Accuser’s Mother Wanted Money

Pop superstar Michael Jackson’s defense received a huge boost Monday as several witnesses painted the accuser’s mother as a greedy welfare cheat. Jurors heard emotional testimony from the accuser’s aunt who said the mother, Janet Arvizo, was only interested in money for her then cancer-stricken son. The aunt, who is estranged from the Arvizo family, said she attempted to arrange a blood drive for her nephew. But she told jurors that Arvizo told her in a phone call that “she didn’t need my (expletive) blood” and that instead “she needed money.” "I think I just hung up on her," the aunt recalled.Welfare Fraud An employee of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services testified that she processed Arvizo’s welfare application in November 2001. She said that in the application, Arvizo stated she had no sources of income, assets or health insurance. However, just 10 days earlier the family had received a $152,000 settlement from a lawsuit filed against J.C. Penney. This followed an altercation with store security guards in 1998 - the guards had suspected Jackson’s accuser of shoplifting. The family claimed the guards battered them and eventually received a settlement which was split between the mother, father and all three children. The defense contends that the family has a history of using false allegations for financial gain. Mercy Dee Manrriquez stated that Arvizo did not disclose any of the settlements on her welfare application and that a person who willingly excluded sources of income from the forms was guilty of fraud. “Would it be fraud to fail to disclose it at this point?” asked defense attorney Robert Sanger. “Yes it would be,” Manriquez said. She also stated that all income should have been reported - including gifts and the $5,000 a month pay of her then boyfriend. Manrriquez further revealed that the mother swore under penalty of perjury that the family did not have any medical insurance. However, it was established in earlier testimony that the accuser’s cancer treatments were in fact covered by his father’s employer. During her testimony previously, Arvizo invoked Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination concerning her alleged welfare fraud. Family Greed Next to testify was Mike Radakovich, an accountant who examined the bank accounts of the Arvizo family. He testified that a week after the accuser’s mother deposited her $32,000 portion of the J.C. Penny settlement, she withdrew $29,000 in a cashiers check made out to a car dealership. Then the paper trail mysteriously ended. “I never saw it going back into any account I looked at,” Radakovich told jurors. He also stated that the accuser’s family was still collecting welfare payments in February and March 2003. At the same time, Jackson was spending “several thousand dollars” paying their expenses, including a private jet trip to Miami, an orthodontist appointment and a body wax for the mother. This is also the time period that the prosecution alleges the family was held captive by Jackson. Radakovich said that during this same time, two welfare payments of $769 were deposited into the bank account of Arvizo’s then boyfriend (now her husband). The boyfriend then paid the rent on the family’s apartment. Editor was “duped” The defense also called Connie Keenan, editor of the Mid Valley News, to the stand Monday. The editor testified that she ran a story about the medical plight of Jackson’s accuser. “It was a story I didn’t want to do but (the mother) played on some sympathies in the office so I assigned it,” she testified. After the story ran, Arvizo wanted another one, Keenan said. “The mother wanted an additional story because she didn’t make enough money from the original story - those are her words, not mine,” she asserted. Keenan also told jurors that Arvizo wanted the article to say people could send her money. She said she had told Arvizo it would be unethical for people to send money to her house and urged her to set up a trust fund in her son’s name. The editor said the account was eventually created and she ran the story on the front page. When defense attorney Thomas Mesereau asked why it was given such prominence, she said, “I think the story tugged at your heart strings. The face of the child was beautiful.” Bringing the testimony to a close, Mesereau asked Keenan if the mother had called her personally and how long the conversation was. “Approximately one minute and 20 seconds,” she retorted. “I didn’t want to talk to her. I had already established the fact that I had been duped.” Source: AP/CNN/eMJey