers asked you to do during
7 those six days?
8 A. The British lawyers never asked me to do
9 anything. We -- again, on the conference calls that
10 we had, we were discussing how the public relations
11 effort between the UK and the United States would
12 mesh together, so there was never a directive from
13 the British lawyers. It was more of a summation of
14 the day's events and how they would be handled in
15 the press.
16 Q. Okay. Now, a sheet of names and phone
17 numbers that you were presented by the prosecutor is
18 Exhibit 410, right?
19 A. Yes, I believe so.
20 Q. Do you have that in front of you?
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. Now, is that a sheet that you used during
23 your work?
24 A. It may -- they sent me several different
25 iterations of contact numbers. This isn't anything
26 that was ever typed up that I saw.
27 Q. Okay. So when did you first see this

28 document?
409
1 A. I don't remember when I first saw it.
2 Q. Did the prosecutor show it to you?
3 A. They very well may have. I don't remember.
4 Q. Well, before you came into court to testify
5 and began to answer questions from Prosecutor
6 Auchincloss, have you ever seen the document?
8 answered.
10 THE WITNESS: I may have. I just don't
11 remember. There was several different iterations of
12 documents that were sent, of e-mails that were sent
13 to me with names and phone numbers on them. This
14 may have been one of the iterations. I don't
15 remember.
16 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: When you met with
17 Prosecutor Auchincloss, did he ever show you this
18 document and say he was going to ask you about names
19 and numbers on the document?
21 Q. To your knowledge, is the first time you
22 ever saw this thing when you were shown it in court?
23 A. To my knowledge, yes.
24 Q. Okay. Well, what makes me curious is your
25 own name and number is on that document, right?
26 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection to the form of
27 the question.
410
1 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You didn't have a document
2 of phone numbers and names that had your own on it,
3 did you?
4 A. Yes, sir, the iterations of information that
5 I was sent contained everyone's phone number. We
6 would include mine too.
7 Q. And were you sent Exhibit 410?
8 A. I don't know, sir. I was sent several
9 iterations.
10 Q. Now, there's a number for Gavin Arvizo on
11 that document. Do you see that?
13 Q. Did you have a document with Gavin Arvizo's
14 number?
15 A. I don't remember, sir. I was sent several
16 iterations of documents. I don't remember.
17 Q. Well, you certainly know who Gavin Arvizo
18 is, right?
20 Q. And if you had been carrying around a
21 document with his name and number, you'd probably
22 remember that, wouldn't you?
23 A. I didn't carry it around. It came to me in
24 an e-mail and I only accessed the numbers that I
25 needed.
26 Q. Okay. But certainly you're testifying that
27 Mr. Auchincloss didn't go over this document before

28 you testified?
411
2 Q. The questions just came out fresh and cold,
3 as far as you're concerned, right?
4 A. As far as I'm concerned, yes, sir.
5 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Argumentative;
6 asked and answered.
7 MR. MESEREAU: I withdraw it.
8 Q. You told the Santa Barbara sheriffs that Mr.
9 Geragos had the final say-so on everything, did you
10 not?
11 A. I told the Santa Barbara sheriffs that I was
12 told that Mr. Geragos had the final say-so, yes,
13 sir, I did.
14 Q. And who told you that Mr. Geragos had the
15 final say-so on everything?
16 A. Mr. LeGrand and Mr. Konitzer.
17 Q. And during those six days you were employed,
18 you operated with the understanding that essentially
19 the buck stopped with Mr. Geragos, right?
20 A. Yes.
22 that on major things, you were to answer to
23 Schaffel, right?
25 Q. And did you answer to Schaffel during those
26 six days?

28 Q. Okay. How many times do you think you spoke
412
1 to Schaffel on the phone during those six days?
2 A. It would be very hard for me to estimate.
3 Maybe ten, maybe 15.
4 Q. Okay. And was it your understanding that
5 Mr. Schaffel was in charge of Mr. Jackson's public
6 relations?
7 A. That's what Mr. Konitzer told me, yes, sir.
8 Q. Konitzer told you that?
10 Q. And obviously Mr. Jackson never told you
11 that?
12 A. No, sir, he did not. I never spoke to Mr.
13 Jackson.
15 that you thought Mr. Schaffel answered to Konitzer,
16 right?
18 Q. And why did you think that?
19 A. Why did I think that?
20 Q. Yes.
21 A. Because Mr. Konitzer told me to -- that Mr.
22 Schaffel was in charge of Michael Jackson's public
23 relations. And obviously Mr. Schaffel would have to
24 answer to someone and to me. That someone would be
25 Mr. Konitzer.
26 Q. Okay. When did you last talk to Mr.
27 Schaffel?
28 A. It was either the 13th or the 14th of
413
1 February. I don't remember.
2 Q. And that would be that year?
3 A. Yes, sir.
4 Q. Have you talked to Mr. Schaffel since you
5 were terminated?
6 A. No, sir.
7 Q. Have you talked to Mr. Konitzer since you
8 were terminated?
9 A. No, sir.
10 Q. Have you talked to Mr. Geragos since you
11 were terminated?
12 A. Yes, sir.
13 Q. When did you last talk to Mr. Geragos?
14 A. I don't remember.
15 Q. Can you tell me approximately when it was?
17 Q. Was it this year?
18 A. No, sir.
19 Q. Was it last year?
20 A. No, sir.
21 Q. Was it the year before last, if you know?
22 A. It would have probably been shortly after I
23 was terminated. Maybe, you know, a few days or
24 something. And then -- I don't remember.
25 Q. Do you consider yourself to be on good terms
26 with Mr. Geragos?
27 A. I wouldn't consider myself either way, to be

28 on any terms with Mr. Geragos.
414
1 Q. Okay. When did you last talk to Mr.
2 Backerman?
3 A. On the 14th of February.
4 Q. Okay. So you've not been in touch with him
5 since you were terminated?
6 A. No, sir.
7 Q. Now, did you include someone named Dieter
8 Weizner as a member of the team?
9 A. I never met Dieter, sir.
10 Q. Did you ever talk to him on the phone?
11 A. No, sir, I never did.
12 Q. So no contact with him ever?
13 A. Never.
15 sheriffs that you knew that Konitzer had obtained a
16 power of attorney over Michael Jackson, true?
18 Q. How did you know that Konitzer had obtained
19 a power of attorney on behalf of Michael Jackson?
20 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Hearsay,
21 unless this witness has personal knowledge.
22 MR. MESEREAU: I asked how she learned, Your
23 Honor. State of mind.
25 You may answer the question. Do you want it
26 read back?
27 THE WITNESS: No.

28 Mr. LeGrand told me.
415
1 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. And approximately
2 when did he tell you that Konitzer had gotten a
3 power of attorney over Michael Jackson?
4 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Same objection.
6 THE WITNESS: Are you asking me when he
7 actually physically signed the power of attorney or
8 when Mr. LeGrand told me that it was going to be
9 signed?
10 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: I'm asking you when you
11 learned that Konitzer was going to have a power of
12 attorney over Michael Jackson.
13 A. At the end of January.
14 Q. Okay. When you first heard about it, was it
15 your understanding that it had already been signed
16 or was it about to be signed?
17 A. It was about to be signed.
18 Q. Okay. And do you remember why -- excuse me.
19 Let me rephrase.
20 In what context did Mr. LeGrand discuss that
21 with you, if you know? Why did it come up?
22 A. David had been telling me for a while that
23 he was preparing to take on a new client, that he
24 had been working on it for a number of months. I
25 think it was probably close to a year. And he was
26 excited about it. He never told me who the client
27 was until he told me about the power of attorney and

28 who the client was.
416
1 Q. And was it your understanding that David
2 LeGrand prepared that power of attorney?
3 A. Yes, it was.
4 Q. Okay. Did you ever learn that David LeGrand
5 had commenced an investigation of Schaffel,
6 Konitzer, Dieter, Geragos, Malnik?
7 A. I asked Mr. LeGrand to start an
8 investigation.
9 Q. And you did that because you thought they
10 were stealing from Michael Jackson, correct?
13 THE WITNESS: No, sir. I did that because I
14 couldn't understand why they would allow Mr.
15 Jackson's reputation to fall into total ruin in the
16 press.
17 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Well, didn't you tell the
18 police that you had learned that Konitzer used the
19 power of attorney to embezzle $980,000 from Michael
20 Jackson?
21 A. I told --
22 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Hearsay;
23 multiple hearsay.
25 You may answer.
26 THE WITNESS: I told the police that Mr.
27 LeGrand told me that.

28 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Well, correct me if I'm
417
1 wrong, didn't you say to the Santa Barbara sheriffs
2 Konitzer had power of attorney and he embezzled
3 $980,000 from Michael Jackson?
4 A. Yes, sir, that was my statement. But
5 your're phrasing it in a way that I didn't say it.
6 I did say that he did have power of attorney, and he
7 embezzled $980,000, but that was told to me by Mr.
8 LeGrand. I had no personal knowledge of Mr.
9 Konitzer take the money from Mr. Jackson.
10 Q. So your source was strictly David LeGrand,
11 right?
13 Q. Do you know approximately when he told you
14 that Konitzer had used that power of attorney to
15 embezzle $980,000 from Mr. Jackson?
16 A. It was somewhere in the beginning of March.
17 But I don't remember the exact date.
18 Q. So that was after you were terminated,
19 right?
21 Q. Now, after you were terminated, you --
22 THE COURT: Counsel, can we take our break?
23 MR. MESEREAU: Yes, Your Honor.
24 (Recess taken.)
25 THE COURT: You may proceed.
26 MR. MESEREAU: Thank you, Your Honor. It's
27 almost noontime.
28 Q. Okay. When you had your interview with the
418
1 Santa Barbara sheriffs, you were asked by Detective
2 Zelis if you knew if Michael Jackson was aware of
3 what the team was doing, do you remember that?
5 Q. And you told him you had no idea whether
6 Michael knew anything about it, right?
7 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection, Your Honor.
8 Calls for speculation; no foundation.
9 THE COURT: Overruled. You may answer.
10 THE WITNESS: As you said, I have never
11 talked to Michael Jackson.
12 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: But you told Detective
13 Zelis you had no idea whether Michael Jackson knew
14 what this team was doing, correct
15 A. That's correct. Because I never spoke with
16 Mr. Jackson.
17 Q. Okay. You tried to speak to him, didn't
18 you?
19 A. No, sir.
21 that on one occasion you asked Mr. Konitzer to get
22 Michael Jackson on the phone to find out about the
23 contract with Martin Bashir, right?
24 A. No, sir, that wasn't me that asked to get
25 Michael Jackson on the phone. That was an attorney
26 from the UK. That's -- that's the incident that I
27 was relating to the police.

28 Q. Didn't you tell the police - correct me if
419
1 I'm wrong - you asked Konitzer to get Michael
2 Jackson on the phone to find out about the contract
3 concerning the Bashir interview, and you told him
4 that Konitzer would say, "He's busy," referring to
5 Jackson, correct?
6 A. No, sir, I don't remember saying that.
7 Q. Would it refresh your recollection if I show
8 you the report?
9 A. You can show me the report. But the
10 incident that you're talking about, I remember very
11 vividly. And it didn't have anything to do with me
12 telling Mr. Konitzer to get Mr. Jackson on the
13 phone. It was an attorney from the UK who was very
14 upset at the lack of responsiveness from Mr. Jackson
15 about his not being on these conference calls that
16 he felt were extremely important.
17 Q. You actually said you tried to get him on
18 the phone and the attorney in Britain tried to get
19 him on the phone, and you both failed, correct?
20 A. No, sir, I don't remember saying I tried --
21 I didn't have a phone number for Mr. Jackson. How
22 would I try to get him on the phone?
23 Q. Well, you asked Mr. Konitzer to put him on
24 the phone, didn't you?
26 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Would it refresh your
27 recollection if I show you the report?

28 A. You can --
420
1 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. He's asked the
2 witness if it would refresh her recollection, and
3 she said it would not.
4 THE COURT: No, actually she did say that,
5 but she said something else, too.
6 Would it refresh your recollection to be
7 shown that report?
8 THE WITNESS: You can show me the report,
9 but I remember the incident very specifically. And
10 I would never tell Mr. Konitzer to get Mr. Jackson
11 on the phone.
12 MR. MESEREAU: May I approach, Your Honor?
13 THE COURT: No, she says that she remembers
14 specifically.
15 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: In other words, if the
16 report of the police officer, which I remind you was
17 recorded, says you told them, "I asked Mr. Konitzer
18 to get Mr. Jackson on the phone, and he told me he
19 was busy," that would be wrong?
22 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you tell the Santa
23 Barbara sheriffs that you believed Konitzer,
24 Schaffel and Weizner created an environment that
25 allowed Jackson to pursue his other interests while
26 they ran the day-to-day operation of his business
27 matters?
421
1 Q. Did you ever ask any member of the team at
2 any time if you could get Mr. Jackson on the phone?
3 A. Not to my knowledge, sir, no.
4 Q. You were asked by the Santa Barbara sheriffs
5 if you had ever met Dr. Farshshian, correct?
6 A. Yes, sir, that's right.
7 Q. And you said you had not?
8 A. No, sir, I had not.
9 Q. You also told him you had never met the
10 Arvizo family, right?
12 Q. Okay. And you've described what Schaffel
13 told you had happened with Janet Arvizo at the
14 ranch, right?
15 A. Yes, sir.
16 Q. But your knowledge of that only came from
17 Schaffel, correct?
19 Q. And it goes without saying, Mr. Jackson was
20 not involved in that conversation, correct?
22 Q. Schaffel also told you that Janet Arvizo was
23 going to sell her story to a British tabloid,
24 correct?
25 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; hearsay.
27 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you tell the police

28 that Schaffel told you Janet was selling a story to
422
1 a British tabloid?
4 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: As part of your work
5 during those six days, you had to consider what to
6 do if Ms. Arvizo sold a story to a British tabloid,
7 right?
8 A. At that -- are you asking me at that point,
9 or are you asking me before that?
10 Q. I'm not talking about any point. I'm asking
11 you if you told the Santa Barbara sheriffs that you
12 were considering what to do if Janet Arvizo sold her
13 story to a British tabloid.
14 A. I don't remember that.
16 you the report?
17 A. Absolutely, sure.
18 MR. MESEREAU: May I show her the report?
19 THE COURT: You may.
20 THE WITNESS: That's what I said.
22 look at your report?
23 A. Yes, sir.
24 Q. Does it refresh your recollection about that
25 issue?
26 A. Yes, it does.
27 Q. Okay. In the course of your duties during

28 those six days, did you take into consideration what
423
1 to do if and when Janet Arvizo sold her story to a
2 British tabloid?
3 A. I didn't know what story Miss Arvizo could
4 sell to a British tabloid.
5 Q. Did you ever, during those six days, as part
6 of your work, discuss the possibility of Ms. Arvizo
7 selling a story to a British tabloid with any member
8 of the team?
9 A. No, because no one would go over the crisis
10 plan with me. I couldn't discuss anything with
11 anyone because they all had different agendas.
12 Q. So you never discussed it with Schaffel,
13 correct?
14 A. I never discussed what the team would do if
15 Miss Arvizo sold a story to the British tabloids,
16 no.
17 Q. Did you ever tell the Santa Barbara sheriffs
18 that Schaffel told you he was going to fax you a
19 letter about that?
20 A. Yes, sir, I certainly did.
21 Q. And did you tell them anything else about
22 that issue?
23 A. That I never received a letter from Mr.
24 Schaffel.
25 Q. But you told them Schaffel told you he was
26 going to fax you a letter about Janet Arvizo selling
27 a story to the tabloids; is that correct?

28 A. No, sir, that's not what I said.
424
1 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection, hearsay.
2 THE WITNESS: That's not what I said.
3 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: What did you say?
4 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I have an objection
5 pending.
6 THE COURT: Just a moment.
7 The objection's sustained.
8 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you ever discuss with
9 the Santa Barbara sheriffs that Schaffel had told
10 you he was concerned that Janet Arvizo was going to
11 make a deal with the British tabloids?
14 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, I did.
15 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Now, the only
16 knowledge you ever had about the Arvizos leaving the
17 ranch was through Schaffel, right?
18 A. No, I discussed it later in the day with Mr.
19 Konitzer.
20 Q. Okay. But you first learned about it
21 through Schaffel, didn't you?
23 Q. Okay. And did you discuss it with Schaffel
24 and Konitzer?
25 A. Not at the same time, sir.
26 Q. At any time?
27 A. On separate occasions on the 13th, yes.

28 Q. Okay. And at some point you learned the
425
1 Arvizo family had returned to the ranch, right?
2 A. I was told that.
3 Q. Was that by Schaffel?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Okay. And you testified that Schaffel told
6 you "the situation is contained," correct?
7 A. Had been contained, yes.
8 Q. Okay. Is that after he told you the Arvizos
9 had returned to the ranch?
10 A. No, sir, that was in the same conversation.
11 Q. So he told you they're back at the ranch,
12 the situation's contained; is that right?
13 A. I think he told me it the other way around,
14 but, yes, that's pretty much the way I remember it.
15 Q. And was that after Schaffel told you that he
16 thought Janet Arvizo was selling a story to the
17 British tabloids?
18 A. Yes, sir, it was.
19 Q. Okay. Okay. You told the police the first
20 thing you wanted to do was laugh, because it sounded
21 like something out of a bad "B" movie, correct?
22 A. Yes, I did, sir.
23 Q. You told the police you remember these dates
24 because you had a rental car you were driving,
25 right?
27 Q. And you had to renew the rental, the weekly

28 rental agreement, right?
426
2 Q. You told them the rental office opened at
3 7:30 a.m., and that was the time you received the
4 call on your cellular phone from Schaffel, correct?
5 A. It was -- I received the call on my phone
6 from Schaffel as I was driving into the parking
7 structure --
8 Q. Okay.
9 A. -- yes.
10 Q. Now, the next day is when you flew from Las
11 Vegas to Hollywood to film the show Access
12 Hollywood, right?
14 Q. And you told Detective Zelis you never asked
15 Schaffel what the story was that Janet was
16 supposedly going to sell to the British tabloids,
17 right?
19 Q. And after Schaffel told you "The situation
20 is contained," you called David LeGrand, correct?
21 A. Later that day, yes.
22 Q. Okay. And you were concerned about what
23 Schaffel had told you, true?
25 Q. You told David LeGrand you were concerned
26 about Schaffel, Backerman, Konitzer and Weizner,
27 correct?
28 A. I don't think I said Weizner, because I
427
1 didn't think at the time that I even knew that
2 Dieter was part of the group.
4 you the report?
5 A. Certainly.
7 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: May I see it, Counsel?
8 MR. MESEREAU: Sure.
9 That's what he's referring to. That's her
10 interview.
11 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Well, that's his
12 impression.
13 MR. MESEREAU: We'll see.
16 look at that?
17 A. Yes, I did.
18 Q. Okay.
19 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Your Honor, may the record
20 reflect that the document that was shown the witness
21 in this case had parentheses around the names that
22 were provided by --
23 THE WITNESS: I didn't say those names. I
24 said the word "they."
25 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: So when the police officer
26 said, referring to those names, he just pulled that
27 out of someplace?
28 A. I did not say those names. And I know I
428
1 wouldn't have said Dieter's name, because I -- I
2 hadn't spoken to Dieter.
3 Q. Okay. Well, at this point you were
4 concerned about what the team was doing; is that
5 right?
7 Q. Would the team refer to all of the people
8 that you had previously identified as members of the
9 team?
10 A. Except for Bell Yard and the attorneys on
11 the UK side, yes.
12 Q. So Geragos, Konitzer, Schaffel?
13 A. Schaffel, Backerman.
14 Q. Were you concerned about what LeGrand was
15 doing?
16 A. No, I felt that David was under a lot of
17 pressure, and, you know, I had no reason to suspect
18 that at that time he would be doing anything wrong.
19 Q. But at that point, LeGrand was telling you
20 he was suspicious of the other members of the team,
21 wasn't he?
22 A. No. Not at that point.
23 Q. At some point he did, didn't he?
24 A. At some point later, yes, he did.
25 Q. Now, when you arrived in Los Angeles to go
26 on Access Hollywood, did you talk to any member of
27 the team on the phone after you arrived?

28 A. Yes, I did.
429
1 Q. Who did you talk to?
2 A. David LeGrand.
3 Q. Did you ever talk to Konitzer that day?
4 A. Not that day, I don't believe so, but I
5 don't remember, sir.
6 Q. Okay. Who told you to appear on that show?
7 A. Well, initially the decision came from Marc
8 Schaffel. And then I spoke -- Access Hollywood sent
9 the questions to me. I forwarded them to Mr.
10 Geragos. We went through them together and created
11 the replies. And then I spent about an hour and a
12 half or so on the phone on Thursday, the 13th, with
13 Mr. Konitzer going over everything for it. So there
14 were -- and then, of course, Mr. LeGrand was aware
15 -- actually, I believe I was in his office on the
16 11th when I talked to Access Hollywood to initially
17 set something -- to do something up with them, so --
18 Q. But you've told the police that you thought
19 Geragos didn't want anybody to do public relations
20 work for Michael Jackson, correct?
21 A. I don't remember saying that specifically.
22 I mean, I don't -- no, I don't remember saying that
23 specifically, that Geragos didn't want anybody to do
24 public relations work for Michael Jackson.
26 in that interview that you had a theory as to why
27 you were pulled off the Access Hollywood show,

28 right?
430
1 A. Yes, I did.
2 Q. You told them that you were told by Geragos
3 that you were pulled off the interview because he
4 did not want anyone to do PR work for Michael
5 Jackson, right?
6 A. When I was on the phone with Mr. Geragos
7 when I was on the set of Access Hollywood, that was
8 one of the things that he told me at that time. He
9 didn't say anyone ever, he just said for that day.
10 He wanted me to stay around, to stick in town, he
11 wanted to talk to me. He wanted me to come in the
12 next day, sign a private investigator's agreement,
13 and then he would -- he would fill me in on the
14 rest, is exactly what he said to me.
15 Q. Again, let me just rephrase the question.
16 You told the police you were told by Geragos that
17 you were pulled off the interview because he did not
18 want anyone to do PR work for Michael Jackson,
19 right?
20 A. Well, as you said, that's a summary of my
21 tapes --
22 Q. Okay.
23 A. -- and I don't remember saying those words
24 exactly.
25 Q. Didn't you tell the police that this made no
26 sense to you?
27 A. Yes, I did.
28 Q. It made no sense that Geragos would not want
431
1 you on the show for that reason; is that correct?
2 A. It made no sense that no one on the team
3 would try to do anything publicly to refute the
4 absolutely horrible things that were coming out
5 about Mr. Jackson.
6 Q. Okay. And you told the police you thought
7 Michael Jackson was being slammed by this team,
8 correct?
10 Q. The word you used was "slammed," right?
11 A. I believe so, yes.
12 Q. You thought they were not doing their job to
13 help Michael Jackson, right?
14 A. Well, they were there longer than my six
15 days, so maybe I was wrong.
16 Q. I'm not asking maybe. But, basically, your
17 opinion at that point was that this team is not out
18 to protect or help Michael Jackson?
19 A. That was absolutely my opinion, yes.
20 Q. You told the police that Access Hollywood
21 had a fax from Mr. Geragos saying, "Don't interview
22 Gabriel," right?
23 A. That's correct, yes, sir.
24 Q. Did you actually see the fax?
26 Q. You told the police that LeGrand and Geragos
27 clashed over several things, right?

432
1 Q. And you were getting your information about
2 that from LeGrand, weren't you?
3 A. Yes, sir. That's correct.
4 Q. And you told the police you thought Konitzer
5 brought Geragos in because Konitzer had power of
6 attorney, right?
8 And --
10 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: -- speculation. No
11 foundation.
13 You may answer.
14 THE WITNESS: Can you repeat the question?
15 I'm sorry.
16 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Yes. You told the police
17 that you believe Konitzer brought in Geragos because
18 Konitzer had a power of attorney, right?
19 A. I believed that because Mr. Konitzer had the
20 power of attorney that allowed him to make the
21 decision to bring Geragos into the team, yes.
22 Q. Now, did you discuss that with Mr. LeGrand
23 at any time?
24 A. Did I discuss Mr. Geragos being brought in?
25 Q. Yes.
26 A. And that Mr. Konitzer had brought him in?
27 Q. Yes.
28 A. I don't remember. I mean, I'm sure that we
433
1 did, but I don't remember in specifics. I just
2 remember that David was not happy with Mr. Geragos.
3 Q. Okay. Did you ever see this power of
4 attorney that Konitzer had --
5 A. No, sir, I never saw it.
6 Q. -- over Mr. Jackson? You never saw it?
7 A. No.
8 Q. You learned everything about that from
9 Mr. LeGrand, right?
11 Q. Okay. And you were fired through an e-mail
12 by Konitzer, right?
13 A. Well, no. It was through an e-mail by
14 David. David sent me the e-mail.
15 Q. Well, you told the police that you were
16 fired on February 15th by an e-mail from Konitzer,
17 didn't you?
18 A. David sent me the e-mail. I'm sure that I
19 said that David sent me the e-mail.
20 Q. Okay. Would it refresh your recollection if
21 I just show you the report?
22 A. You can show me the report, but the e-mail
23 didn't come from Ronald. The e-mail came from
24 David. And I can tell you what it said, if you
25 would like me to.
26 Q. No, that's okay. But you're saying you
27 didn't tell the sheriffs Konitzer sent it. You told

28 them David sent it, is that right?
434
1 A. I don't remember if I said specifically
2 David sent it. But the e-mail said that Ronald made
3 the decision, so that may be why it reads that way.
4 Q. Okay. You told the police you had sent an
5 e-mail to Konitzer, right?
7 Q. And you told the police you sent an e-mail
8 to Konitzer saying, "Schaffel, Backerman and Weizner
9 have no plan of action and that Michael Jackson is
10 going to get skewered on national T.V.," right?
11 A. Again, I would have never said Weizner,
12 because I never heard Dieter's name during that
13 time. And, yes, I probably did say that Michael was
14 going to get skewered. And that was -- one of my
15 major concerns was that there was no plan of action
16 to protect his interests from scurrilous
17 accusations.
18 Q. Okay. Okay. Was there ever any discussion
19 between you and members of this team about getting
20 rid of Backerman and Schaffel?
21 A. In the e-mail that I sent to Ronald, I
22 detailed reasons why I thought that he needed to get
23 rid of Mr. Backerman and Mr. Schaffel, yes.
24 Q. Did you actually tell him he ought to do
25 that?
26 A. I put it in the e-mail to Mr. Konitzer, yes,
27 I did.
28 Q. And why did you think Mr. Backerman should
435
1 go?
2 A. Because he had done things that I felt were
3 detrimental to the positive public relations effort
4 we were trying to move forward.
5 Q. Okay. To make a long story short, you
6 thought you had a better plan to protect and
7 represent Mr. Jackson than this team, right?
8 A. I believed that I had Mr. Jackson's public
9 relations interests at heart much more than Mr.
10 Backerman or Mr. Schaffel, yes, absolutely.
11 Q. What about the other members of the team?
12 Did you think you had more of an interest in doing a
13 good job for Mr. Jackson than the other members,
14 like Mr. Geragos?
15 A. I didn't know what Mr. Geragos's position
16 was. So I can't speak to their intentions. I don't
17 know. I can only speak to what I know.
18 Q. Okay. You told the sheriffs that when you
19 saw the Bashir interview, it disgusted you and made
20 you ill, right?
22 Q. And you told them, the police -- pardon me,
23 I keep saying "police" -- the sheriffs that Konitzer
24 and Weizner have a record of making very bad
25 business deals, right?
27 Q. You told the sheriffs that Konitzer and

28 Weizner have scammed people out of millions of
436
1 dollars, right?
3 Q. You told the sheriffs that after you were
4 fired by Konitzer, Mr. LeGrand hired you to do
5 public relations work, right?
7 Q. Now, was that for his law firm?
8 A. No, that was for him personally.
9 Q. Him personally?
10 A. Uh-huh.
11 Q. To your knowledge, was he a partner at a law
12 firm then?
14 Q. You told the sheriffs LeGrand ran a
15 background check on Konitzer, right?
16 A. I didn't hear your question, I'm sorry.
17 Q. You told the sheriffs that LeGrand was doing
18 a background check on Konitzer, right?
19 A. Yes, he did.
20 Q. Did you encourage him to do that?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. Because you were suspicious of what Konitzer
23 was up to, right?
24 A. I was suspicious of everything, yes.
25 Q. On that team?
26 A. On that team, yes.
27 Q. Did you tell that to Mr. LeGrand?

28 A. Yes, I did. Many, many times.
437
1 Q. Okay. You told the sheriffs that it was
2 your understanding that LeGrand and Konitzer had
3 been casual friends for about nine years, right?
4 A. That's what David told me, yes.
5 Q. And you told the sheriffs you thought
6 Konitzer hired LeGrand because he thought LeGrand
7 would be quiet and just do his job, correct?
8 A. Yes, that's correct, that's what I said.
9 Q. But at some point you learned that LeGrand
10 started an investigation of Konitzer, right?
11 A. At some point I pushed David to go in that
12 direction, yes.
13 Q. And you pushed David to investigate a lot of
14 other people, didn't you, besides Konitzer?
15 A. Who?
16 Q. Malnik.
17 A. No. I didn't push David to investigate Al
18 Malnik.
19 Q. But you learned that he was investigating
20 him, didn't you?
21 A. I don't remember David ever telling me that
22 he was investigating Al Malnik.
23 Q. How about Schaffel?
24 A. I don't remember David ever telling me he
25 was investigating Marc Schaffel either.
26 Q. Okay. So you don't know anything about that
27 investigation, if it existed, right?

438
1 Q. Never seen any documents that LeGrand showed
2 you about those people being investigated?
4 Q. Okay. You told the sheriffs that LeGrand
5 would not have investigated if you had not put these
6 questions in his head, right?
7 A. I believe that to be true, yes, because he
8 told me in the beginning that I was overreacting.
9 Q. Okay. And you told the sheriffs that once
10 LeGrand started doing his investigation and
11 background checks on Konitzer, he spoke with
12 accounting people and found out Konitzer had
13 embezzled $980,000 from Mr. Jackson, right?
14 A. That was the total figure that he told me,
15 yes.
16 Q. You told the sheriffs that one thing of
17 value that Michael Jackson has is a Sony catalog,
18 correct?
20 Q. How did you learn about the Sony catalog?
21 A. Through several sources.
22 Q. Can I ask you who they are?
23 A. Well, first of all, public knowledge. And
24 of course David told me.
25 Q. And what is your understanding of what the
26 Sony catalog is?
27 A. It's a collection of music, copyrights on

28 music.
439
1 Q. And what kinds of music are you talking
2 about?
3 A. Popular music. But basically music from The
4 Beatles and other artists.
5 Q. You told the sheriffs your understanding was
6 that Sony had an interest in that catalog, along
7 with Mr. Jackson, right?
9 Q. And you told the sheriffs that you thought
10 Konitzer was being paid to isolate Michael Jackson,
11 create Michael Jackson's downfall so Sony can get
12 the catalog back, didn't you?
13 A. No, that's not what I said.
15 you the report?
16 A. You can show me the report, but that's not
17 what I said.
18 Q. Did you ever say the following, Ms. Kite:
19 "Gabriel said it makes sense to her that Konitzer
20 and Weizner were being paid to isolate Michael
21 Jackson and let him do his own thing and let him
22 create his downfall so that Sony can get the catalog
23 back"?
24 A. No, sir.
25 Q. Never made that statement?
26 A. Not in that way, never, sir.
27 Q. Okay. Did you ever tell the sheriffs you

28 thought the recording industry was just as bad as Al
440
1 Malnik?
2 A. I probably did, yes.
3 Q. Okay. Now, you read this report before you
4 came in to testify, right?
6 Q. Did you ever point out to anyone that you
7 thought some of the statements were not accurate?
9 Q. Who was that?
10 A. To Gordon.
11 Q. When was this?
13 Q. You don't remember? You talked to him for a
14 couple of hours two nights ago, correct?
15 A. Yes, sir.
16 Q. Did you talk to him about the report then?
17 A. No, I don't believe I did talk to him about
18 the report then.
19 Q. Okay. You told the sheriffs you're not
20 saying that Sony is paying Konitzer and Weizner, but
21 if you could prove it, you'd love to?
22 A. Yes, I said that as a facetious remark.
23 Absolutely. I did say that.
24 Q. You told the sheriffs you have a lot of
25 sources inside of Sony, correct?
26 A. That's correct, yes.
27 Q. And you told the sheriffs that those sources

28 inside of Sony have told you that they've been
441
1 waiting for years to get the Sony catalog back from
2 Michael Jackson, correct?
4 Q. And you told the sheriffs that if you look
5 at Konitzer and Weizner's track record, they're not
6 the type of people that should be managing anything
7 for Michael Jackson, right?
8 A. Yes, sir, that's what I believed, yes.
9 Q. Told the sheriffs, "If you look at their
10 track record, they're not good business people,"
11 right?
13 Q. You told the sheriffs that they caused
14 Michael Jackson to lose his logo in the United
15 Kingdom?
16 A. Yes, sir, that's correct, I did say that.
17 Q. How did you know that?
18 A. I read that through news reports and I
19 believe David confirmed that for me.
20 Q. And you thought -- you told the Santa
21 Barbara sheriffs you thought Konitzer and Weizner
22 were tight with Schaffel, right?
23 A. Yes, sir, that's correct, I did.
24 Q. And you thought they all were hurting
25 Michael Jackson, right?
26 A. Yes, sir, I do, absolutely.
27 Q. And you still believe that, right?

28 A. Yes, absolutely.
442
1 Q. You told the Santa Barbara sheriffs that you
2 think somewhere down the line Konitzer and Weizner
3 were going to get a payoff, right?
4 A. I don't remember -- you know, I don't
5 remember using those exact words, and I don't know
6 what context I would use it in.
8 you the report?
9 A. Sure you can.
11 THE COURT: Yes.
13 look at the report?
14 A. Yes, sir, I have.
15 Q. Does it refresh your recollection about what
16 you said?
17 A. Yes, it does.
18 Q. And regardless of where you got your
19 knowledge, I'm just asking if you said this to the
20 sheriffs.
21 A. Yes, I believe I did say that, yes.
22 Q. So you told them it made sense to you that
23 down the line Konitzer and Weizner were going to get
24 some kind of payoff?
25 A. Yes, sir, that's correct. But that payoff
26 could have been from a business interest; it could
27 have been from any number of things.

443
1 believed that Konitzer, Weizner and Schaffel
2 concocted the business with Janet Arvizo, right?
3 A. Again, I wouldn't have used Dieter's name,
4 because I had no knowledge of Dieter at the time.
5 That I believe they concocted the business with her?
6 Meaning --
7 Q. That they were doing something with
8 Arvizo --
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. -- that was harmful to Michael Jackson,
11 correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And you were concerned that Schaffel and
14 Konitzer had done something to Janet Arvizo as well,
15 right?
17 Q. So, basically what you were telling the
18 sheriffs was, you think Michael Jackson's a victim
19 and Janet Arvizo is a victim of these guys, right?
20 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; that's
21 argumentative.
23 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, again, you have no
24 personal knowledge of what happened at the ranch
25 with Miss Arvizo, right?
26 A. You're absolutely correct, sir, I have no
27 personal knowledge of that.

28 Q. And you have no personal knowledge of really
444
1 anything Michael Jackson's done in his lifetime,
2 because you've never been there to watch him, right?
3 A. That's absolutely correct, sir.
4 Q. And how many times did you talk to Schaffel
5 about what he said happened to Janet Arvizo at the
6 ranch, do you know?
7 A. After the first phone call in the morning?
8 Q. Uh-huh.
9 A. I don't know. Maybe two times, three times
10 total that day. Not many.
11 Q. Uh-huh. Did he ever really describe to you
12 what had happened at the ranch?
13 A. Other than telling me that they left the
14 ranch, no.
15 Q. And he told you they returned, right?
16 A. He told me that the situation had been
17 contained.
18 Q. And he also told you they returned.
19 A. That they had returned, yes.
20 Q. Did he ever give you any details about that?
21 A. About how they returned?
22 Q. Yes.
24 Q. So Schaffel never gave you any details about
25 how they left or how they returned, right?
26 A. No. He just said they left in the middle --
27 in the middle of the night --

28 Q. Right.
445
1 A. -- or sometimeearly in the morning.
2 Q. Right.
3 A. And due to his level of agitation, I assumed
4 they didn't go out in a chauffeur-driven limousine.
5 Q. Do you know how they went out?
6 A. No, sir, I do not.
7 Q. Did anyone ever tell you it was a chauffeur-
8 driven car?
9 A. No, sir.
10 Q. Ever discuss that with Prosecutor
11 Auchincloss?
12 A. No, sir, I did not, ever.
13 Q. Okay. But at one point you used the word
14 "kidnap," didn't you, to the sheriffs?
15 A. Yes, sir, I absolutely did.
16 Q. But you didn't know she was kidnapped.
17 A. No, I didn't.
18 Q. You knew none of the details at all, right?
19 A. No, that was my own personal feeling based
20 on Marc Schaffel's level of agitation.
21 Q. I guess it goes without saying, you didn't
22 trust Mr. Schaffel very much either?
24 Q. You didn't trust Mr. Konitzer either?
26 Q. Did you trust Mr. Geragos?
27 A. I didn't trust or distrust Mr. Geragos.

28 Q. Okay. The ones you were most suspicious
446
1 about were Schaffel and Konitzer, right? Would that
2 be accurate?
3 A. An accurate reflection would be to say that
4 I was most suspicious about anyone who was taking
5 their eye off of the devastation that was happening
6 to Mr. Jackson at that time.
7 Q. Okay. And I guess it goes without saying,
8 you were concerned about Mr. Jackson's welfare as a
9 public relations professional?
10 A. Absolutely, sir, yes.
11 Q. You thought he was mistreated and
12 misadvised, right?
13 A. Yes, sir. For the six days I was there.
14 Q. You've told the Santa Barbara sheriffs that
15 Mr. Geragos was being paid by Al Malnik, right?
16 A. I don't remember saying that specifically.
17 You can show me the report, and I remember reading
18 that in the report, but I don't remember saying that
19 specifically to them.
20 Q. Well, you told them that he was being paid
21 by Malnik, but when they questioned you, you said it
22 was just an assumption, didn't you?
23 A. I believe the context of that comment came
24 from when Mr. Jackson was -- from when the ranch was
25 raided in November, and Mr. Jackson was taken from
26 Las Vegas back to L.A., or back here.
27 Q. Well, in referring to this interview, the

28 one I've been asking you all the questions about --
447
1 A. Right.
2 Q. -- you told the Santa Barbara sheriffs that
3 you assumed Mr. Geragos was being paid by Al Malnik,
4 correct?
5 A. The fee for Mr. Geragos at the time to
6 represent Mr. Jackson. Not during the public
7 relations period that I worked there --
8 Q. Okay.
9 A. -- but after, later in the month. Yes,
10 that's what I said.
11 Q. Okay.
12 A. Uh-huh.
13 Q. Let me just get it straight so I understand:
14 You told the Santa Barbara sheriffs you thought Mr.
15 Geragos was being paid by Al Malnik, but you're
16 referring to a period after the six days you had
17 worked?
18 A. Yes, sir, that's absolutely correct.
19 Q. Okay. Thank you.
20 Now, you made some statements about what you
21 think a proactive public relations effort is. But
22 you knew that a rebuttal film was being prepared
23 that was supposed to be a public relations response
24 to the Bashir tape, correct?
26 Q. And you told the Santa Barbara sheriffs that
27 somebody was getting $3 million for that rebuttal

28 video; right?
448
2 Q. Was it your understanding that Schaffel was
3 getting that money?
4 A. No, it was my understanding that it was
5 going into a corporation.
6 Q. Okay. Do you know what corporation?
7 A. Fire Mountain, I believe.
8 Q. Okay. So realistically, you knew that
9 something was being done to respond to the Bashir
10 video, right? Or, excuse me, the Bashir show?
11 A. Realistically, I knew that something was
12 being done. Whether or not it was something that I
13 agreed with or thought was the level that Mr.
14 Jackson deserved is a totally different question.
15 Q. Did Schaffel or Konitzer really include you
16 in the production of that rebuttal video?
17 A. What do you mean by "include"?
18 Q. Well, during the six days you worked with
19 this team, did they ask you for any advice on how to
20 do a rebuttal video?
21 A. Not on how to do the video. But Mr.
22 Schaffel did call me to discuss with me who would
23 appear on the video. And I told him that I felt
24 very strongly that Mr. Jackson needed to appear on
25 it to refute, himself, the claims that were being
26 made against him.
27 Q. Okay. And were you asked anything else

28 about what your thoughts were on that rebuttal
449
1 video?
3 Q. Is that the only suggestion you gave, that
4 you can recall?
5 A. That I can recall sitting right here right
6 now, yes.
7 Q. Okay. Did you feel in some way that they
8 were cutting you out of the development of that
9 rebuttal video?
10 A. No, I didn't, because there were so many
11 other fires going on and so many other things that
12 needed to be done. And the way that that video was
13 being structured wasn't really anything that I felt
14 that I could give input to anyway.
15 Q. Did you think that video was being prepared
16 with Mr. Jackson's interests in mind?
17 A. I believed that Mr. Konitzer and Mr.
18 Schaffel were preparing -- were preparing it with
19 Mr. Jackson's interests in mind, yes.
20 Q. But you thought they could do a better job,
21 is that it?
22 A. Absolutely, yes, sir.
23 Q. Did you think they had a profit motive in
24 trying to put that video together?
26 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I'll object and move to
27 strike just as to foundation. And speculation.

450
1 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You told the sheriffs that
2 Schaffel was part of an agreement with FOX
3 Television regarding a rebuttal video, correct?
5 Q. You told them that it was your understanding
6 Schaffel had reaped some of those profits, right?
8 Q. And you told the sheriffs that, if you saw
9 it, you could identify Schaffel's agreement,
10 correct?
12 Q. Did you actually see the agreement at one
13 time?
14 A. Yes, I believe I saw a draft copy of the
15 agreement.
16 Q. Now, you never met Schaffel personally,
17 right?
18 A. No, sir.
19 Q. How did you end up seeing Schaffel's
20 agreement with FOX Television?
21 A. Because the initial agreement, David LeGrand
22 called me and asked me to have a friend of mine in
23 Chicago, who had done entertainment work, help him
24 prepare it.
25 Q. Okay. And who was that?
26 A. Don Hancock.
27 Q. Okay. Did you help Don Hancock put that

28 agreement together?
451
1 A. No, he did it pretty much on his own,
2 because I was busy with other things.
3 Q. Okay. And it was your understanding the
4 agreement was strictly between Schaffel and FOX; is
5 that correct?
6 A. No, sir, that --
7 Q. What was your understanding in that regard?
8 A. It was my understanding that the agreement
9 was being done on behalf of Mr. Jackson, but that
10 there were stipulations in the agreement that Mr.
11 Schaffel could and would profit from.
12 Q. Okay. At the time this was all being done,
13 you thought Schaffel was trying to make a large sum
14 of money on this, didn't you?
15 A. I didn't know how much money Mr. Schaffel
16 was trying to make on it. I don't know.
17 Q. Did Schaffel ever discuss that with you?
18 A. How much money he would make on it?
19 Q. Yes.
20 A. Not that I remember, no.
21 Q. Did you ever discuss that with Konitzer?
22 A. How much money Mr. Schaffel would make on
23 something like this?
24 Q. Yes.
25 A. Not that I remember, no, sir.
26 Q. Was it your understanding that Mr. Konitzer
27 was going to make money on this video?

28 A. No, sir. That wasn't my understanding of
452
1 why the video was being made.
2 Q. All right. Let me explore that for a
3 second. You certainly believed people were trying
4 to make money on this rebuttal video, right?
6 Q. You thought Schaffel was one of them, right?
8 Q. Did you think anyone else was making money
9 on it?
10 A. Yes, sir, that's correct, I did.
11 Q. Was that Konitzer?
12 A. No, it wasn't.
13 Q. Who was it?
14 A. Mr. Jackson.
15 Q. Okay. How did you know that?
16 A. Because David LeGrand told me.
17 Q. Okay. Did you think LeGrand was going to
18 make any money on it?
19 A. I didn't ask him. I had no idea.
20 Q. Okay. Okay. Did you look at the draft of
21 the agreement?
22 A. I don't remember. I may have, but I
23 really -- after I spoke with Don initially, I put
24 him in touch with David, and they pretty much took
25 care of it.
26 Q. But you never discussed, obviously, with Mr.
27 Jackson any role he had in this video at all, right?

453
1 Q. And you never actually watched Mr. Jackson
2 play any role in this, did you?
3 A. No, sir, I did not. No.
4 Q. You told the sheriffs that there were two
5 deals with FOX, correct?
7 Q. One was for a $3 million deal and one was a
8 $2 million deal?
10 Q. The first was a videotape that Schaffel or
11 someone named Christian had videotaped, right?
12 A. They were involved in it, yes.
13 Q. And the second had to do with Michael
14 Jackson home videos, right?
15 A. Yes, sir, that's correct, sir.
16 Q. Did you play any role in the development of
17 these home videos?
18 A. No, sir.
19 Q. Have you ever seen the rebuttal video that
20 was telecast by FOX?
22 Q. When did you see it?
23 A. I don't remember. I don't remember. It may
24 have been around the time that it was shown or it
25 may have been later. I truly don't remember.
26 Q. Did you ever see the home videos you
27 referred to?
28 A. I believe I did, but I don't remember.
454
1 Q. Were you asked advice on the development of
2 the home videos?
3 A. David and I had discussed that before when
4 we talked about a plan to -- to rehabilitate Mr.
5 Jackson's image, but that was before it actually
6 came into being.
7 Q. Okay. You told the sheriffs that Geragos
8 was paid money by Malnik, right?
10 Q. And you learned that from Mr. LeGrand; is
11 that correct?
12 A. I don't remember who I learned that from.
13 And I believe, again, you're talking about the time
14 after I was there for the six days. And I don't
15 remember if it came from Mr. LeGrand or not. I
16 don't remember.
17 Q. You told the sheriffs that you were told by
18 LeGrand that the remaining money owed to Geragos was
19 paid by Al Malnik, to, quote, "keep this thing
20 going," correct?
21 A. Yeah, that's probably true.
22 Q. Okay. You told the sheriffs you did not
23 know what the connection was, if any, between Malnik
24 and Michael Jackson, right?
26 Q. Because you've never seen Mr. Malnik with
27 Mr. Jackson, right?

28 A. Just in the newspaper like everyone else,
455
1 that's correct.
2 Q. And you never met Mr. Malnik personally,
3 right?
4 A. No, sir, I never did.
5 Q. You told the sheriffs you kept quizzing Mr.
6 LeGrand about Malnik and the video and what this
7 team is doing, right?
8 A. After -- when I went to work for David
9 public-relations-wise? Is that your question?
10 Q. Yes.
11 A. I mean, I'm asking you timeframe-wise.
12 Q. Yes.
14 Q. And he would often give you information,
15 right?
17 Q. Okay. And you told them that Mr. LeGrand is
18 scared of an attorney named John Branca, right?
19 A. That's what he told me, yes, sir.
20 Q. And you told them that he was scared of
21 Branca because he had fired Mr. Branca, correct?
23 Q. "He" being LeGrand?
25 Q. And you told the sheriffs that Mr. Branca
26 had worked for Mr. Jackson off and on for
27 approximately 20 years, right?

456
1 Q. And you told them Mr. Branca gets a
2 percentage of music deals that Michael Jackson
3 signs; is that correct?
5 Q. How did you know that?
6 A. Mr. LeGrand told me that.
7 Q. And you told them that Branca has an account
8 that this money goes to, right?
10 Q. And Mr. LeGrand told you he was scared of
11 Branca because he knew a lot about what Branca was
12 doing with Michael Jackson's money, correct?
13 A. I don't remember that I phrased it that way.
14 Q. How did you phrase it, if you know?
15 A. I just remember saying that Mr. LeGrand was
16 afraid of Mr. Branca.
17 Q. Did Mr. LeGrand tell you he was suspicious
18 of what Mr. Branca was doing with Mr. Jackson's
19 money?
20 A. I don't remember him using the word
21 "suspicious." I don't remember specifically what he
22 said about it.
23 Q. Okay. But based upon your conversations
24 with LeGrand, you formed the conclusion that LeGrand
25 was suspicious of what Branca was doing with Mr.
26 Jackson's affairs, true?
27 A. I can't answer that, because I can't speak

28 to what was in David's mind. I don't have -- you
457
1 know, I don't know how I could form an opinion at
2 that point.
3 Q. But you told the sheriffs that LeGrand told
4 you that he was physically afraid of Branca, right?
5 A. Yes, he did.
6 Q. You told the Santa Barbara sheriffs that Mr.
7 LeGrand would refer to Al Malnik as "Uncle Al,"
8 correct?
9 A. That's correct, he did.
10 Q. Did he tell you he was afraid of Uncle Al?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Okay. Didn't you tell the Santa Barbara
13 sheriffs that Mr. LeGrand told you, "Mr. Malnik has
14 connections, and I don't want to see anyone end up
15 dead in an alley"?
16 A. He didn't say it in that context, sir. Not
17 at all.
18 Q. Okay. I'm not asking you in what context he
19 said it, but didn't you tell the sheriffs that
20 LeGrand told you that?
21 A. I did not make a statement like that, no.
23 you the report?
24 A. You can show me the report, and I know what
25 you're referring to, and I did not make a statement
26 like that.
27 Q. You were misquoted, do you think?

28 A. I think so, yes. I know exactly what that
458
1 statement was referring to.
2 Q. Just correct me if I'm wrong. You didn't
3 tell the Santa Barbara sheriffs that LeGrand told
4 you words to the effect, "I know Malnik has some
5 connections and I don't want to see anyone end up
6 dead in an alley"?
7 A. You're taking it totally out of context.
8 No. Mr. -- Mr. LeGrand never said anything to me or
9 words to those effect, using it the way you are in
10 the statement, no.
12 words to the effect that you thought Konitzer and
13 Schaffel and others were conspiring against Michael
14 Jackson, correct?
15 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; foundation.
16 Also requires hearsay to form that opinion.
17 THE COURT: The objection's overruled.
18 You may answer.
19 THE WITNESS: I don't believe I said words
20 to the effect that I believe they were conspiring
21 against Mr. Jackson. What I did say was that I
22 believed that their actions were not beneficial to
23 Mr. Jackson.
24 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: But you certainly
25 discussed with Mr. LeGrand Mr. LeGrand's concern
26 about what these individuals were doing to Mr.
28 A. It was my concern about the way that Mr.
459
1 Jackson's public relations image was being handled,
2 and I took that concern continuously to Mr. LeGrand.
3 Q. But I'm not asking you about that. You and
4 Mr. LeGrand repeatedly discussed his concerns and
5 your concerns that these characters were taking
6 advantage of Mr. Jackson, correct?
7 A. My concerns, which David told me several
8 times that I was overreacting, until I continued to
9 press him on it, and he began the investigation.
11 You told the sheriffs that Konitzer told you
12 Michael Jackson hadn't seen Mr. Schaffel for months,
13 right?
15 Q. You told the Santa Barbara sheriffs that
16 Konitzer said, "Schaffel's a good guy"; is that
17 right?
18 A. That statement is in the report, but it
19 wasn't Mr. Konitzer that said that about Mr.
20 Schaffel.
21 Q. He never said that to you?
22 A. Not to my recollection.
23 Q. Okay. And you told the sheriffs you felt
24 that Konitzer, Weizner and Schaffel manipulated Mr.
25 Jackson to get whatever they wanted, right?
26 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Calls for a
27 conclusion; speculation.
460
1 THE WITNESS: I don't believe I said they
2 manipulated Mr. Jackson. I believe I said they
3 manipulated the situation.
4 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: But the situation had
5 everything to do with Mr. Jackson's welfare, right?
8 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You told them Mr. LeGrand
9 would continually talk to you about what was
10 occurring with Michael Jackson and seek your advice?
12 Q. And did he do that?
13 A. Yes, he did.
14 Q. You complained about Al Malnik, correct?
15 A. I complained about -- well, I don't know if
16 "complained" is the right word. But I told Mr.
17 LeGrand that I was afraid that a high-profile public
18 association with Mr. Malnik, compounded with
19 everything else that Mr. Jackson had going on, would
20 be very detrimental to him, yes, I did.
21 Q. Did you discuss with Mr. LeGrand that Al
22 Malnik had connections with Sony?
23 A. I don't remember ever discussing that with
24 Mr. LeGrand.
25 Q. Did you and Mr. LeGrand ever discuss Al
26 Malnik's connection to the catalog?
28 Q. Now, you indicated to the sheriffs, and I
461
1 believe you testified today that Mr. Geragos wanted
2 you to sign a private investigator's nondisclosure,
3 correct?
5 Q. And was it your understanding that he wanted
6 to call you a private investigator?
7 A. I had no understanding. I can just tell you
8 what he said to me. That's all.
9 Q. But, I mean, was your reaction to this,
10 "He's trying to make me look like a private
11 investigator so everything is confidential"? Is
12 that the idea?
13 A. Um --
14 Q. Is that what you thought? Let me rephrase
15 the question. It's an awkward question.
16 I gather Mr. Geragos told you he wanted you
17 to sign this form, true?
19 Q. And your understanding was it was a
20 nondisclosure form, right?
21 A. I -- I don't think "nondisclosure" would
22 cover it. I think it was ratcheted up -- you know,
23 a step up from a nondisclosure.
24 Q. Well, correct me if I'm wrong, you told the
25 Santa Barbara sheriffs that Mr. Geragos wanted to
26 bring you in under a private investigator's
27 nondisclosure. Does that sound right?

28 A. Yeah. I don't remember using the word
462
1 "nondisclosure," but, yes.
2 Q. And when he talked to you about this, was it
3 your belief that he wanted you to sign something
4 that pledged you to confidentiality?
5 A. It sounded to me like it was pledging me to
6 more than confidentiality.
7 Q. Well, and it was going to be under the guise
8 that you were somehow an investigator, right?
9 A. I don't know what it would be under the
10 guise of. I just --
11 Q. Well, let me just ask you this: What did he
12 tell you about that?
13 A. He said to me exactly what I said. He asked
14 me to stay in town overnight. He wanted me to come
15 into the office the next day. He wanted me to sign
16 the private investigator's agreement, and then he
17 would fill me in on everything that was going on.
18 Q. Okay. And you didn't feel good about that,
19 right?
21 Q. Something seemed wrong with that?
22 A. Yes, sir, it did.
23 Q. Because you're not a private investigator,
24 right?
26 Q. You didn't like the idea you'd sign
27 something that said you were something you're not,

28 right?
463
1 A. That was part of it.
2 Q. Okay. You also didn't want to be "gagged,"
3 as you used the word with the sheriffs, right?
5 Q. You wanted to be free to discuss your work
6 with anyone you wanted?
7 A. No, that's not true. I put together the
8 situation that happened the day before with Marc
9 Schaffel calling me about Janet Arvizo. 24 hours
10 later, Mr. Geragos is telling me that -- after I had
11 already spoken to Ronald and asked him about the
12 situation, spoken to David, and David said he
13 couldn't talk to me about it right now. Then Mr.
14 Geragos is asking me to stick around 24 more hours
15 and come in and sign something and he would talk to
16 me. I didn't know what it meant.
17 But obviously I wasn't -- obviously I didn't
18 go around talking to the press about it, because it
19 didn't get out, so....
20 Q. Actually, you had signed an agreement at
21 some point to be a public relations person with the
22 team, didn't you?
24 Q. That actually had a confidentiality clause,
25 didn't it?
26 A. I don't believe it did, sir.
27 Q. Didn't have any?

28 A. No.
464
1 Q. So when you signed an agreement, you thought
2 you were free to say whatever you wanted that you
3 heard from that team?
4 A. I did not have a confidentiality agreement
5 in that agreement. But that didn't mean I was
6 seeking to actively breach a confidence.
7 Q. Well, you talked in your direct examination
8 about an agreement.
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. And you signed a consulting agreement,
11 didn't you?
12 A. Yes, I believe so.
13 Q. And you probably sign them in your work
14 quite often, true?
15 A. Yes, I do. But I remember looking at this
16 one at Mr. LeGrand's office and there wasn't
17 anything in there about confidentiality, in that
18 agreement.
19 Q. Okay. Did you have further discussions with
20 Mr. Geragos?
21 A. After that day?
22 Q. Yes.
23 A. No.
24 Q. Now, you don't know how often Mr. Geragos
25 spoke to Mr. Jackson, do you?
27 Q. So if Mr. Geragos hardly ever saw Mr.

28 Jackson or talked to him, you wouldn't know one way
465
1 or the other, right?
2 A. No, sir, I wouldn't.
3 Q. Mr. Geragos told you, "I want to see if I
4 can keep you on the team," didn't he?
5 A. Yes, he did, sir.
6 Q. And when did that discussion happen?
8 Q. You told Mr. Jackson you were concerned
9 about Konitzer, Weizner, and Schaffel, right?
10 A. Again, I wouldn't have said Dieter's name.
11 But, yes, I believe I told him that.
12 Q. As I think you know in this report --
13 A. I understand it says that. I know. I just
14 want to make sure that you know.
15 Q. Okay. But you told Mr. Geragos you were
16 concerned about what Konitzer and Schaffel were
17 doing, right?
18 A. I believe so, yes.
19 Q. And you arranged to meet with Mr. Geragos on
20 some future dates, right?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. And they never happened, right?
23 A. No, they did not.
24 Q. To your knowledge, why did they get
25 cancelled?
26 A. Mr. Geragos told me that he was in court.
27 Q. Any other reasons?

28 A. Not to my knowledge, no.
466
2 that you quit pursuing a meeting with Mr. Geragos
3 because there were more things that LeGrand was
4 telling you and you had more distrust for Mr.
5 Geragos?
6 A. That's correct. I thought you were asking
7 me about on Mr. Geragos's part why they didn't
8 happen. Yes, that's correct.
9 Q. And your understanding was that Mr. LeGrand
10 didn't trust Mr. Geragos, correct?
11 A. That's what he told me, yes, that's correct.
12 Q. And one of the reasons he told you he didn't
13 trust Mr. Geragos was he thought Mr. Geragos was
14 tight with Mr. Malnik, true?
16 Q. Well, he told you that he thought Mr.
17 Geragos was being paid by Al Malnik, correct?
18 A. But that was after. You're taking two
19 instances and juxtaposing them.
20 Q. Okay.
21 THE BAILIFF: Mr. Mesereau, is your
22 microphone on?
23 MR. MESEREAU: I haven't looked.
24 THE COURT: Oh, has he been talking?
25 (Laughter.)
26 THE BAILIFF: We'll fix it at the break.
27 MR. MESEREAU: We'll start again, Your

28 Honor.
467
1 (Laughter.)
2 THE COURT: Did you hear that? Screams of
3 protest from the jury.
4 MR. MESEREAU: Doesn't work at all.
5 THE BAILIFF: Do you want me to fix it now
6 or wait till the break?
7 THE COURT: Actually, he's heard quite well,
8 I think. Do people in the back hear him?
9 A VOICE FROM THE AUDIENCE: No.
10 THE COURT: You should signal if you can't
11 hear.
12 A VOICE FROM THE AUDIENCE: We did; we have.
13 THE BAILIFF: They have been, and I turned
14 the air conditioner off.
15 THE COURT: You've been working on it, okay.
16 (Discussion off the record.)
17 THE COURT: Why don't you call.
18 THE BAILIFF: I did call.
19 BAILIFF NARRON: She did. I thought in the
20 meantime they could use that one.
21 THE COURT: Why don't you say something so we
22 can see if they can hear you in the back.
23 MR. MESEREAU: "Hello; hello."
24 A VOICE FROM THE AUDIENCE: Very good.
26 Q. Ms. Kite, you told the sheriffs that, from
27 the outside looking in, your opinion was that

28 Michael Jackson did not know the things that
468
1 Konitzer and the team were doing around them, right?
3 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; requires
4 speculation. She's never met Michael Jackson.
5 There's no way she could have knowledge of what Mr.
6 Jackson knows.
8 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, that's correct. I
9 said that.
10 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Now, did you say before
11 that you had never issued any press releases while
12 you worked for the team?
13 A. I wrote a press release, but I don't believe
14 it ever went out on the wires.
15 Q. Okay. Didn't you tell the Santa Barbara
16 sheriffs that you personally wrote various press
17 releases that went out and got the approval from
18 Schaffel?
19 A. I don't believe -- I wrote press releases
20 and I sent them to Marc Schaffel for approval, but
21 they did not go out.
22 Q. None of them went out?
23 A. No. Not to my knowledge, no.
24 Q. Did you tell the police that some went out?
25 A. I don't believe that I said that they went
26 out or they didn't. I remember saying that I wrote
27 the releases and I got -- you know, sent them to

28 Marc Schaffel for approval.
469
2 show you the report?
3 A. You can show me the report, but I don't --
4 if that's what it says, I don't remember saying that
5 they did or didn't. I distinctly remember writing
6 the releases and sending them to Mr. Schaffel for
7 approval, and Mr. Konitzer.
9 don't think Michael Jackson even knew about these
10 releases, correct?
11 A. That's correct, yes, I did.
12 THE COURT: Just a moment.
13 (To a sound technician) Why don't you just
14 wait till the break. And then you'll be better able
15 to -- 15 minutes.
16 Go ahead.
17 MR. MESEREAU: Oh. I thought we were taking
18 a break. Excuse me, Your Honor.
19 THE COURT: No, I wanted -- I didn't want him
20 to try and fix that while you were trying to ask
21 questions. We have sound right now, so --
22 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you know someone named
23 Jermaine Jackson?
24 A. Yes, I do.
25 Q. Who is Jermaine Jackson?
26 A. Jermaine is Michael's brother.
27 Q. Do you know him personally?

28 A. Yes, I do.
470
1 Q. How do you know him personally?
2 A. I met with him.
3 Q. Approximately when was that?
4 A. I believe in April of 2003.
5 Q. And did you arrange that meeting?
6 A. Mr. Jackson and I, Jermaine Jackson and I,
7 spoke on the phone and arranged it together, yes.
8 Q. Did you call him?
9 A. He called me initially.
10 Q. Okay. Do you know how he got your number?
11 A. Yes, from Rita Cosby at FOX.
12 Q. Did you meet with Jermaine?
13 A. Yes, I did.
14 Q. Where did you meet with him?
15 A. At his home in Encino, California.
16 Q. You told Jermaine Jackson that Al Malnik and
17 other people pretended to be Michael's friends, but
18 were not, true?
21 You may answer.
22 THE WITNESS: I don't remember saying that to
23 Mr. Jackson.
24 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You met with Jermaine
25 Jackson for approximately six or seven hours, right?
26 A. For several hours, yes.
27 Q. And you told the Santa Barbara sheriffs

28 about that meeting, true?
471
1 A. Yes, that's correct. I did.
2 Q. And you mentioned Al Malnik, correct?
3 A. Yes, I did.
4 Q. You mentioned Konitzer, correct?
5 A. Yes, I did.
6 Q. You mentioned Geragos, correct?
7 A. I don't remember if I mentioned Geragos. I
8 don't remember.
9 Q. You mentioned Schaffel, didn't you?
10 A. Yes, absolutely I did.
11 Q. You told Jermaine Jackson, "These people are
12 not your brother Michael's friends," right?
13 A. I don't remember that those were my exact
14 words.
16 show you the report?
17 A. Sure you can.
19 THE COURT: Yes.
20 THE WITNESS: That's not what it says. It
21 says I told you about him and other people that were
22 not Michael Jackson's friends, but it doesn't say --
23 it doesn't quote me as saying that --
24 THE COURT: Wait. When he shows you to
25 refresh your memory, just look at it, and then you
26 can tell him whether or not it does refresh your
27 memory.
28 THE WITNESS: Okay. Okay.
472
2 look at that police report?
3 A. Yes, I have.
4 Q. And did you tell Jermaine about Al Malnik
5 and other people that were Michael Jackson's friends
6 but were really not?
7 A. I did not say it in those terms. I told Mr.
8 Jermaine Jackson about people that were associated
9 with Mr. Jackson, but I don't -- and I did not say
10 and it does not quote me in there as saying that
11 these people were Mr. Jackson's friends but were
12 really not. That's not what it quotes me as saying.
13 Q. Well, I want to ask you if this is a correct
14 quote: "Gabriel said she told Jermaine Jackson
15 about Al Malnik and other people that were Michael
16 Jackson's friends but were really not." Did you say
17 anything to that effect?
18 A. That is not a direct quote from me. That's
19 not how it reads.
20 Q. Did you say words to that effect?
21 A. I told Mr. Jermaine Jackson about people
22 that were associated with Mr. -- with Mr. Michael
23 Jackson that I felt were detrimental to him. But I
24 don't believe I ever said they were pretending to be
25 his friend, but they're really not.
26 Q. So these words are wrong that I just read
27 you?
28 A. The exact word using them as a quote is
473
1 wrong, yes.
2 Q. Yes. Yes. Now, Mr. Jackson's mother was at
3 the meeting, correct?
4 A. Mr. Jackson's mother was at the house.
5 Q. Was she at the meeting?
6 A. No, she wasn't.
7 Q. Did you ever speak to her that day?
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. And how long did you speak to her?
10 A. Just for a minute or two.
11 Q. Did Mr. Jermaine Jackson introduce you to
12 Michael's mother?
13 A. Yes, he did. And to his wife also.
14 Q. Okay. Is it true the meeting went six or
15 seven hours?
16 A. I was there for about six hours, yes.
17 Q. Okay. And you told the Santa Barbara
18 sheriffs Jermaine was in a complete state of denial
19 about the people around Michael Jackson, right?
20 A. That's what I felt, yes.
21 Q. And you told Jermaine words to the effect,
22 "These people are taking advantage of Michael
23 Jackson," true?
24 A. I told Jermaine Jackson that I believed,
25 especially Marc Schaffel and his continued
26 association with Mr. Michael Jackson, was going to
27 be very detrimental to him, yes. And Mr. Jackson

28 told me that his brother didn't associate with those
474
1 type of people.
2 Q. Okay. You told Jermaine Jackson you thought
3 Michael needed to be around his family and away from
4 these people, right?
5 A. Yes, I did.
6 Q. And you felt frustrated that you weren't
7 getting through to Jermaine about your concerns,
8 right?
9 A. I don't believe "frustrated" would -- I felt
10 sad.
12 thought that Michael Jackson's lawyers would just
13 shut you up if you complained to them, correct?
14 A. I told them that I didn't believe it would
15 do me any good to talk to Mr. Jackson's lawyers
16 about what was going on, because they wouldn't want
17 to hear anything I had to say, yes, that's correct.
18 Q. And when you say "Michael Jackson's
19 lawyers," are you talking about Mr. Geragos?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Are you talking about Mr. LeGrand?
22 A. No. I mean, David always listened to what I
23 had to say, so, no.
24 Q. How long after this meeting with Jermaine
25 Jackson did you learn that Mr. LeGrand had started a
26 private investigation of whether or not these people
27 were defrauding Michael Jackson?

28 A. The investigation was started before the
475
1 meeting with Mr. Jackson.
2 Q. Okay. And did you discuss that
3 investigation with David LeGrand.
4 A. The investigation that he started?
5 Q. Yes.
6 A. As it was ongoing?
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. Not to my knowledge, no.
9 Q. Did he tell you that he had suspicions that
10 these people were stealing from Michael Jackson at
11 some point?
12 A. He told me that he had called the
13 accountants and got them to give him some
14 information without Mr. Konitzer's knowledge, and
15 that's how he figured out that there was an amount
16 of money missing.
17 Q. Okay. But at some point did he say to you
18 words to the effect, "I'm hiring a top-flight
19 investigative firm to investigate all of these
20 people, because I think they're stealing from
21 Michael Jackson"?
22 A. No.
25 THE WITNESS: No, he did not. We were on
26 the phone. And he told me to call his managing
27 partner and ask him to begin an investigation into

28 these people.
476
1 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay.
2 A. And I sent an e-mail to the managing partner
3 and said, "David asked me to e-mail -- to contact
4 you and," you know, "begin an investigation."
5 Q. Okay. Okay. Now, you considered going to
6 the police to tell them what was being done to Mr.
7 Jackson, didn't you?
9 Q. Well, you told the Santa Barbara sheriffs
10 that you didn't go to the tabloids or the police to
11 tell them your story, right?
12 A. That's correct. Yes.
13 Q. But you had considered it, right?
14 A. Oh, no. I had no information or hard
15 knowledge to go to the police with. And I certainly
16 would never go to the tabloids with a story.
17 Q. When you told the Santa Barbara sheriffs you
18 were concerned about what these people were doing to
19 Michael Jackson, you also mentioned the names Frank
20 and Vinnie, correct?
21 A. Yes, I believe I mentioned the names.
22 Q. And you told them you had heard Frank and
23 Vinnie were involved with these individuals who you
24 thought were defrauding Michael Jackson, correct?
25 A. No, I said I had heard the names. But I
26 don't -- don't remember specifically commenting on
27 the capacity of their involvement with Mr. Jackson.

28 Q. Okay. You told the police you had no
477
1 further information on Frank and Vinnie?
2 A. That's correct, I did.
3 Q. You also told the sheriffs that Stuart
4 Backerman was brought in by Konitzer and you thought
5 he would do anything Konitzer wanted, right?
6 A. Yes, I did.
7 Q. So clearly, you thought Mr. Backerman was
8 harming Mr. Jackson, right?
9 A. Yes, I did.
10 Q. Okay. Did you think he was dishonest?
11 A. I -- I believed that anyone who would put
12 out a press release on himself above serving the
13 press interests of Mr. Jackson at a critical time
14 was just not someone who would serve Mr. Jackson in
15 the capacity that he deserved.
16 Q. Okay. I guess it goes without saying, you
17 thought that Mr. Backerman's public relations
18 efforts were harming Mr. Jackson; does that make
19 sense?
20 A. I didn't believe they were helping Mr.
21 Jackson.
22 Q. Okay. You felt he was putting his personal
23 interests ahead of his client Michael Jackson?
25 Q. Okay. Did you ever tell that to Backerman
26 directly?
27 A. No, sir. I did -- Stuart and I had a

28 conversation a few days earlier. He was extremely
478
1 upset because someone had quoted -- used my name in
2 a newspaper and quoted me as being Mr. Jackson's
3 spokesperson. And he called me to yell at me about
4 that.
5 And I told him that this was not the time to
6 nitpick about stuff like that; that I never asked to
7 be called Mr. Jackson's official spokesperson. And
8 that when the fire was burning, it was time to roll
9 up the sleeves and pitch in and not worry about such
10 petty things.
11 Q. When you met with Jermaine Jackson,
12 Michael's brother, at the home, how long after you
13 had been terminated did this happen?
14 A. Several weeks. Maybe six weeks. I don't
15 remember. Four weeks. Somewhere around there.
16 Q. So it was pretty close to the time that you
17 were terminated?
18 A. Yes, uh-huh.
19 Q. But in this six-day period that you were
20 working with this team, you appear to have obtained
21 an awful lot of information about the team, correct?
23 Q. Your information came a lot -- excuse me.
24 Your information about this team came from many
25 discussions with David LeGrand, true?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. And those discussions preceded your joining

28 the team, right?
479
1 A. Not -- David didn't really discuss
2 information with me about the team per se before I
3 joined the team. So I had no preconceived notions
4 when I joined the team.
5 Q. After you left the team, you continued your
6 discussions with David LeGrand, true?
8 Q. About the team, right?
9 A. In a manner of speaking, but not
10 specifically.
11 Q. After you left the team, were you and
12 LeGrand still close friends?
13 A. Yes, we were.
14 Q. Okay. And you're close friends today,
15 correct?
16 A. No, we're not.
17 Q. You're not close friends at all?
18 A. No, sir.
19 Q. Are you antagonists?
20 A. No, I wouldn't -- no.
21 Q. How would you describe your relationship?
22 Just not a friendly one now?
23 A. The last time that David called me was the
24 day that the Santa Barbara Police came to interview
25 me. And he left me a message and I didn't call him
26 back. I didn't return the call. And -- because I
27 didn't -- I didn't want to be put into -- in a bad

28 position.
480
1 Q. Did the Santa Barbara sheriffs tell you not
2 to speak to anybody about the interview?
3 A. Not to speak with anybody at all?
4 Q. About your interview, yes.
5 A. No, I don't remember that they said that to
6 me, no. No, sir.
7 Q. Okay. So correct me if I'm wrong, he tried
8 to reach you on March 11th, 2004, and you didn't
9 return the call, right?
11 Q. And you haven't talked to him since, right?
12 A. No, sir, that's correct.
13 Q. Okay. Do you still do any public relations
14 work for his firm or him?
15 A. No, sir.
16 Q. When did your public relations work for him
17 stop?
18 A. Visibly, I would say probably sometime
19 around the beginning of April. But throughout the
20 summer and, you know, even up to around the time of
21 the raid of the ranch, he would send me e-mails and
22 ask me to check things out for him, or I would send
23 him articles.
25 that Backerman was more concerned with his own
26 public relations than taking care of Michael
27 Jackson, right?
28 A. Yes, I did.
481
1 Q. And you still believe that, right?
2 A. Yes, I do.
3 Q. Now, did Backerman ask you to help him with
4 his own press release about what a great guy he was?
5 A. Oh, God, no, he didn't.
6 Q. Did you see that -- did you see that press
7 release by surprise, or how did you learn about it?
8 A. I saw it in the newspaper, yeah.
9 Q. Was this during the six days you worked for
10 Michael?
11 A. Yes, sir, it was. I believe it was the 13th
12 of February.
13 Q. And was it announcing that Mr. Backerman
14 will be doing PR for Michael Jackson?
15 A. Yes, sir, it was.
16 Q. And you don't know if Backerman's ever met
17 Michael Jackson, do you?
19 Q. Certainly in any discussions you had with
20 Mr. Backerman, Michael wasn't there, right?
21 A. That's correct. If he was, I think he would
22 have been very upset.
23 Q. Now, you told the police that Backerman was
24 upset that there was an article about you in the New
25 York Times saying that you represented Michael,
26 right?
27 A. That's correct. It wasn't an article. It

28 was a quote. I had received an overflow, what we
482
1 called an overflow call from a reporter who was
2 looking for a quote on a story that he was going to
3 run. I did not identify myself to that reporter as
4 his spokesperson, and -- but when the report was
5 printed, that's how it quoted me. And Mr. Backerman
6 was extremely, extremely annoyed about that.
7 Q. Okay. What did he say to you?
8 A. He said, "How could you go around telling
9 people that you're Mr. Jackson's spokesperson? I'm
10 his official spokesperson, not you."
11 Q. And what was your response?
12 A. I won't give you my verbatim response. But
13 my response basically was, "Stuart, it was a call
14 that I took. I never told anyone that I am Mr.
15 Jackson's official spokesperson. This -- our client
16 is in severe trouble and this is not the time to be
17 wasting an hour or so on the phone arguing about
18 something so petty as this."
19 Q. And did you tell the sheriffs where
20 Backerman was staying at that point in time?
22 Q. Where did you tell the Santa Barbara
23 sheriffs that Backerman was staying?
24 A. At Mr. Schaffel's house.
25 Q. How did you learn that?
26 A. From Mr. Backerman and from David LeGrand.
27 Q. You've indicated that you thought

28 Schaffel -- excuse me, not "you thought." You were
483
1 told Schaffel's in charge of public relations at one
2 point, right?
3 A. Yes, sir.
4 Q. Backerman told you he's in charge of public
5 relations at one point, didn't he?
6 A. No, Backerman never said he was in charge of
7 public relations.
8 Q. What did he say his role was?
9 A. He was Mr. Jackson's official spokesperson.
10 Q. And he told you that he was Mr. Jackson's
11 official spokesperson while living at Mr. Schaffel's
12 place; is that correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And, of course, you don't know if -- if
15 Backerman even cleared anything ever with Michael
16 Jackson. You don't know?
17 A. I have no idea if Mr. Backerman ever spoke
18 with Mr. Jackson, no.
19 Q. Your suspicion was he was issuing press
20 releases without Mr. Jackson even knowing about it,
21 right?
22 A. Stuart never, to my knowledge, during the
23 time I was there, issued a press release either. No
24 releases except for Bell Yard's went out at that
25 time.
26 Q. Okay. And you told the sheriffs that you
27 didn't think Konitzer even filled in Backerman about

28 all the information he had?
484
1 A. That's correct. Yes, I did.
2 Q. So you thought Backerman was being left in
3 the dark about what Konitzer was doing, right?
4 A. I believed that there was an intense lack of
5 communication among the team that could have worked
6 to Mr. Jackson's benefit to help quench some of the
7 fires.
8 Q. So what you wanted was a better team, a team
9 with more integrity, correct?
10 A. What I wanted was a team that would be
11 extremely proactive on Mr. Jackson's benefit.
12 Q. And you felt this team was putting their own
13 interests ahead of Mr. Jackson's?
15 THE COURT: Let's take our break.
16 (Recess taken.)
17 THE COURT: Counsel?
18 MR. MESEREAU: Yes. Thank you, Your Honor.
19 Q. Ms. Kite, you told the Santa Barbara
20 sheriffs that you have no personal knowledge of
21 anything Michael Jackson has done, correct?
23 Q. You told them you had no personal knowledge
24 that any molestation ever took place with Michael
27 Q. You also told them you had no personal

28 knowledge about Janet Arvizo ever being kidnapped,
485
1 correct?
2 A. Other than what I heard from Marc Schaffel
3 and my own feelings.
4 Q. You told the police that you may be wrong,
5 you may have overreacted, and maybe there was no
6 kidnapping, right?
7 A. That was always a possibility, but that's
8 not what I believed.
9 Q. Well, you told the police that, in your
10 mind, maybe you're wrong; maybe you overreacted;
11 maybe there was no kidnapping at all, right?
12 A. That's what I said, yes.
13 Q. Okay. For obvious reasons. You weren't
14 there.
16 Q. Okay. You told them you can't imagine what
17 it's like to be in a cage and watched all the time,
18 right?
20 Q. You told the sheriffs that you were on the
21 phone with LeGrand and Schaffel when NBC was
22 negotiating for footage regarding the rebuttal tape,
23 right?
25 Q. And that's the footage that eventually went
26 to FOX, correct?

28 Q. That's the footage that was produced in
486
1 response to the Bashir documentary, correct?
3 Q. And you said that LeGrand issued a statement
4 to the press that Geragos ordered to make NBC look
5 bad, right?
6 A. No, that's not what I said. That's --
7 that's not what I said. If you'd like me to explain
8 that incident to you, I'd be glad to.
9 Q. Is that wrong, what I just said? I'm just
10 looking at the report. Is that wrong?
11 A. You're taking it out of context. Yes, it's
12 wrong.
14 show you the paragraph?
15 A. You can show me the paragraph. I know what
16 it's referring to, and it's a summary of what I
17 said, and it's not correct.
18 Q. Okay. I didn't summarize it.
19 A. That's okay. I'm just letting you know.
20 Q. Okay. Okay. Did you complain that Mr.
21 Geragos wanted to make NBC look bad?
22 A. No. I didn't say anything about Mr. Geragos
23 trying to make NBC look bad, no.
24 Q. Do you know where the sheriffs got that
25 remark?
26 A. I said it about Mr. Schaffel, not about Mr.
27 Geragos.
28 Q. Okay.
487
1 A. And Mr. Geragos gave the okay to release the
2 information.
3 Q. Okay. Did you tell the sheriffs that Mr.
4 Geragos gave the okay to release information that
5 was damaging to NBC?
6 A. Yes, I did.
7 Q. And correct me if I'm wrong, I think what
8 you're saying is that Schaffel prepared that
9 information, right?
10 A. What I'm saying is that Schaffel spoke with
11 Mr. Geragos and Mr. LeGrand and pushed for the
12 information to be released.
13 Q. Okay.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And did you object to releasing that
16 information?
17 A. I didn't know about it when it happened.
18 But when I found out, I objected vigorously, yes.
19 Q. Was that because you didn't want to make NBC
20 look bad?
21 A. It was because I felt it was bad precedent,
22 period.
23 Q. Okay. Was it your understanding that
24 Schaffel and Mr. Geragos were trying to make NBC
25 look bad?
26 A. It was my understanding that Mr. Schaffel in
27 particular was trying to make NBC look bad.

28 Q. But you thought Mr. Geragos had okayed it?
488
1 A. David LeGrand told me that the okay came
2 from Mr. Geragos.
3 Q. Okay. And you said you wanted to publicly
4 exonerate NBC and CBS, true?
5 A. I remember saying NBC, but I don't remember
6 saying CBS.
7 Q. Okay. You wanted to somehow make up for the
8 fact that NBC ended up looking bad?
9 A. No, I didn't want to make up for it. I felt
10 terrible for the fallout that NBC received based on
11 the memo that Mr. Schaffel arranged to have
12 released. It wasn't right and it wasn't fair.
13 Q. Okay. And did Schaffel tell you why he
14 wanted to do this?
15 A. I knew why he wanted to do it. He didn't
16 have to tell me.
17 Q. What did he tell you about it?
18 A. Well, he was upset because NBC was producing
19 another special about Mr. Jackson and they were
20 referring to Mr. Schaffel's past.
21 Q. Okay. Okay. And Mr. Schaffel also was
22 upset that he wasn't getting any profit from that
23 show, correct?
24 A. I don't know if he would have gotten profits
25 from the NBC show or not. I don't know.
26 Q. Okay. All right. Did you believe Mr.
27 Backerman was involved in that effort?

28 A. In what effort?
489
1 Q. The effort by Schaffel and Geragos.
2 A. To NBC?
3 Q. Yes.
4 A. To release that memo?
5 Q. Yes.
6 A. No, I don't believe so.
7 Q. Okay. Now, at some point you told the
8 sheriffs that Geragos brought in another PR firm; is
9 that right?
11 Q. Who was that?
12 A. Eric Dezenhall.
13 Q. From Washington D.C.?
14 A. Yes, I did.
15 Q. Did you ever speak to him?
16 A. Yes, I did.
17 Q. When did you last speak to him?
18 A. Probably in April of that same year, 2003.
19 Q. And did you speak to him about the work he
20 was going to do?
21 A. I spoke to him -- David had asked me to
22 speak to him about several different things.
23 Q. Okay. And you complained that Mr. Dezenhall
24 told you that Mr. Jackson is not socially relevant?
25 A. Yes, he did say that.
26 Q. And you were upset that a public relations
27 spokesperson would ever say that about a client,

28 right?
490
1 A. Yes, I was.
2 Q. You were particularly upset that he would
3 say that about his new client, Michael Jackson,
4 right?
5 A. I was upset because I didn't believe, no
6 matter what, that there would ever come a time that
7 Mr. Jackson wasn't socially relevant.
8 Q. And you don't know if Mr. Dezenhall ever met
9 or spoke to Mr. Jackson, do you?
11 Q. Your understanding is simply that Mr.
12 Geragos hired him?
14 Q. You complained that Mr. Dezenhall shouldn't
15 make a statement like that about Mr. Jackson, true?
16 A. I don't know that I complained, but I -- I
17 would never make a statement about that about a
18 client of mine, no matter what.
19 Q. You accused him of doing nothing and saying
20 nothing, right?
21 A. I didn't accuse him. I believed that he
22 would be a very good fit for the team because he had
23 the same hunker-down philosophy, the same philosophy
24 of "Don't say anything. Don't put anything out. It
25 doesn't matter what bad press is out there, we can't
26 refute it. We're already behind the eightball."
27 Q. Did you complain that you thought Mr.

28 Dezenhall was throwing his client to the wolves?
491
1 A. I don't remember saying that about Mr.
2 Dezenhall.
3 Q. Did you use words to that effect?
4 A. I believe I said "the team," or I felt that
5 basically that's what the team was doing to Mr.
6 Jackson by not being proactive and responding for
7 him in the press.
8 Q. Okay. You complained that Mr. Konitzer
9 wanted to build a website called "MJJ Invincible,"
10 right?
11 A. I didn't complain. I stated that when I was
12 hired, Mr. Konitzer asked to put up a website, and
13 the URL that he wanted to use was "MJJ Invincible."
14 And I told him I thought that was highly
15 inappropriate, given the backlash that was out there
16 with all of the -- with the Bashir documentary and
17 everything else going on. I didn't believe that Mr.
18 Jackson should put himself in that position to be
19 subject to more ridicule from the press by having a
20 website domain of that name.
21 Q. But you don't know if Mr. Jackson even knew
22 about this idea, right?
24 Q. You said Konitzer was "out of his mind,"
25 right?
26 A. Yes, I did. I did.
27 Q. You said, "That's the last thing they should

28 do," correct?
492
1 A. That's absolutely what I said.
2 Q. Okay. You thought that Mr. Schaffel was
3 saying things to the press to get himself back in
4 Michael Jackson's good graces, correct?
6 Q. Because you knew that Mr. Schaffel was not
7 in Michael Jackson's -- Michael Jackson's good
8 graces, right?
9 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection; requires
10 speculation as to what she knew about Mr. Jackson's
11 intent or knowledge.
13 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did someone tell you that
14 Marc Schaffel was not in Michael Jackson's good
15 graces?
16 A. No one told me that specifically.
17 Q. Well, but you did tell the sheriffs you
18 thought Schaffel was trying to get back into his
19 good graces, true?
22 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You told the Santa Barbara
23 sheriffs that Michael Jackson has a lot of talent
24 but never matured past the age of 12, right?
25 A. I didn't say it that way, no, sir.
26 Q. You said something to that effect, didn't
27 you?
28 A. No, what I said to him -- to the sheriffs,
493
1 when they spoke to me, was that I felt that Mr.
2 Jackson was very talented, extremely talented, but
3 the way that he was portrayed was that he hadn't
4 matured past the age of 12.
5 Q. Okay. And clearly, you didn't think this
6 team was helping him deal with any of this, did you?
8 Q. You thought they were actually hurting him,
9 didn't you?
11 Q. Now, clearly you have never personally
12 observed Mr. Jackson do anything wrong --
13 THE COURT: Counsel, you've asked that
14 question ten times today. I want you to look at the
15 jury and realize that they're tired of listening to
16 this.
18 THE COURT: You know, the -- you need to
19 grasp the evidence and present it, not keep
20 repeating it.
21 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Yes, Your Honor.
22 Just a few more questions.
23 Q. Did you send the team a series of letters
24 that appeared to have favorable responses to the
25 Bashir documentary by e-mail?
26 A. I don't know what you're referring to.
27 Q. Well, did you ever send to -- just one

28 second.
494
1 May I just take a second, Your Honor?
2 THE COURT: Yes.
3 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: When you first were
4 retained, you were sending various e-mails to the
5 team, correct?
6 A. Sending and receiving, yes.
7 Q. And you were trying to educate the team
8 about responses to the Bashir documentary, correct?
10 Q. Okay. Do you remember what the subject of
11 those e-mails was?
12 A. I don't remember, sir. I sent a lot of
13 e-mails during that time.
14 Q. Did you ever send an e-mail that basically
15 said -- showed letters where people were saying they
16 thought Mr. Jackson was being exploited in Bashir?
18 Q. Okay. Do you remember ever discussing that?
19 A. We may have discussed it as a way to attack
20 Mr. Bashir. But I don't remember. I mean, part of
21 the plan was to try to get Mr. Jackson's image
22 rehabilitated. So obviously anything that could
23 show Mr. Bashir had ill intent towards Mr. Jackson
24 would be very helpful to us.
25 Q. Did you investigate Mr. Bashir's background
26 yourself?
27 A. No, sir, I didn't have the time.

28 Q. Did you plan to do that?
495
2 Q. Did you take any measures to do that at all?
3 A. No. Not at the time, no.
4 Q. Did you hire anybody to do that?
5 A. No, sir, I didn't.
6 Q. Do you know Mr. Bashir?
7 A. No, sir, I do not.
8 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. No further questions.
9 THE COURT: Thank you.
10
11 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
12 BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS:
13 Q. Ms. Kite, you mentioned when you were
14 referring to Mr. Dezenhall you had that hunker down
15 approach?
16 A. Yes, I did.
17 Q. What did you mean by that?
18 A. Don't say anything to the press. Don't
19 talk. If negative publicity comes out, you just
20 brush it off and move on.
21 Q. Is that an uncommon philosophy in PR?
22 A. I think it's more uncommon, yes.
23 Q. Is it a nonexistent philosophy? I mean, is
24 it very rare, I should say?
25 A. I would think that it would be more rare
26 than common.
27 Q. Okay. Do some PR firms implement that

28 philosophy?
496
1 A. Yes, they do.
2 Q. Was it evident to you that that was the
3 philosophy of the team?
4 A. Yes, it is. Yes, it was.
5 Q. Including Bell Yard?
6 A. No, not Bell Yard.
7 Q. Okay. Everybody with the exception of Bell
8 Yard?
10 Q. And did you have an impression as to whether
11 or not the team thought that was the best way to go
12 about these things, whether or not --
13 A. Whether to hunker down or not?
14 Q. Yes.
15 A. My impression was that they didn't want to
16 do anything. They wanted to hunker down, because
17 anything I asked to be able to do on behalf of Mr.
18 Jackson I was told not to.
19 Q. Did you ever develop an impression as to why
20 they wanted to hunker down?
21 A. My impression was that there was obviously
22 something more important than Mr. Jackson's public
23 relations going on.
24 Q. Okay. You said that you've never met Mr.
25 Jackson.
27 Q. And do you know if anybody from Bell Yard,

28 that you dealt with, ever met Mr. Jackson?
497
2 Q. And Mr. Backerman, you said, never met Mr.
3 Jackson?
5 Q. Okay. There was some -- a statement made to
6 you by Mr. Schaffel concerning Janet selling her
7 story to the tabloids.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Do you recall talking about that?
10 A. Uh-huh.
11 Q. Did you ever have any information or
12 knowledge that Janet wanted to sell a story to the
13 tabloids?
15 Q. Did you ever have any information that Janet
16 even had a story to tell the tabloids?
18 Q. Did you question anybody about that?
19 "What's this story about?" Did you ever --
20 A. I thought it -- when Mr. Schaffel said that
21 he was afraid she was going to sell her story to the
22 tabloids, my first thought was, "What story?" But I
23 never really questioned anybody about it.
24 Q. You said that one of the witnesses, I
25 believe it was -- well, I can't recall. I believe
26 you stated that Schaffel -- someone told you
27 Schaffel hadn't seen Jackson for a couple of months.

28 A. Yes. Mr. Konitzer told me that in a
498
1 telephone call.
2 Q. Do you know if that's true?
3 A. I have no direct knowledge of that.
4 Q. What was the context of that conversation?
5 A. I was, again, extremely concerned, because
6 the media was raising questions about Mr. Schaffel's
7 background, and I wanted to be able to answer them.
8 And Mr. Konitzer, I kept telling him, "This is not a
9 good thing to have Mr. Schaffel continuously linked
10 with Mr. Jackson in the press. We need to stop here
11 this." And he told me at that point that Mr.
12 Schaffel hadn't seen Mr. Jackson for a couple of
13 months.
14 Q. Okay. But you have no idea whether that's
15 true?
17 Q. Do you know anything about Mr. Schaffel's
18 relationship with Mr. Jackson?
19 A. Not personally, no.
20 Q. As to how many times he talks to him or sees
21 him or any of that?
22 A. No, I don't.
23 Q. What about Mr. Geragos's relationship with
24 Mr. Jackson? Do you have any knowledge as to how
25 often they talk or dealt with each other during this
26 point?
27 A. No, sir.
28 Q. Mr. Konitzer, same question.
499
1 A. No, sir, I don't. I know that Ronald
2 portrayed to me that he stayed at the ranch, that he
3 talked directly to Michael, but I couldn't tell you
4 if that's true or not.
5 Q. No personal knowledge. What about Mr.
6 LeGrand? Did he tell you whether or not he talked
7 with Mr. Jackson?
8 A. Yes, he did.
9 Q. What did he say about that?
10 A. Told me that he had talked to Mr. Jackson;
11 that he met him in Miami when he went to do the
12 power of attorney; that he went to Neverland to be
13 there on a day that they were supposed to tape a
14 special with CBS that got cancelled. And I don't
15 remember the times after that, but I know there were
16 other times after that.
17 Q. Did Mr. LeGrand have Mr. Jackson's phone
18 number; do you know?
19 A. I'm sure he did. I never asked him.
20 Q. Did Mr. LeGrand -- you stated that Mr.
21 LeGrand expressed some concerns to you about these
22 people that were around Mr. Jackson. Did Mr.
23 LeGrand ever express those concerns to Mr. Jackson,
24 according to Mr. LeGrand?
25 A. Yes, he did.
26 Q. So he told you he did talk to Mr. Jackson
27 about it?
28 A. Yes.
500
1 Q. And informed him of the problems?
3 Q. When did this happen?
4 A. In March. Mid March.
5 Q. You said that Mr. Konitzer had a power of
6 attorney at some point?
8 Q. And do you know anything about the power of
9 attorney?
10 A. The only thing that I know is David told me
11 that it could be overridden at any time by the
12 client and that it required two signatures.
13 Q. Okay. So, two signatures; what does that
14 mean?
15 A. I don't know. That's just what he said.
16 Q. So the power of attorney required two
17 signatures. Could you tell whether or not he was
18 talking about actions taken under the power of
19 attorney or the power of attorney itself?
20 A. I couldn't tell you.
21 Q. Okay. The FOX special. First of all, who
22 is Fire Mountain? You testified briefly about Fire
23 Mountain.
24 A. Fire Mountain is a corporation that David
25 set up in Las Vegas.
26 Q. And who are the parties, the principals in
27 that corporation?
501
3 Q. There was this NBC memo that Mr. Schaffel
4 was upset about. Do you know what that was all
5 about?
6 A. What the memo was about?
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. Yes, the memo was --
10 foundation.
12 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: You said that the FOX
13 rebuttal program produced -- or there was a contract
14 for that program to produce $3 million, correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Okay. And you also said you believed some
17 of that money went to Mr. Jackson?
18 A. Yes, I believe that.
19 Q. What did you base that on?
20 A. I just -- I guess based on what David said
21 and -- I mean, I never saw money actually
22 transferred into Mr. Jackson's hands, so --
23 Q. Did this transaction take place while you
24 were working as a PR person?
25 A. Yes, it did.
26 Q. Were you upset about it?
27 A. Yes, I was.
28 Q. Why?
502
1 A. Because I said that I didn't believe that
2 Mr. Jackson should have to sell the proof of his
3 innocence.
4 Q. Was that a PR move on your behalf?
5 A. Yes, absolutely.
6 Q. Did you express your concern to anybody?
7 A. Yes, I did.
8 Q. To whom?
9 A. To Mr. LeGrand. To Mr. Schaffel. To Mr.
10 Konitzer. To Bell Yard.
11 Q. Do you know why they didn't take your
12 advice?
13 A. Yes, I did.
14 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; calls for
15 speculation.
17 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did they tell you why
18 they wanted money for this?
19 A. Yes, they did.
20 Q. What did they say?
21 A. Because there was no money.
22 Q. What do you mean?
23 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; the Court's
24 ruling.
26 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Was there any
27 information -- you mentioned a number of fires

28 burning, right? What did you mean by that?
503
1 A. Attacks on Mr. Jackson in the press.
2 Q. Okay. Were there any attacks on Mr. Jackson
3 in the press concerning finances --
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. -- his finances?
6 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; the Court's
7 ruling.
8 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I believe this door has
9 been opened.
10 MR. MESEREAU: I don't think it has, Your
11 Honor.
12 THE COURT: The question, as presented,
13 I'll allow, and the answer that was given. "Were
14 there any attacks on Mr. Jackson in the press
15 concerning finances?
16 "Answer: Yes."
17 That's as far as you can go at this time on
18 that subject.
20 Q. Who did Mr. LeGrand -- he was an attorney.
21 Who was he an attorney for?
22 A. Mr. Jackson.
23 Q. Anybody else, as far as you know? I mean,
24 in this relationship with Mr. Jackson, was he an
25 attorney for a corporation of Mr. Jackson's, or any
26 other entity involving Mr. Jackson?
27 A. I don't know. I don't know.

28 Q. And as an attorney, who did he report to, as
504
1 Mr. Jackson's attorney?
3 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: If you know; if you've
4 been told.
5 THE COURT: Just a moment. I'm not quite
6 sure what the question was.
7 I'll sustain the objection.
8 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: You mentioned that the
9 power of attorney at some point was revoked?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. You were I believe referring to the power of
12 attorney for Mr. Konitzer?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Do you know when that was?
15 A. In mid March of 2003. I believe it was
16 sometime around the 12th of March.
17 Q. Do you know if that terminated Mr. Konitzer
18 as an employee or from working for Mr. Jackson?
20 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Your Honor, she was asked
21 a portion of statements.
22 THE COURT: That's true.
23 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: This is the full
24 statement.
25 THE COURT: You're correct. I understand
26 that. Just let me --
27 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Thank you.

28 THE COURT: All right. The foundation
505
1 objection is sustained. But do you want the
2 question read back so you know what I'm ruling on?
3 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Sure. Thank you.
4 (Record read.)
5 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right. I'll rephrase
6 the question.
7 Q. Did you learn from anybody that Mr. Konitzer
8 was continuing to work for Mr. Jackson after the
9 power of attorney was revoked?
11 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It's establishing the
12 foundation. It's a yes or no question.
13 THE COURT: Well, it calls for hearsay, too.
14 It's a little more complicated than that.
15 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Well, I can limit it some
16 more.
17 THE COURT: Okay.
18 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: When you learned
19 that -- well, let me back up. When did you learn
20 that the power of attorney was revoked?
21 A. Around the 12th of March.
22 Q. From?
24 Q. Okay. And do you know whether or not that
25 power of attorney, when it was revoked, terminated
26 Mr. Konitzer's employment by Mr. Jackson --

28 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: -- based upon these
506
1 conversations with Mr. LeGrand?
2 MR. MESEREAU: Foundation and hearsay.
3 THE COURT: All right. I'm going to let you
4 answer that question yes or no. The question is
5 just whether or not you know, not what the result
6 was.
7 THE WITNESS: Yes, I know.
8 THE COURT: Then the rest of the foundation
9 would be how does she know that, without telling us
10 the answer.
11 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Okay. How do you know
12 the answer to that question?
13 A. Mr. LeGrand told me.
14 Q. And what did Mr. LeGrand tell you?
15 A. He told me that the power of attorney had
16 been terminated; that Ronald didn't have any more
17 control over Michael's finances, but that he was
18 still going to continue to do business with him.
19 Q. When you went and spoke with Jermaine
20 Jackson, can you tell me how that meeting came
21 together?
22 A. I had been speaking with Rita Cosby from
23 FOX. She suggested that I might want to call
24 Jermaine Jackson because he was very concerned about
25 his brother. She gave Mr. Jackson my telephone
26 number.
27 He called me. We spoke. He asked if I'd be

28 willing to come and meet with him. And I told him
507
1 yes, I would. And I went.
2 Q. And you expressed concern about some of the
3 team members to Mr. Jermaine Jackson?
4 A. Yes, I did.
5 Q. Did you express any other concerns about Mr.
6 Jackson to Jermaine at that time?
7 A. Yes, I did.
8 Q. What did you tell him?
9 A. I expressed concern about his --
10 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Relevance; 352;
11 foundation.
12 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: The full conversation.
14 THE WITNESS: I expressed concern about Mr.
15 Jackson's financial situation.
16 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: In what respect?
17 A. Um --
18 MR. MESEREAU: Objection, Your Honor. The
19 Court's ruling.
21 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Did Mr. Jermaine
22 Jackson indicate whether or not he was close to his
23 brother during this conversation?
24 A. I don't think he ever said he was close to
25 his brother, but he didn't say he was distant
26 either. He indicated great concern about his
27 brother.
28 Q. Did he indicate whether or not he had
508
1 communications with his brother?
2 A. Yes, he did.
3 Q. You also mentioned that Mr. Konitzer and Mr.
4 Weizner had a history of bad business decisions.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. What did you base that on?
7 A. Information from David and information that
8 I'd read in the press.
9 Q. Okay. And as far as these bad business
10 deals that you had read about in the press, can you
11 give me an approximate time frame as to when these
12 things were published?
13 A. No. I'm sorry, I can't. They were -- some
14 of them were before my employment with Mr.
15 Jackson --
16 Q. Okay.
17 A. -- and some of them after.
18 Q. It was published in the press, these bad
19 business dealings?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did you, in your dealings with Mr. Schaffel,
22 ever receive any information from him, direct
23 information from him, that he intended to hurt
24 Michael Jackson?
25 A. Never.
26 Q. What about with Mr. Konitzer?
27 A. No.
28 Q. Mr. Backerman?
509
1 A. No.
2 Q. Mr. Geragos?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Or Mr. LeGrand?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Did you ever have any information that they
7 intended him any malice, this group of people?
8 Well, that's compound.
10 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I'll strike that.
11 Q. Your assessment that they were hurting
12 Michael Jackson, is that based on your professional
13 experience in the public relations field as far as
14 what was going on, or based on something else?
15 A. It was based on what I saw in the public
16 relations side, the lack of action.
17 Q. You felt that the hunker-down approach was
18 all wrong here?
19 A. Yes, I did.
20 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Your Honor, there's two
21 areas that I feel are relevant at this point
22 regarding Mr. Schaffel and Mr. Malnik concerning the
23 cross-examination. However, I don't want to go into
24 these areas without the Court's permission.
25 THE COURT: All right. Counsel want to
26 approach?
27 (To the jury) That means you can talk. Not

28 only that, you have to talk.
510
1 (Discussion held off the record at sidebar.)
2 THE COURT: All right. Thank you for
3 talking.
4 Counsel, proceed.
5 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Thank you.
6 Q. Ms. Kite, with respect to the public
7 relations problems associated with Mr. Jackson that
8 you've identified, the fires specifically - and I'm
9 talking only about issues that had made their way
10 into the media - was there any negative PR
11 associated with Mr. Jackson specifically regarding
12 Marc Schaffel?
14 Q. What was it?
17 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: You may answer the
18 question.
19 MR. MESEREAU: Your Honor, the basis is
20 hearsay; 352.
21 THE COURT: The hearsay objection's
22 overruled. The 352, again, if you're talking about
23 undue use of time, it's overruled.
24 This is more evidence, though, it's more
25 evidence that isn't being offered for the truth of
26 the matter asserted. The witness has testified that
27 she was trying to help put out fires - for lack of a

28 better word, I'll use that word - concerning Mr.
511
1 Jackson, and then there was some cross-examination.
2 And I've now agreed to let the attorney cover two
3 more areas that she might -- or she'll testify.
4 We'll see what she testifies to about those things.
5 MR. MESEREAU: We object on foundation also,
6 Your Honor.
7 THE COURT: Huh?
8 MR. MESEREAU: We object on foundation also.
10 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: So I think you
11 previously testified you researched the Internet,
12 you researched the news services, television, et
13 cetera, correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Based on that, what specific problem did you
16 identify involving Mr. Jackson's association with
17 Marc Schaffel?
18 MR. MESEREAU: Vague as to time, Your Honor.
19 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: I'll be specific.
20 Q. As to during this month of February in 2003.
21 A. David told me, and I discovered, that Mr.
22 Schaffel -- am I allowed to say?
23 THE COURT: Yes.
24 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Let's focus
25 specifically on what came out in the media during
26 that month.
27 A. What came out in the media during that month

28 was that Mr. Schaffel was a gay pornography
512
1 producer.
2 Q. All right. And let's move on to the -- and
3 did you perceive that as a negative public relations
4 association?
5 A. With respect to Mr. Jackson, yes,
6 absolutely.
7 Q. Let's move on to Mr. Malnik. Was there any
8 negative -- same question. Based upon all your
9 review of the different news services, was there
10 ever any negative public relations issues presented
11 in the media by virtue of Mr. Jackson's association
12 with Al Malnik?
14 Q. And what was that?
15 A. There were --
16 Q. Speaking about the month of February 2003
17 again.
18 A. There was articles about Mr. Jackson's
19 association with Mr. Malnik as he was reputed to be
20 a known mobster.
21 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right. Thank you. I
22 have no further questions.
23 MR. MESEREAU: Yes, sir.
24 THE COURT: Any cross?
25
26 RECROSS-EXAMINATION
27 BY MR. MESEREAU:
28 Q. Ms. Kite, you have no knowledge whatsoever
513
1 that Mr. Jackson has ever been involved in anything
2 related to gay pornography production?
4 Q. And you have no information of Mr. Jackson
5 himself ever being involved in mobster-type
6 activities?
8 Q. In fact, you were repeatedly complaining,
9 "You've got to get these people away from Mr.
10 Jackson"?
11 A. Absolutely, I was.
12 Q. And you complained they were exploiting him,
13 correct?
14 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Objection. Vauge as to
15 who "they" are. Argumentative as to the word
16 "exploiting."
17 THE COURT: Overruled. You may answer.
18 THE WITNESS: Can you read it back? I'm
19 sorry.
20 THE COURT: Yes.
21 (Record read.)
22 THE COURT: I think the answer came in
23 before the objection, but I overruled the objection.
24 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: And you went to Mr.
25 Jackson's mother's home, and you met with Jermaine
26 and his mother to tell them that these people were
27 taking advantage of Mr. Jackson, and Mr. Jackson

28 appears to be nowhere to be seen, right?
514
1 A. I went to tell them that I was concerned
2 about the association between these people and Mr.
3 Jackson, yes, I did.
4 Q. And you never saw these people with Mr.
5 Jackson, did you?
7 MR. MESEREAU: Thank you. No further
8 questions.
9 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: Nothing further.
10 THE COURT: Thank you. You may step down.
11 Is this witness excused?
12 MR. MESEREAU: Yes, Your Honor.
13 THE COURT: You're excused.
14 Call your next witness.
15 MR. SNEDDON: Do you want to keep going,
16 Your Honor?
17 THE COURT: What time --
18 MR. MESEREAU: Your Honor, can we make it
19 subject to re-call?
20 THE COURT: Excuse me?
21 MR. MESEREAU: We would like to make the
22 witness subject to re-call.
23 THE COURT: All right. You're not
24 permanently excused. You may leave, but you may be
25 recalled. Is that all right?
26 THE WITNESS: Okay.
27 MR. SNEDDON: Judge, could we approach for

28 just five, ten seconds?
515
1 THE COURT: All right.
2 MR. SNEDDON: I promise it won't be longer
3 than that.
4 (Off-the-record discussion held at sidebar.)
5 MR. SNEDDON: Call Al Lafferty, Your Honor.
6 THE COURT: Come forward. When you get to
7 the witness stand, remain standing. Raise your
8 right hand. Face the clerk.
9 THE CLERK: Please raise your right hand.
10
11 ALBERT LAFFERTY
12 Having been sworn, testified as follows:
13
14 THE WITNESS: I do.
15 THE CLERK: Please be seated. State and
16 spell your name for the record.
17 THE WITNESS: Albert Lafferty. A-l-b-e-r-t,
18 L-a-f-f-e-r-t-y.
19 THE CLERK: Thank you.
20
21 DIRECT EXAMINATION
22 BY MR. SNEDDON:
23 Q. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Mr.
24 Lafferty.
25 A. Good afternoon.
26 Q. How are you employed?
27 A. I'm employed by the Santa Barbara County

28 Sheriff's Office.
516
1 Q. How long have you been a deputy sheriff?
2 A. 18 years.
3 Q. And directing your attention back to
4 November of 2003, okay?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. What were your duties and assignments at
7 that time?
8 A. At that time I was assigned to the forensics
9 investigation unit, the criminal investigation
10 division.
11 Q. Could you just take a moment and explain to
12 the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what that job
13 with the forensics unit involved?
14 A. It was our job to respond to crime scenes,
15 document those scenes, search for evidence, collect
16 and preserve the evidence, and process any evidence
17 which was within our capabilities.
18 Q. With regard to November 18th of 2003, did
19 you participate on the execution of a search warrant
20 on Mr. Jackson's ranch at Neverland Valley Ranch?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. And what particular duty assignments were
23 you assigned on that day?
24 A. I was assigned to shoot video and
25 photographs of the main residence.
26 Q. Now, was there some significance attached to
27 the manner in which you shot your footage in

28 relationship to the chronology of the events that
517
1 day?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Would you explain that to the ladies and
4 gentlemen of the jury?
5 A. I was initially tasked with photographing
6 the interior of the main residence before any search
7 had been conducted.
8 Q. And the purpose for that?
9 A. To document the scene as it was before
10 anything had been disturbed by any of the searching
11 members.
12 Q. Now, did you also participate in the
13 production -- or did you also videotape the premises
14 that day?
15 A. That was my purpose, yes, that was to
16 videotape.
17 Q. So you did video and not still photography?
18 A. I did several still photos, but my primary
19 assignment was for video.
20 Q. And when you did video, were you assigned to
21 a particular location at the ranch premises?
22 A. Yes, I was.
23 Q. Would you tell the ladies and gentlemen of
24 the jury where you were assigned?
25 A. It was the main residence located on the
26 ranch.
27 Q. Now, were you also assigned responsibility

28 subsequent to that time to take some aerial
518
1 photographs?
2 A. Yes, I was.
3 Q. And what specifically was your assignment?
4 A. To document the ranch property, overall
5 views and specific views of the buildings located on
6 the ranch.
7 Q. And do you recall when you did that?
8 A. That was on March 2nd of 2004.
9 Q. And in that connection, were you also
10 assigned to do some research on just some basic
11 information on the location of the ranch?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And the purpose of that?
14 A. To be able to identify in the photographs
15 which buildings they were.
16 Q. Now, were you also -- can you tell us
17 whether or not you were involved in the preparation
18 of an exhibit which was used for purposes of court
19 demonstration, actual map location of the
20 premises --
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. -- and the ranch itself --
23 A. Yes, I was.
24 Q. -- in relation to other places in Santa
25 Barbara County?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. Could you describe to the ladies and

28 gentlemen of the jury what you did in that
519
1 connection?
2 A. In that connection what I did was use the
3 Microsoft Streets and Map Program, which our unit
4 had at the time, to display a map showing the
5 surrounding area of Santa Ynez Valley and the
6 location of the ranch.
7 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, at this time I've
8 had four -- I'm sorry, Exhibits 4 through 12 marked
9 for identification purposes. I'm going to show them
10 to counsel for their examination. I believe they
11 have a copy of them already, but....
12 Your Honor, I intend to lay the foundation
13 and ask for their admission. And I want to make
14 sure the procedure's okay with the Court ahead of
15 time and then display what I have here on the
16 board --
17 THE COURT: That's --
18 MR. SNEDDON: -- as we go through them.
19 THE COURT: That's how I would like to do
20 that.
21 MR. SANGER: Your Honor, I have no objection
22 if it will save time, he can put them on the board
23 and show the witness at the same time, if that's all
24 right with the Court.
25 THE COURT: Yes, it is. If there's no
26 objection, that would save time.
27 MR. SNEDDON: Can we move these admitted

28 into evidence at this time, then, Your Honor?
520
1 MR. SANGER: In this case, that's fine, Your
2 Honor. We'll do it that way.
3 THE COURT: In this case, they're admitted.
4 MR. SNEDDON: In this case, I'll accept it.
5 Q. All right. Deputy Lafferty, let me just
6 hand you those. And let's start with the first
7 exhibit. Could you indicate what People's Exhibit
8 No. 4 is?
9 THE COURT: See, what he was suggesting, he
10 agreed they come into evidence, so you could just
11 put them right on the --
12 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: We have it set up with the
13 computer, Your Honor.
14 THE COURT: You do.
15 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: If you could activate the
16 PC button.
17 THE COURT: The PC button? Okay.
18 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It takes a few minutes for
19 the projector to warm up.
20 THE COURT: It's on, isn't it?
21 MR. AUCHINCLOSS: It's coming.
22 MR. SNEDDON: Maybe we could dim the lights.
23 THE BAILIFF: Do you want all of them
24 dimmed?
25 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: All right. Deputy
26 Lafferty, could you explain to the ladies and
27 gentlemen of the jury what People's Exhibit No. 4

28 is?
521
1 A. This is the map I made using the Microsoft
2 Streets and Maps showing the Santa Ynez Valley area,
3 community, and the ranch location.
4 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, may I approach the
5 witness?
6 THE COURT: Yes.
7 MR. SNEDDON: Thank you.
8 Q. All right. I've handed you a little laser
9 pen to help with some of the directions here.
10 Could you locate, for instance, the town of
11 Solvang on there for us?
12 A. The City of Solvang is located right here in
13 the lower center portion of the map.
14 Q. All right. And Los Olivos?
15 A. Los Olivos is directly north of that. Right
16 in this area.
17 Q. Right under the word "California"?
19 Q. Now, I notice that towards the top of the
20 exhibit, People's No. 4, and in the middle toward
21 the top is a little red arrow; is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Could you indicate to the ladies and
24 gentlemen of the jury what that red arrow -- and
25 could you find it with the laser? There you go.
26 A. This right here?
27 Q. Yes. What is that?

28 A. That's a small push pin used to identify the
522
1 entrance location of the ranch.
2 Q. All right. Let's move to the next exhibit,
3 People's 5, if we could.
4 With regard to People's 5, it's in evidence,
5 could you tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury
6 what that is?
7 A. This is a closer-in view of the area, with
8 the town of Los Olivos being located in the center
9 lower portion of the picture. The yellow line
10 highlights Figueroa Mountain Road as it proceeds
11 north from the town of Los Olivos and ends again at
12 a red push pin indicating the ranch entrance.
13 Q. All right. Now, let's go to the next
14 exhibit, People's No. 5 -- or No. 6.
15 Could you explain to the ladies and
16 gentlemen of the jury what People's No. 6 is?
17 A. This is an overall aerial photograph showing
18 the ranch property.
19 Q. Now, with regard to the information that's
20 been placed on this exhibit, the writing that's on
21 there in yellow, did you do that?
22 A. Yes, I did.
23 Q. And from what sources of information did you
24 put those letters and designations on there?
25 A. That was information provided by Sergeant
26 Robel and yourself.
27 Q. You've been to the ranch yourself, though,

28 have you not?
523
1 A. Yes, I have.
2 Q. So you recognize the areas depicted up
3 there, correct?
4 A. Yeah, that's correct.
5 Q. Now, with regard to this particular exhibit,
6 People's No. 6, there's an arrow that points back
7 towards Los Olivos?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And the road just to the bottom on the
10 diagram, that's marked Figueroa Mountain Road?
12 Q. Do you know approximately what the distance
13 is from the gate where it says "ranch entrance"
14 to -- back to, say, where 154 -- Highway 154 is?
15 A. It's just over five miles.
16 Q. Could we go to People's No. 7?
17 Now, People's No. 7 is another aerial
18 photograph that you took?
19 A. Yes, it is.
20 Q. And with regard to the designation of the --
21 of the areas of buildings located on this exhibit,
22 did you put those on there?
23 A. Yes, I did.
24 Q. Is that based on your personal information
25 and observations?
26 A. Yes, it is.
27 Q. While you were at the ranch?

524
1 Q. All right. Let's go to the next number, if
2 we could, which I believe is 8?
4 Q. All right. And People's No. 8 is another
5 aerial you took, correct?
7 Q. And with regard to the information placed on
8 there, did you place that information on there?
9 A. Yes, I did.
10 Q. And is that information you gathered while
11 you were personally at the ranch on the occasion
12 that you were there?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now, I notice on this particular photograph,
15 this particular exhibit, that there's a road that
16 runs in the upper top of the photograph, about in
17 the middle. Do you see that?
18 A. This road here?
19 Q. Yes, sir. Do you know where that road goes
20 to?
21 A. That was the road leading from the main gate
22 entrance on Figueroa Mountain Road that we came in
23 on.
24 Q. So that's the road that takes you from the
25 main gate to the house?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. And to the areas depicted on this

28 photograph?
525
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. All right. Why don't we go to the next
3 exhibit, then. This is No. 9?
5 Q. And with regard to People's No. 9, did you
6 place the designations on these particular areas?
7 A. Yes, I did.
8 Q. And this is another aerial that you took?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Have you ever been in the theater itself?
11 A. No, I have not.
12 Q. All right. Let's go to the next exhibit,
13 which would be People's No. 10. And 10 is just a
14 wider view of 9 but has more information; is that
15 correct?
16 A. Yes, slightly different angle.
17 Q. And it just shows the theater and the
18 amusement park?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. All right. Let's go to People's No. 11.
21 People's No. 11 is another aerial that you
22 took; is that correct?
23 A. It is correct.
24 Q. And the designation that's on there is the
25 zoo?
26 A. Correct.
27 Q. That's the zoo area, as you know it to be?

28 A. Yes.
526
1 Q. Or at the time you took these photographs?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. All right. I believe there's one last
4 photograph there, Deputy. What is that?
5 A. This is an aerial view of the train station
6 area.
7 Q. And that's the -- okay. And that's
8 another -- in this particular photograph, there is a
9 road that runs directly into the train station where
10 the clock is and goes to the bottom of the
11 photograph.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Do you know where that road leads to?
14 A. That's the road that leads past the main
15 residence.
17 Your Honor, I do have more questions for
18 this witness, but it will take considerably more
19 than the two minutes we have left.
20 THE COURT: All right. We'll recess for the
21 afternoon.
22 Court's in recess.
23 (The proceedings adjourned at 2:30 p.m.)
24 --o0o--
25
26
27
28
527
1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
4 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE )
5 OF CALIFORNIA, )
6 Plaintiff, )
7 -vs- ) No. 1133603
9 Defendant. )
10
11
12 I, MICHELE MATTSON McNEIL, RPR, CRR,
13 CSR #3304, Official Court Reporter, do hereby
14 certify:
15 That the foregoing pages 341 through 527
16 contain a true and correct transcript of the
17 proceedings had in the within and above-entitled
18 matter as by me taken down in shorthand writing at
19 said proceedings on March 2, 2005, and thereafter
20 reduced to typewriting by computer-aided
21 transcription under my direction.
22 DATED: Santa Maria, California,
23 March 2, 2005.
24
25
26
27 MICHELE MATTSON McNEIL, RPR, CRR, CSR #3304

28
528

Court Transcript 3 02 2005

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Court Transcript 3 02 2005

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Court Transcript 3 02 2005

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

2 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA

3 SANTA MARIA BRANCH; COOK STREET DIVISION

4 DEPARTMENT SM-2 HON. RODNEY S. MELVILLE, JUDGE

7 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF )

10 -vs- ) No. 1133603

11 MICHAEL JOE JACKSON, )

16 REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

18 TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 2005

22 (PAGES 298 THROUGH 336)

27 REPORTED MICHELE MATTSON McNEIL, RPR, CRR, CSR #3304

13 For Defendant: COLLINS, MESEREAU, REDDOCK & YU

21 OXMAN and JAROSCAK

12 KITE, Ann Marie 306-A

5 403 February 2003 e-mails - page 17,

2 Wednesday, March 2, 2005

5 THE COURT: Good morning.

6 COUNSEL AT COUNSEL TABLE: (In unison)

7 Good morning, Your Honor. Good morning, Your Honor.

8 THE JURY: (In unison) Good morning.

9 THE COURT: Sorry we kept you waiting a short

10 time this morning. This is going to occur -- is the

11 mike -- can you hear me? Is that better?

12 A VOICE: Can't hear you.

13 THE COURT: Should be on now. They can't

14 hear. What I'm going to do --

15 Would the witness step down for a moment,

17 Can you hear me now?

18 THE JURY: (In unison) Yes.

19 THE COURT: I sound like one of those

20 commercials for the cell phone; "Can you hear me

22 I want to talk to you a little bit about the

23 reason we were late this morning. We were -- we

24 really weren't late. The attorneys and I were

25 working on a legal problem that arose at the end of

26 the day yesterday.

27 And that's the nature of a lawsuit. It's a

2 happens in front of you. And so there's a couple of

3 things that I want to tell you. And I think perhaps

4 the best thing to do is to talk to you about the

5 co-conspirator statements. And the best way to talk

6 to you about that is to read the law to you, as you

7 will hear again at the end of the case.

8 Evidence of a statement made by one alleged

9 conspirator other than at this trial shall not be

10 considered by you as against another alleged

11 conspirator unless you determine, by a preponderance

12 of the evidence; one, that from other independent

13 evidence that at the time the statement was made, a

14 conspiracy to commit a crime existed.

15 Two, that the statement was made while the

16 person making the statement was participating in the

17 conspiracy, and that the person against whom it was

18 offered was participating in the conspiracy before

19 and during that time.

20 And three, that the statement was made in

21 furtherance of the objective of the conspiracy. The

22 word "statement" as used in this instruction

23 includes any oral or written, verbal expression or