More lawyers questioning lawyers in the Michael Jackson trial on Friday, with Jackson's former attorney Mark Geragos back in the witness stand. Geragos started giving his testimony on 13 May, but was allowed a seven day break because of his own work commitments. He returned on Friday though, and whilst the sparring between him and prosecution attorney Ron Zonen was entertaining, little more was revealed so I'm not sure why he bothered. We already knew Geragos had been suspicious of the family of Jackson's current accuser, Gavin Arvizo, for some time before they made their allegations against the singer, and that he had hired a private investigator to follow them. Yet much of what Geragos spoke about on Friday related to that same point.
We were never going to find out why Geragos ceased to be Jackson's lawyer as legal preparations for the current court case were being made because he was barred from speaking about anything that happened after the singer's arrest because of attorney/client privilege rules. As previously reported, according to Californian law, a lawyer can only talk about his or her client in court if the client gives him/her permission. Jackson had only allowed Geragos to talk about events leading up to his arrest in Nov 2003.
That point remained the most controversial thing of the day. As previously reported, both the jury and the prosecution were unaware of that restriction until Geragos himself raised it in court. Judge Rodney Melville has said he is considering sanctioning Jackson's main lawyer Thomas Mesereau Jr for not bringing everyone's attention to that fact sooner. Melville told the court on Friday: "I feel deceived by Mr Mesereau and I am considering ... sanctions of some sort against Mr Mesereau".
Mesereau apologised for the confusion, but pointed out the paperwork he supplied the court included the full details of Jacko's partial waiver, adding that he hadn't said anything in the court room because he didn't think it was relevant because questioning would centre on what happened before Jacko's arrest. On the paperwork point he would seem to have a strong argument for acting appropriately in regard this matter. And the second point perhaps less so - after all, he is choosing to ignore the fact that the prosecution were sure to ask why Geragos had ceased to be Jackson's lawyer - a question, some might argue, the restriction on the waiver is specifically designed to stop being asked. Either way, it will be interesting to see what action, if any, Melville takes against Mesereau.
The case continues today, with prosecution lawyers saying they reckon the defence will rest their case in the next week. After that, prosecutors are expected to present a brief rebuttal case before closing arguments are presented.