Dal sito della Santa Barbara Press

Judge may loosen Jackson decorum order
Witnesses will learn Wednesday about decision

By DAWN HOBBS
NEWS-PRESS STAFF WRITER


RAFAEL MALDONAOD/NEWS-PRESS
With his window reflecting the media and their cameras, attorney Mark Geragos climbs into his SUV Friday after telling the press he cannot answer questions about the grand jury proceedings.


A judge in the Michael Jackson child molestation case indicated Friday he may loosen restraints that currently bar grand jury witnesses from speaking to anyone after they've testified in the secret proceeding.

As the judge's order now stands, even Mr. Jackson's defense lawyers are prohibited from interviewing their own witnesses — which they argued violates their client's right to have effective legal representation.

Presiding Superior Court Judge Clifford Anderson will finalize his ruling, sought by defense attorneys, on Wednesday. He said he would likely direct prosecutors to contact witnesses and inform them of the change
Judge Anderson's order barring grand jury witnesses from speaking is one of many restrictions — along with those imposed by Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville who would oversee a trial — that has made the level of secrecy in this case atypical.

So far, there have been eight days of grand jury testimony in the case against Mr. Jackson, who is charged with seven counts of lewd acts with a child under the age of 14 and two counts of administering alcohol to allegedly commit the molestation.

The arguments in the Santa Barbara courtroom Friday illustrated the tug of war between the alleged victim's right to privacy, the defendant's right to a fair trial and the public's right to know about the workings of its legal system.

Friday's hearing was off-limits to journalists until media attorney Bill Thompson convinced the judge the proceeding should be opened.

The lead defense team lawyer, Mark Geragos, likened the judge's current order against grand jury witnesses to "martial law" and pointed out that only grand jurors are legally prohibited from speaking to anyone about the secret proceedings — not the witnesses.

Co-counsel Robert Sanger recounted how Sheriff's Sgt. Steve Robel contacted a defense investigator on his cell phone who happened to be sitting in Mr. Sanger's downtown office and warned him against speaking to witnesses who have testified before the grand jury: "I told him I found that to be quite unorthodox — which I felt was actually an understatement."

Senior Deputy District Attorney Gerald Franklin said the defense could ask witnesses about what they "saw, heard or did" on certain occasions, but not about their testimony.

Mr. Geragos countered: "How is a witness supposed to parse out their recollection of events from their testimony before the grand jury?"

The proceeding on Friday was originally set to continue an emergency, closed-door hearing to determine if prosecutors can force one of Mr. Jackson's private investigators to testify before the grand jury.

The issue of the private investigator Bradley Miller's grand jury subpoena will be taken up on Wednesday, as well as whether the media can be present for that portion of the hearing.

Judge Melville has also struggled with whether the information Mr. Miller gathered at the request of Mr. Geragos should be considered confidential, especially an audiotape of interviews seized during a raid of the private investigator's Beverly Hills office.

Late Friday, Judge Melville reconsidered the defense's request to keep the material private, and opted to make the audiotape available to the prosecution. This decision may affect Judge Anderson's ruling Wednesday on whether the prosecution can force Mr. Miller to testify.
Fonte:[URL]News Press-Caso Jackson[=URL]http://www.newspress.com/mjacksonupdate/index.html
Per favore...Potete tradurre? In parole povere...

trad?? Anke sintetica

Qualcuno potrebbe cortesemente dirmi cs dice quell'articolo?

ma possibile che nn capita un geniaccio??

Vediamo...
Vale!!!??? Puoi tradurre se ti capita??:rosa:

Sostanzialmente si parla delle pesanti pressioni da parte dei media, supportate persino dai pareri di alcuni legali esperti in questo tipo di questioni, affinchè quanto emerge via via che il processo si svolge venga reso pubblico.

Del "conflitto d'interessi" tra i diritti della vittima, dell'accusato e dello stato della California chiamato a garantire alle parti un "giusto" processo.

Sembra che stiano considerando di fare dei passi indietro sull'ordine di restrizione, che attualmente obbliga al silenzio quanti coinvolti direttamente ed indirettamente nel dibattimento.
Ci sono comunque pareri discordi tra chi tutela le rispettive parti. Qualsiasi cambiamento su quanto già deciso in passato, verrà annunciato pubblicamente.

[SM=x47937]

... vedremo: ci tocca aspettare di saperne di più

[SM=x47951]

Grazie Gracy!

Prego bella!

Speriamo presto si sappia qualcosa di più preciso...

Grazie anke da parte mia