Accuser's Mother in Michael Jackson Trial Pleads Fifth on Fraud Charges
NGUYEN: It was the accuser's mother who dominated headlines this week in the child molestation trial of singer Michael Jackson. Her testimony was at times salacious, when describing what she says happened at the Neverland ranch. The mother also claims family members were virtual prisoners at the pop star's compound. She also testified she was acting when she praised the singer in a videotape meant to offset negative publicity surrounding a BBC documentary. But is her testimony credible, the topic this morning in "Legal Briefs." And the fireworks, well, they did explode Friday at the Michael Jackson trial. Very contentious exchanges in court between the mother of his accuser and the singer's lead attorney. Now, to sort it all out, let's bring in our legal experts. Civil liberty attorney Lida Rodriguez-Taseff, live from Miami, and former prosecutor Nelda Blair in Houston. We appreciate you both being here. Boy, yesterday, fireworks went off in the courtroom. Let's start with you, Lida: the mother got into many heated exchanges with Thomas Mesereau, which is Michael Jackson's defense attorney. At one point the judge even said if you don't stop it, I'm going to put this trial on hold until you cool down. Is this thing out of control?</s>LIDA RODRIQUEZ-TASEFF, CIVIL LIBERTY ATTORNEY: Absolutely not out of control, but you know, it did go a little too far. The problem was that the mother kept giving these rambling answers that had nothing to do with the questions that were asked. In fact, the judge repeatedly warned her, keep your answers to the questions that are asked. Please don't ramble on, but she kept doing it and doing it, and it finally got to Mesereau.</s>NGUYEN: Oh, yes, it did. And Nelda, I just want to read a little bit what the mother said. She repeatedly, as Lida just said, addressed the jury. She went on to say, "Now, I know that Neverland is all about booze, pornography, and sex with boys." How damaging is that? Even though it was stricken from the record?</s>NELDA BLAIR, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, "stricken from the record" means it is simply not in writing in the record, but it is certainly in the minds of the jurors. Every lawyer knows that a judge striking something from the record does nothing to strike it from the juror's memory. It is damaging. This lady has obviously waited for a couple of years to tell her story and she is going to do it no matter what Mesereau does in the cross-examination. I think that she is obviously coming off a little strong. But you know what, she's been a boom to the prosecution.</s>NGUYEN: How credible has she been, Lida?</s>RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Absolutely not credible at all. Rambling answers. Every time she is asked a question she doesn't really want to answer, she mumbles on about something else. And most importantly, she had to take the fifth on a very, very important issue of committing welfare fraud. She is being investigated right now by the L.A. D.A's office for having committed welfare fraud from 2001 to 2003. ,Now the only bad part about how that testimony came out, is that she didn't even have to tell the jury that she was pleading the fifth. The judge did it for her. So it saved her for now but it's not going to save her in closing.</s>NGUYEN: Nelda, that's a very good point, because -- by pleading the fifth, does it kind of give the jury the sense maybe she is guilty?</s>BLAIR: Well, it may give the jury the sense of that, but the reason it doesn't come in at all and the judge is keeping that evidence out is because it is just that, what Lida said, an investigation. It is not a criminal conviction that she has. She is being charged with something that she has not been proven that she's committed. So, certainly it's not something the jury ought to hear. And the judge did tell the jury that she would be taking the fifth amendment as to that matter. And that's all that was said about it. I really don't think it damages her that much. Yes, she's not the most together witness. And, yes, she does ramble, but all the jury has to do is believe a little bit of what she says, believe a little bit of a few other witnesses and brick by brick that wall's is built.</s>RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Well, she also said that...</s>NGUYEN: Go ahead.</s>RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: No, I just think it's absolute hooey Nelda, that you have to be wondering what it is this welfare fraud has to do with the case. The bottom line is, you're talking welfare fraud to get money from the government. You're talking fraud on J.C. Penney to get money from a department store. You are talking shaking down other TV personalities and actors. This is all about money and what Mesereau is building a very good case for the defense, that this is about money.</s>NGUYEN: OK, but if it is about money she also said she is not planning on seeking a civil suit against Jackson so she doesn't want to get money that way. Is that convincing, because when Mesereau said, all right, well do you know about the deadline to file that suit? She says, I think so.</s>BLAIR: I don't think that's a big deal. Go ahead, Lida.</s>RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: It absolutely is a big deal. Let's face it. Who did she call before she ever called the police? She called one of the lawyers who represented one of the other kids who ended up getting a multimillion judgment from Jackson. You think this woman is not waiting until this trial is over? She is not being held to any standard. She can say whatever she wants on the stand and then turn around and sue Michael Jackson for millions of dollars which is what she intends to do.</s>BLAIR: All the jury has to believe is that something happened. That anything that she says or maybe her son or a former accuser or the cook or the bodyguard or the maid, all the jury has to do is believe a little bit of their testimony and he's convicted.</s>NGUYEN: All right. We're going to have to leave it there. Lida Rodriguez-Taseff, Nelda Blair, boy, fireworks here this morning.</s>HARRIS: Good stuff, good stuff.</s>NGUYEN: That was good stuff. Thank you, ladies.</s>BLAIR: Thank you.</s>RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Thank you.</s>HARRIS: Before we get to the half hour I want to check in on some of the e-mail responses to this question: do you think the U.S. should negotiate with hostage takers? And this from Bob: "Absolutely not. To borrow one of Harrison Ford's lines from 'Air Force One,' 'if you give' -- I think this is also the title of a kid's book -- 'if you give a mouse a cookie, he will want a glass of milk.'"</s>NGUYEN: Mary in Los Angeles says, "If President Bush's daughters were hostages, I can guarantee that'd make negotiations before they let their daughters die. Yes. Negotiate." And, again, we must let you know, not many people are siding with folks like Mary who believe the U.S. should negotiate, but we do want to hear what you think about it. Send it in, wam@CNN.com. From reprimand to -- for Prince Harry to a mother with eight legs. There is news to satisfy every curiosity on CNN.com today. We will get a look at what is most popular in the 9:00 a.m. hour of CNN SATURDAY MORNING. But first, tips for beating springtime allergies. "House Call" with Dr. Sanjay Gupta and your top stories are straight ahead.