,
28 tweets,
6 min read
Read on Twitter
I see haters are going about the "semen found on MJ's bed" as damning evidence. What they are not telling you is that it was so "damning evidence" that the prosecution did not even intend to introduce it to court. That's what the underlined part means. 
If the prosecution had thought it was "damning evidence" they certainly would have intended to introduce it. Thing is, it didn't. People slept in MJ's bedroom all the time when he wasn't even there.
For example, when they examined some of the porn downloaded on a laptop that was found in MJ's bedroom, some of the dates were while MJ was in Las Vegas. So those pics were obviously not downloaded by him.
Someone was in his room and used his laptop to download those pics. They might have also slept there. So there you have one explanation as to how semen belonging to someone else might have got on his bed.
We also know from testimony that Frank Cascio threw parties at Neverland when MJ wasn't there. He sometimes stayed with guests (girls) in MJ's room. So there you have another possibility.
In any case, not even the prosecution thought this was damning evidence, and in that motion cited above you can see them state that they do not intend to introduce it to court. Which obviously would not have been the case if they thought it proved something.
Haters are only going on about it because they love to talk about salacious stuff like "semen" and they rely on people's ignorance about the case, as usual, by throwing in inflammatory salacious sounding stuff, but in reality not even the prosecution thought it proved anything.
And one more thing to consider: had they introduced it, that would have meant the Defense could have got their own forensic expert to examine it, which might have revealed it wasn't even what the prosecution claimed it to be?
As for the the evidence they DID try to introduce: the underwear with another male's semen. In the prosecution's motion it sounds pretty damning, but then from the defense's reply it finally turned out what it actually was. Pay attention, it will be funny!
So basically, the prosecution wanted to introduce an underwear from another male, that was found, NOT in MJ's room, but in the arcade area in a big laundry bag with other miscellaneous items from different people!
This they tried to use to "corroborate" Gavin's claim that MJ kept his underwear. This is HOW desperate this prosecution was, yet even they refrained from wanting to use the DNA on the bed, which is very telling about that "evidence".
For the record: Gavin's underwear was never found at Neverland. There is absolutely no evidence of MJ keeping his underwear like he alleged.
So once again the prosecution did extreme mental gymnastics to try to create "evidence" in the absence of real, damning evidence. Haters follow that tradition, apparently.
See? This is why we don't just run with cherry picked prosecution motions as if they are the gospel truth, like haters do (see also the motion about the books found that they circulate or Sneddon's motion about Jordan's description).
They are just that: the claims of a prosecution that didn't even manage to prove its case in court. As you can see, it's easy to describe something in a way that sounds damning - like they did here with the underwear.
But then when you get the context, do some research on it, it often turns out the prosecution's version was just ridiculous, out of context hype. Here the "damning" evidence actually turned out to be laundry from different people, stored in a storage area. LOL.
And while we are at it. There is lie claim haters circulate re. DNA evidence: that MJ's semen was found on nudist magazines with nude children. NOT TRUE!
First of all, the nudist magazines found in MJ's possession (mainly from the 1930s and 1960s) focus overwhelmingly on nude adult females. These are the type of magazines we are talking about:
Secondly, MJ's semen was NOT found on them. It is once again haters being dumb and/or taking things out of context. Here are the documents they found their claim on.
It is an extract from an evidence sheet sheet. What it says is that, characteristic for the prosecution’s “no stone unturned” approach, they used an Alternate Light Source (ALS) detector on the magazines to see if they find anything that they can use.
Because ALS testing showed some fluorescent on the surface of these particular magazines, they sent them to the Santa Barbara Department of Justice to further testing. This was enough for haters to jump to the conclusion that Jackson’s semen was found on these magazines.
The document does not say that, though – and if they had done some more research – eg. had the read the trial transcripts then they wouldn’t have embarrassed themselves with this conclusion.
What happened was explained in detail in trial testimonies by the prosecution’s own forensic experts who told the jury that ALS is a device that detects anything of biological origin: hair, fiber, saliva, blood, semen, sweat.
If such a fluorescent shows up on one surface of an item then the item is sent to a laboratory for further analysis (eg. DNA analysis) to see what it is exactly and whom the DNA belongs to.
From the March 24, 2005 testimony of Lisa Susan Roote Hemman, a senior identification technician in the forensic unit of the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department:
Later in Hemman’s testimony some more was explained about ALS and what it actually detects:
On the same day a senior criminalist of the California Department of Justice at the Santa Barbara Regional Crime Laboratory Charlane Marie testified about the results of their analysis and she stated that they had found nothing that could be used against MJ.
So not even the prosecution claimed that they have found MJ’s semen on those magazines. It is another hater lie designed to gaslight those who are ignorant about the case.
