1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And you refused, right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And why is that?
5 A. Because I have to interview where the
6 children supposedly are staying. But I could not go
7 to the address in East L.A., because, first of all,
8 I didn’t know it, and that was the address that was
9 listed on the referral.
10 Q. Okay. All right. Now, how many times
11 before your interview on the 20th do you think Janet
12 Arvizo called your cell phone number?
13 A. Maybe two or three times.
14 Q. Okay. In any of those calls, did Janet
15 Arvizo ever tell you she was being held against her
16 will?
17 A. No.
18 Q. In any of those calls, did Janet Arvizo tell
19 you that she was being falsely imprisoned by anyone
20 connected to Michael Jackson?
21 A. No, she did not.
22 Q. In any of those calls, did Janet Arvizo tell
23 you that her children were being held against their
24 will by Michael Jackson?
25 A. No, she did not.
26 Q. In any of those calls, did Mrs. Arvizo ever
27 say that her children were being held against their
28 will by anyone associated with Michael Jackson? 10661
1 A. No, she did not.
2 Q. In any of those calls, did Janet Arvizo tell
3 you that she was the victim of extortion?
4 A. No, she did not.
5 Q. In any of those calls, did Janet Arvizo say
6 that her children were the victim of extortion?
7 A. No, she did not.
8 Q. In any of those calls, did Janet Arvizo ask
9 you to call the police --
10 A. No.
11 Q. -- because she was --
12 A. No.
13 Q. -- the victim of crime?
14 A. No.
15 Q. In any of those calls, did Janet Arvizo say,
16 “Our family is being kidnapped”?
17 A. No, she did not.
18 Q. Okay. Now, after your interview with the
19 Arvizo family on the 20th at Jay Jackson’s
20 apartment, did Janet continue to call you on the
21 cell phone?
22 A. She called the office several times. She
23 also spoke to the supervisor. I talked to her maybe
24 a few more times on the cell phone.
25 Q. Okay. And in any of those calls on the cell
26 phone, did Janet Arvizo tell you, “My family is the
27 victim of crime”?
28 MR. SNEDDON: Object. Asked and answered, 10662
1 Your Honor.
2 MR. MESEREAU: This is after the 20th, Your
3 Honor.
4 THE WITNESS: After the 20th?
5 THE COURT: Overruled.
6 You may answer.
7 THE WITNESS: But I did see her.
8 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: We’ll get to that. But
9 I’m asking you about these cell phone calls.
10 A. No, she did not.
11 Q. In any of those cell phone calls after the
12 20th, did Janet Arvizo say, “My family is being held
13 against their will”?
14 MR. SNEDDON: Object as leading.
15 THE WITNESS: No.
16 THE COURT: Overruled.
17 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: You --
18 A. No.
19 Q. And in any of those cell phone calls after
20 the 20th, did Janet Arvizo tell you words to the
21 effect, “Please call the police. My family is being
22 falsely imprisoned”?
23 A. No, she did not.
24 Q. Okay. In any of those cell phone calls
25 after the 20th, did Janet Arvizo say Michael Jackson
26 is doing anything improper?
27 A. No.
28 Q. All right. Would it be correct to say that 10663
1 the cell phone calls that Janet Arvizo made to you
2 after the 20th were primarily concerned with what
3 your report was going to be?
4 A. Yes. Basically. And she was complaining
5 about -- she was complaining about what could she do
6 to try to -- with not being -- what could she do
7 about the Bashir document being seen without her
8 consent --
9 Q. Okay.
10 A. -- basically.
11 And she asked me, and I told her I was not a
12 lawyer, I was a social worker, and maybe she should
13 get a lawyer if you want to pursue it. That’s what
14 I told her.
15 Q. Did she ever suggest to you that she or her
16 children should have been paid for appearing on the
17 Bashir interview?
18 A. Mainly concerned about the fact that they
19 did not have her consent.
20 Q. Okay. Did she ever say anything about they
21 should have been paid?
22 MR. SNEDDON: Object. Asked and answered.
23 THE WITNESS: No.
24 THE COURT: Sustained.
25 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you recall yourself
26 discussing anything with Janet Arvizo about whether
27 her kids should be compensated?
28 MR. SNEDDON: Object. Asked and answered. 10664
1 THE COURT: Overruled.
2 You may answer.
3 THE WITNESS: She did not say “compensated.”
4 She wanted to know what could she do, what
5 grounds -- what legal grounds did she have against
6 it if she did not have consent, did not give her
7 kids consent. She didn’t have her consent to have
8 her kids shown on T.V.
9 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. All right. Just
10 one point about the beginning of the interview at
11 the Jackson apartment on the 20th.
12 Did Janet Arvizo show you pictures of her
13 family with celebrities on that day?
14 A. I don’t think so. No.
15 Q. You don’t recall her bringing out photos?
16 A. I don’t recall. Maybe she did.
17 Q. But you do recall the video she showed you,
18 of course?
19 A. Yeah, the video.
20 Q. You don’t recall her showing you photos of
21 celebrities?
22 A. You know, maybe she did. I can’t remember.
23 Q. Okay. All right.
24 A. That I cannot remember.
25 Q. Is it possible she did that after the tape
26 was played?
27 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, I’m going to
28 object as asked and answered. Calls for 10665
1 speculation.
2 THE COURT: Sustained.
3 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: After the tape of Michael
4 Jackson and Gavin was played at that apartment, did
5 Janet Arvizo ever tell you the names of any
6 celebrities she knew?
7 A. Yeah, she did.
8 Q. What did she say?
9 A. She talked about Chris Tucker and his coming
10 over to the house, and I think they were having --
11 making s’mores or something, and they were around
12 the fireplace. And she talked about a few other
13 people. I can’t really remember. I was there to
14 investigate the general neglect. I got, you know --
15 Q. Did it appear to you that she was trying to
16 impress you about the celebrities she knew?
17 A. In what way? Do you want my observation?
18 Q. Yes.
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Okay. Now, you mentioned that Janet talked
21 to you about her son Star having a cyst on his
22 brain.
23 A. Yeah.
24 Q. Do you remember what she said about that?
25 A. That’s all she said. And I asked her the
26 doctor’s name. She told me Kaiser. I called the
27 hospital. I tried to call the doctor. I never did
28 get any response from them. 10666
1 Star’s -- not “Star’s.” Gavin’s doctor, the
2 oncologist, I think it is. Oncologist. I think it
3 was Dr. Cooper. I did attempt to get in touch with
4 him.
5 THE COURT: They’re having trouble hearing.
6 You need to lean into the microphone.
7 THE WITNESS: I’m sorry.
8 I did attempt to get in touch with him.
9 THE COURT: No, that’s the wrong microphone.
10 THE WITNESS: The wrong one?
11 THE COURT: Yeah.
12 There you go.
13 THE WITNESS: I did attempt to get in touch
14 with him. I didn’t get any response.
15 We have so many days to respond to a
16 referral.
17 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. How many days do
18 you have to respond to a referral?
19 A. 30.
20 Q. 30?
21 A. Yeah.
22 Q. Okay.
23 A. And it took me a little while to get in
24 touch with her. About eight, seven days.
25 Q. Okay. Now, typically, after you conduct the
26 interview with the family, which you of course did
27 on the 20th of February, 2003, what do you typically
28 do next in your investigation? 10667
1 A. I make a decision based on the information
2 that’s gathered.
3 Q. And did you make a decision at some point?
4 A. I had to, yeah. I made a decision.
5 Q. What was your decision?
6 A. On the 27th of February. That the
7 allegations for general neglect of mother, Janet
8 Ventura, the allegations of sexual abuse by Michael
9 Jackson were unfounded at that time --
10 Q. Okay.
11 A. -- based on the information received.
12 Q. Now, what are some of the factors that went
13 into your conclusions?
14 A. For general neglect, as I explained to you
15 earlier, the kids were in school. They were all
16 medically being treated. They had supervision.
17 They had shelter, food, clothing. They were not in
18 any way in an unsafe environment. Those are the
19 factors that went into that.
20 Q. Okay. And when you formed your conclusions,
21 what did you do with them?
22 A. Well, I have to write them. I write what
23 they call an Allegation and Investigation Narrative
24 of the referral, the allegations.
25 And I went through all of the above things
26 that we’ve been speaking about or what -- the
27 questions that I asked them and what were the
28 answers in response to them. 10668
1 After that I write what they call a
2 Conclusion based on the information gathered and
3 received.
4 Q. And you put your conclusions in written
5 form?
6 A. Yes, I did.
7 Q. And what did you do with the written report?
8 A. It is turned in to the supervisor. It was
9 via our computer. It goes directly to the
10 supervisor, and she reviews it.
11 Q. Okay. And how long do you think Janet
12 continued to call you on your cell phone?
13 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, I’m going to
14 object. Vague as to time.
15 MR. MESEREAU: I’ll rephrase it.
16 THE WITNESS: She called the job also.
17 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: I have to rephrase the
18 question. I’m sorry.
19 A. Okay.
20 Q. After your interview on February 20th, 2003,
21 you’ve indicated that Janet continued to call you on
22 your cell phone, right?
23 A. Yeah.
24 Q. For how long after February 20th do you
25 think she called you on your cell phone?
26 A. Just a few times. She also called the job a
27 lot, and she was calling my supervisor a lot.
28 MR. SNEDDON: I’m going to object to that. 10669
1 Hearsay; lack of foundation.
2 THE COURT: Sustained.
3 BAILIFF CORTEZ: Your microphone’s off, sir.
4 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you know whether or not
5 Janet was calling your supervisor after February
6 20th?
7 A. Yes.
8 MR. SNEDDON: Objection. Lack of
9 foundation; calls for hearsay.
10 THE COURT: Sustained.
11 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you keep in touch with
12 your supervisor about Janet Arvizo after the
13 interview on February 20th?
14 A. Yes, I did.
15 Q. And how often would you talk to your
16 supervisor about the investigation into the Arvizos?
17 A. While I was writing the report, after I
18 wrote the report, I talked to her about it, and if
19 there’s anything that she sees that maybe need to be
20 changed or make some corrections, she would do it at
21 that particular time.
22 We also took it to what they call -- the
23 assistant regional administrator had to look at it
24 also.
25 Q. Now --
26 MR. SNEDDON: Move to strike as
27 nonresponsive.
28 THE COURT: Sustained. Stricken. 10670
1 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: If someone who’s under
2 investigation calls your agency on the phone, is a
3 record made of that call?
4 A. Repeat the question.
5 Q. Sure. If someone who is being investigated
6 by your agency for allegations of general neglect
7 calls your office on the phone --
8 A. Right.
9 Q. -- are records kept of those calls?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. How are those records kept?
12 A. The contact is made on the phone. I am to
13 put it in the computer. We have a tracking system.
14 Sometimes it’s not done. Sometimes it’s done on
15 paper and later entered into what is called CWCMS,
16 which is our computer system.
17 Q. If you’re responsible for investigating
18 someone for allegations of general neglect, is one
19 of your responsibilities to know whether or not that
20 person is calling your agency?
21 A. That’s just record-keeping, you know.
22 Telephone contacts, personal contacts, visits, it’s
23 all part of the report.
24 Q. And when you did your report on your
25 investigation into the Arvizos, did you take into
26 account contacts between the Arvizos and your
27 agency?
28 A. No, it’s just a record. It’s 10671
1 record-keeping.
2 Q. To your knowledge, did Janet Arvizo ever
3 call you at your agency?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. How many times do you think she did that
6 after February 20th, 2003?
7 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, that’s been asked
8 and answered.
9 THE COURT: Sustained.
10 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did you ever -- did you
11 have any knowledge of Janet calling your supervisor
12 after February 20th?
13 A. Yes, she did.
14 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, I’m going to
15 object. Lack of foundation; calls for hearsay; and
16 it was asked and answered.
17 THE COURT: Overruled. Next question.
18 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Did you discuss
19 with your supervisor conversations your supervisor
20 had had with Janet Arvizo after February 20th, 2003?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. Did your supervisor ever tell you that Janet
23 complained she was being falsely imprisoned?
24 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, I’m going to
25 object. It’s hearsay.
26 THE COURT: Sustained.
27 MR. SNEDDON: And --
28 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: During the period of time 10672
1 that you were investigating Janet Arvizo and her
2 family, did you have the ability to immediately get
3 in touch with police officers if you had to?
4 A. Oh, yeah.
5 Q. And how would you have done that?
6 A. We would call. If I thought there was any
7 doubt in my mind that there was any abuse going on,
8 we would be in children’s court.
9 Q. Okay. Okay. And at no time during your
10 investigation into Janet Arvizo did you ever call
11 the police in Los Angeles and report that any crime
12 was being committed on the Arvizos, right?
13 A. No, I did not.
14 Q. In fact, you’re not aware of anyone at your
15 agency ever contacting the Los Angeles Police
16 Department because they had gotten a report that
17 Janet and her children were the victim of criminal
18 conduct, right?
19 MR. SNEDDON: I’m going to object as
20 leading.
21 THE COURT: Sustained.
22 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you know whether or not
23 your supervisor at any time ever called the Los
24 Angeles Police Department to get the police involved
25 in any false imprisonment of the Arvizo family?
26 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, I object to the
27 question as being a lack of foundation.
28 THE COURT: Sustained. 10673
1 MR. SNEDDON: And calling for hearsay.
2 THE COURT: Sustained.
3 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Do you recall running into
4 Janet Arvizo around April 1st, 2003?
5 A. Yes, I do.
6 Q. And where did you see Janet Arvizo on that
7 day?
8 A. Can I say the Fatburger?
9 At Fatburger.
10 Q. Okay. All right. And where was the --
11 excuse me. Where was the Fatburger located?
12 A. On Wilshire and Highland.
13 Q. Okay. Now, Wilshire is a main thoroughfare
14 through Los Angeles, right?
15 A. It’s down the street from where I work.
16 Q. Okay.
17 A. Yeah.
18 Q. And had you walked from where you worked to
19 the Fatburger?
20 A. Oh, no, I couldn’t walk.
21 Q. Okay. Was this around lunchtime?
22 A. Yeah, it was lunchtime.
23 Q. And did you see Janet and her children at
24 the Fatburger?
25 A. To my amazement I did.
26 Q. Okay. And what were they doing at the
27 Fatburger, to your knowledge?
28 A. I was going to Fatburger to eat. And she 10674
1 was going to take the kids to tutoring.
2 Q. Did she tell you where the tutoring was?
3 A. It was upstairs. She showed me where it
4 was.
5 Q. When you say “upstairs” --
6 A. Upstairs in the complex.
7 Q. Now, which complex is this?
8 A. It’s a little complex with Fatburger, a
9 Subway, and El Pollo Loco and some other things.
10 Q. Is this like an office-type building?
11 A. No, it’s a -- a bunch of little stores.
12 Q. So do you mean on a second level?
13 A. Yeah, on the second level.
14 Q. And she told you there was a tutoring center
15 there?
16 A. Yeah. She was taking them to tutoring, yes.
17 Q. And did she tell you anything about the
18 tutoring that was going on?
19 A. She just said she had to go to tutoring
20 because the kids had missed so much school dealing
21 with the whole issue with the video -- I mean, the
22 broadcast and everything about the Bashir, that they
23 missed so much school, and she didn’t have any
24 money, and that she did tell me that Michael wanted
25 to send them to Brazil somewhere.
26 Q. Okay.
27 A. And she didn’t want to go. She didn’t know
28 any people there. And she was disgusted. And she 10675
1 hadn’t -- as a matter of fact, she told me she
2 hadn’t seen him.
3 Q. Did she say words to the effect, “I don’t
4 want to go to that dump,” meaning Brazil?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Did she tell you where she was living at the
7 time?
8 A. We didn’t get into that. I didn’t ask her
9 where she was living. I think my supervisor might
10 have asked her, because I was trying to distance
11 myself.
12 Q. From her?
13 A. Yeah. Because most of the time I see
14 clients on the streets, because, you know, it’s
15 local. I try not to engage conversation.
16 Q. Okay. When you saw Janet and the children
17 at Fatburger, did it look like they were being
18 restrained?
19 A. No.
20 Q. When you saw Janet at the -- and the
21 children at the Fatburger, did it look like they
22 were being held against their will?
23 MR. SNEDDON: Your Honor, I’m going to
24 object to these questions. This is April of 2003.
25 It’s irrelevant.
26 THE COURT: Overruled.
27 THE WITNESS: No, they did not.
28 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did she tell you whether 10676
1 or not any plane tickets had ever been purchased for
2 any Brazil trip?
3 A. No, she just mentioned it. She mentioned
4 that he wanted them to go to Brazil.
5 Q. And she said she wouldn’t go?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Is that what she said?
8 A. Yeah.
9 Q. She said she won’t go to that dump?
10 A. Yeah, right. Basically, yeah.
11 Q. Okay.
12 A. We talked a little bit more, but I asked how
13 the children were doing. Said they were doing okay,
14 except they missed a lot of school, you know.
15 Q. When you saw Janet and the kids at the
16 Fatburger, did Janet ever ask you to call the
17 police?
18 A. No, she did not.
19 Q. Going back just a little bit and then I’ll
20 finish, when you first made contact with Janet
21 Arvizo, did you tell her that you had gone to the
22 address with some police officers on the 14th?
23 A. To be very honest, I’m not really sure if I
24 mentioned to her, but I’m quite sure I did, knowing
25 how I am. I’m quite sure I did.
26 Q. You typically will tell --
27 A. Yeah, I told her I came there looking for
28 her with the police, uh-huh. 10677
1 Q. Okay.
2 A. Uh-huh.
3 Q. And when you said that, she never said,
4 “Call the police. We’re in trouble”?
5 A. No, that was the first -- that was on the
6 20th -- on the 14th when I first went to the home --
7 Q. Right.
8 A. -- of Major Jackson.
9 Q. Yeah.
10 A. I just kind of mentioned it to her, that I
11 did try to contact her there at that particular
12 address.
13 Q. Did you tell her you tried to contact her at
14 that address with some police officers?
15 A. Yes, I did.
16 Q. Okay.
17 A. Uh-huh.
18 Q. Did she ever tell you words to the effect,
19 “Please call those police officers. We’re being
20 held against our will”?
21 A. No, she did not.
22 Q. Let me rephrase that. Let’s go back to the
23 20th.
24 Did you ever ask any of the Arvizo children
25 in that interview about their father?
26 A. We spoke of their father briefly.
27 Q. Okay.
28 A. With the domestic violence issues and -- 10678
1 Q. You talked about all that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Okay. Before you arrived to interview the
4 Arvizos on the 20th, had you done any search to see
5 if they’d had prior contacts with your agency?
6 A. Yes, I did.
7 Q. And what did you do in that regard?
8 A. When the referrals come through, we know
9 that if -- if there has been another referral, so
10 what I did was I researched it. I looked it up.
11 Q. And what did you find?
12 A. I found that there was an allegation of
13 domestic violence against the father of the family.
14 And then we tried to do voluntary family maintenance
15 services with our department, which is done for six
16 months with supervision by the Department of
17 Children & Family Services.
18 Q. Did you learn whether or not, in 1996, Gavin
19 had accused his mother of molesting him?
20 A. You know what? I think that was pre our
21 computer system and everything was on hard copy, so
22 that information was not made privy to me.
23 Q. But you did obtain the information at some
24 point?
25 A. I’m not aware of that one, no.
26 Q. Okay. Are you aware of any contact between
27 Janet, Gavin and your agency in 1996?
28 A. No, I’m not. 10679
1 MR. MESEREAU: Okay. Thank you. No further
2 questions.
3 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
4 THE COURT: Cross-examine?
5
6 CROSS-EXAMINATION
7 BY MR. SNEDDON:
8 Q. Good morning.
9 A. Good morning.
10 Q. Is it Mrs. Peters?
11 A. Ms.
12 Q. Ms.? Okay. I just want to ask you a few
13 questions about the unit you worked in, if we can,
14 and a little bit about your background.
15 A. Uh-huh.
16 Q. With regard to the unit, I believe you --
17 you indicated that that unit was formed shortly
18 after 1994; is that correct?
19 A. Yeah.
20 Q. And it was formed as a result of prior
21 allegations made against the defendant in this case,
22 Mr. Jackson, because information was leaked,
23 correct?
24 A. That’s what I hear, yeah.
25 Q. Okay.
26 A. That’s what I understand.
27 Q. And prior to that time, when information
28 came in on the hotline, was there a working 10680
1 relationship at that time between the Los Angeles
2 Police Department and your department to jointly
3 investigate allegations that come off the hotline?
4 A. Allegations of sexual abuse --
5 Q. Yes, ma’am.
6 A. -- which is criminal.
7 Q. There was a partnership, correct?
8 A. That’s always been, yeah.
9 Q. And in fact, some of those officers who
10 worked that unit are located at the same -- some
11 co-located with your workers?
12 A. No, they’re not.
13 Q. They’re at different locations?
14 A. Yeah.
15 Q. But you work together?
16 A. Yeah. We work with the police department,
17 yes.
18 Q. Okay. Now, with the formation of this unit,
19 do you no longer work with the LAPD on sensitive
20 case information, in other words?
21 A. Rephrase the question.
22 Q. Yeah, maybe it’s a bad question. Let me ask
23 it this way: If an allegation had come in back in
24 1994 of the type that you got in this particular
25 case, a member from your department and a member
26 from the police department, Los Angeles Police
27 Department, would have been working on the case,
28 correct? 10681
1 A. No. We would have to request that.
2 If we felt at the time of the interview,
3 that we were having an interview, and a referral
4 came in, and there was allegations of sexual abuse,
5 at that point what we would do, if I’m investigating
6 someone at that time, I would call the police. Not
7 on all occasions do I actually go out there with a
8 police officer.
9 Q. Maybe I misspoke. I was asking about what
10 the procedure was back in 1993.
11 A. 1994, which is 11 years ago, the procedures
12 are still the same, basically. If there’s
13 allegations of sexual abuse, which is criminal, we
14 are to call the police department if, in fact, the
15 allegations are true.
16 Q. So it would be your testimony, then, that
17 back in ‘94, the original interview would have been
18 done by somebody from your department, and then Los
19 Angeles Police Department would be called in?
20 A. Only if --
21 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; beyond the scope.
22 THE COURT: Just a minute.
23 Overruled.
24 You may answer.
25 THE WITNESS: I can answer?
26 MR. SNEDDON: Sure. Go ahead.
27 THE WITNESS: Only if the allegations were
28 deemed to be true. We don’t take them out every 10682
1 case.
2 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: But on some cases you do?
3 A. Yes, we do. You know, it just depends.
4 Q. All right. And I think you told the jury
5 that one of the options that you have available to
6 you when you go out to investigate allegations of
7 neglect or abuse is to -- after the interview, if
8 you conclude that the children are not in a safe
9 environment, is to remove those children immediately
10 from that environment, correct?
11 A. Exactly.
12 Q. And you’ve done that on several occasions?
13 A. Oh, yeah.
14 Q. Many occasions?
15 A. Many occasions.
16 Q. Now, with regard to your training, I think
17 you -- in response to Mr. Mesereau’s questions, you
18 indicated that you had a lot of ongoing training in
19 the department on a regular basis?
20 A. Yes, we have mandatory training.
21 Q. That deals with emotional abuse?
22 A. All kind of issues, yeah.
23 Q. Child sexual abuse?
24 A. Yes. I mean, I can’t even run them off, all
25 the names, but mostly everything.
26 Q. Okay. And --
27 A. New procedures --
28 Q. -- as a result of -- go ahead. I didn’t 10683
1 mean to cut you off.
2 A. No, I was just saying policy, procedures and
3 new things, and --
4 Q. I think what I’d like to do is just focus a
5 little bit about the training that you’ve had with
6 regard to interviewing children who may have been
7 the victims, alleged victims, of a sexual abuse,
8 okay?
9 A. Yeah.
10 Q. Okay. And I know it’s difficult, because
11 you’re a very experienced person. You’ve been in
12 this business a long time. But you did, I believe,
13 based on your testimony, indicate that you had
14 received specialized training with regard to --
15 A. I have training in that, but I’m not a
16 specialist in sexual abuse, if that’s what you
17 wanted to know. No, I’m not.
18 Q. Okay.
19 A. Based on my experience, yeah.
20 Q. Okay. In your training, did they educate
21 you about the difference between disclosures by boys
22 and disclosures by girls?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And different approaches to take?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. And different concerns about the
27 individuals?
28 A. Yes. 10684
1 Q. And did they talk to you about the
2 differences between younger children and teenaged
3 children?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And the differences between teenaged boys
6 and teenaged girls?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And did they educate you and did you learn
9 that, in fact, it’s very unusual for a teenaged boy
10 to admit that he’s been molested by an adult?
11 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. No foundation;
12 misstates the facts.
13 MR. SNEDDON: I’m --
14 THE COURT: Overruled.
15 You may answer.
16 THE WITNESS: That’s one of the --
17 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: It’s been your experience,
18 has it not, as a person with over 30 years
19 experience, for a teenaged boy to admit that he’s
20 been molested by an adult is a very, very difficult
21 thing to do, isn’t it?
22 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Vague; no
23 foundation.
24 THE WITNESS: Am I to answer?
25 THE COURT: Overruled.
26 You may answer.
27 THE WITNESS: I can answer that?
28 THE COURT: I can have the question read 10685
1 back.
2 THE WITNESS: Yeah, please read that back to
3 me.
4 THE COURT: Okay.
5 (Record read.)
6 THE WITNESS: Yes. That’s one of the things.
7 That’s not all of the things. But that’s one of
8 them, yes.
9 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: And I assume, during the
10 course of your training, that you’ve become
11 familiar with the term “Child Sexual Assault
12 Accommodation Syndrome”?
13 A. Oh, wow. I won’t repeat this again. I am
14 not a sexual abuse therapist. I do deal with sexual
15 abuse cases. I do deal with physical abuse. I
16 deal -- I do deal with emotional abuse, medical
17 neglect.
18 When it comes to the specialist, I would
19 have referred a child who was in sexual -- possible
20 sexual abuse to a sexual abuse therapist. I do know
21 some of the things about sexual abuse, some of them,
22 but I’m not a therapist. At that point I am a
23 social worker evaluating and investigating
24 allegations of abuse.
25 Q. Yes, ma’am. I think all I asked was are you
26 familiar?
27 A. No. I’m not familiar with that, no. I can
28 answer that. No. 10686
1 Q. Let me try it under another phrase, then.
2 Are you familiar with the fact -- as a
3 result of your training with the department to
4 investigate allegations of child abuse, are you
5 familiar with the fact that children don’t always
6 disclose --
7 A. Oh, yeah. Sure.
8 Q. -- on the first visit by somebody?
9 A. Of course. Oh, yeah.
10 Q. And sometimes it comes in a serial fashion,
11 correct?
12 A. Yes. Yes.
13 Q. Okay. So -- and you’re also familiar, from
14 the same training, that it’s unlikely that a
15 teenaged boy is going to tell another female adult
16 that he’s been molested in the presence of his
17 mother, correct?
18 A. That could be one of the things, yeah.
19 Q. That was one of the things you were taught,
20 wasn’t it?
21 A. Yeah.
22 Q. So, in fact, the day that you were there
23 talking to Gavin Arvizo and asking him questions
24 about whether he was inappropriately touched by Mr.
25 Jackson, other than his younger brother Star,
26 everybody in the room was a female, correct?
27 A. Yes. Uh-huh.
28 Q. Let’s talk a little bit about when you first 10687
1 arrived there. You described the situation as very
2 friendly, correct?
3 A. Yes, I did.
4 Q. And that Janet Arvizo, I think you
5 mentioned, may have been, to you, overly friendly
6 because she hugged you?
7 A. That’s my observation.
8 Q. Yes, ma’am. Okay. And when you went to the
9 Arvizo -- or the apartment where you thought the
10 meeting was to take place on the 20th, when you
11 first got there, I believe in response to Mr.
12 Mesereau’s questions, you said that there was
13 about -- there was -- she immediately wanted you to
14 watch this video, correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Okay. And I want to ask you a couple
17 questions about this.
18 A. All right.
19 Q. In preparation for your testimony today, did
20 Mr. Mesereau allow you to listen to a tape-recording
21 that was made of the events that occurred when you
22 arrived at the house on the 20th and went for about
23 20 minutes?
24 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; foundation.
25 THE COURT: Sustained.
26 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: Were you aware of the fact
27 that your meeting with Janet Arvizo had been
28 surreptitiously tape-recorded? 10688
1 A. No.
2 Q. Not at that point in time. Are you aware of
3 that now?
4 A. Through the media.
5 Q. Yes, ma’am. Through the media.
6 A. That’s the only way I knew.
7 Q. Okay. And you heard your voice?
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. And it was your voice?
10 A. It was me.
11 Q. Okay. And before you testified here today,
12 did Mr. Mesereau ask you to listen to the tape with
13 your voice on it?
14 A. That’s the first time I’ve ever seen him.
15 Q. Did an investigator for Mr. Mesereau ask you
16 to do that?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Okay. Did they ask you to look at the
19 transcript that had been prepared of that particular
20 meeting?
21 A. No.
22 Q. And so basically what you’re telling us is
23 based on your recollection of what happened several
24 years ago, or a year and a half ago?
25 A. Yes. 2003, right?
26 Q. Okay. And isn’t it a fact that the first
27 two and a half minutes of that tape you can hear
28 everybody just making introductions and talking in 10689
1 general before anybody puts anything into the
2 machine?
3 A. I never heard the tape.
4 Q. Okay. Well, I’m asking you your
5 recollection. Does that refresh your recollection
6 with regard to what happened?
7 A. Yes.
8 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; no foundation.
9 MR. SNEDDON: It does.
10 MR. MESEREAU: Calls for speculation.
11 THE COURT: Overruled. The answer was,
12 “Yes.” Next question.
13 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: Now, when you went out
14 there on the 20th, you had actually attempted to
15 find Mrs. Arvizo and the children on the 14th,
16 correct?
17 A. Yeah.
18 Q. Okay. And when you did that, you went to
19 the location that you have told us about with the
20 police officers --
21 A. Right, I did.
22 Q. -- correct?
23 A. Yes, I did.
24 Q. And then you went over to the school?
25 A. No, not the same day.
26 Q. No.
27 A. Later on.
28 Q. The next day? 10690
1 A. No, it was a Friday.
2 Q. It was a Friday.
3 A. So, let’s see. Monday was my day off.
4 Probably was Tuesday.
5 Q. So how many days in between?
6 A. Four.
7 Q. So that would have been around the 18th,
8 then?
9 A. Right.
10 Q. So you went to the school, you contacted the
11 principal of the school?
12 A. Excuse me. I talked to a counselor there.
13 Mrs. Heiss.
14 Q. With regard to the original allegation that
15 had come into your department, you had received,
16 actually, multiple referrals, had you not?
17 A. No.
18 Q. There weren’t several people who had
19 actually complained and asked for an investigation?
20 A. No, I only received the one referral.
21 Q. From the principal of the school?
22 A. Am I to say who the caller was?
23 Q. Well, I’m asking you --
24 A. Is it okay?
25 Q. I’m asking you if it was the principal of
26 the school complaining that they weren’t in school.
27 A. No.
28 Q. Now, you mentioned before in your 10691
1 examination with Mr. Mesereau that records are kept
2 of contacts that come in about allegations; is that
3 correct?
4 A. Yes, they are. There’s a referral number on
5 all allegations.
6 Q. Okay. What is CAHL?
7 A. Child Abuse Hotline.
8 Q. Okay. And do not your records reflect the
9 fact that the director of the school called in an
10 alleged allegation to the hotline on the 14th of
11 February, 2003?
12 A. You’re right. But those calls come from the
13 Child Abuse Hotline, as you -- the CAHL.
14 Q. Yes, ma’am.
15 A. Those cases, from there, they go to certain
16 districts and regions that are located in --
17 depending on the address of the mother or father or
18 whatever. And that’s how they are framed out.
19 And once they do that, if they see that it’s
20 a case that has high profile, or -- like I say, we
21 do a lot of media cases. We also do law
22 enforcement, judges, lawyers, doctors. I mean, not
23 doctors, but judges and lawyers. We do those cases
24 for confidentiality.
25 So what I’m saying to you is that I only
26 know that until I get the referral, where the actual
27 allegation came from, who was the reporter, and I do
28 think -- I do remember -- recall that it was Tesh, 10692
1 Dr. Tesh.
2 Q. Dr. Tesh?
3 A. Dr. Tesh from the school who called and
4 reported that. Based on the information that
5 there -- was received and the airing of that
6 particular tape, an allegation was called in.
7 Q. Did you determine, when you went to the
8 school on the 18th, at that point, that one of the
9 problems that had motivated the school to contact
10 the hotline was the fact that the children were not
11 in school?
12 A. Well, after speaking to the counselor at the
13 school, she told me she was in contact with Ms.
14 Arvizo, and that she had arranged for the children
15 to have homework taken. And that’s why she happened
16 to be calling that day when I was sitting in her
17 office and that’s how I made contact with her. It
18 was just a coincidence that I was there.
19 Q. Okay. But -- so the answer to the question
20 is no, they were not in a regular school?
21 A. They were at John Burroughs Middle School.
22 They had missed some days out of school after the
23 airing, which was on 2-6, I think, if I can
24 remember. 2-6-03 was the airing of the tape. They
25 had not been to school because of some of the
26 harassment and some of the things the children were
27 saying about them.
28 Q. So it’s your understanding that the reason 10693
1 they weren’t attending school was because of the
2 fallout from the --
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. -- showing of the video?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Had you seen the video, the Bashir video?
7 A. A little bit of it.
8 Q. Prior to the time that you went out to
9 interview Mrs. Arvizo on the 20th --
10 A. No, I hadn’t seen it. No.
11 Q. You hadn’t?
12 A. Huh-uh.
13 Q. Had you seen excerpts from it at all?
14 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; relevance.
15 MR. SNEDDON: It goes to --
16 THE COURT: Overruled.
17 You may answer.
18 THE WITNESS: Yes, uh-huh.
19 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: Had you seen the picture of
20 Gavin sitting next to the defendant, Michael
21 Jackson?
22 A. Yes, I did.
23 Q. With his head on his shoulder?
24 A. Yeah.
25 Q. Had you seen the excerpts in which Mr.
26 Jackson admitted that he slept with little boys in
27 his bed?
28 A. Yes. 10694
1 Q. Okay. So you were aware of all that before
2 you went out to interview the Arvizos on the 20th?
3 A. No, I didn’t see the interview. This was
4 after.
5 Q. Okay. Then in fairness to you, I think we
6 should clear that up.
7 Before you went to see the Arvizos on the
8 20th of February --
9 A. Right.
10 Q. -- okay? - had you seen any part of the
11 Bashir video?
12 A. No, I didn’t.
13 Q. Okay. So you were unaware of what the
14 allegations were? Let me ask it a different way.
15 Did you read any media accounts other
16 than --
17 A. Of course. I saw it all over T.V.
18 Q. Okay.
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. That’s all I’m trying to do is see what you
21 knew when you went out there.
22 A. I live in America. I saw it, yes. I did.
23 Q. All right. Were you aware of the fact, when
24 you went out there on the 20th of February, that the
25 allegation was that Mr. Jackson had admitted in this
26 program to sleeping with young boys --
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. -- in his bed? 10695
1 A. Yes, I was. Yeah.
2 Q. And you were aware of the fact that one of
3 the people who had been portrayed on that video was
4 one of the children of Mrs. Arvizo, Gavin?
5 A. Right.
6 Q. Okay. So you knew that when you went out
7 there?
8 A. Yes, I did. Yes.
9 Q. And you mentioned that you also checked --
10 you also checked some files and confirmed that there
11 was a domestic violence history in the family,
12 correct?
13 A. Yes, I did.
14 Q. And you confirmed that, in fact, your
15 department had substantiated those claims, correct?
16 A. Yes, they did.
17 Q. And I think you said to us that, to your
18 knowledge, Mrs. Arvizo was aware of the fact, during
19 the meeting on the 20th, that you had the power to
20 take her children away from her immediately,
21 correct?
22 A. Oh, yeah. Having previously dealt with the
23 Department of Children & Family Services, I’m quite
24 sure she knew.
25 Q. In response to Mr. Mesereau, you indicated
26 that you thought that she knew that?
27 A. Yes, she knew.
28 Q. She knew? 10696
1 A. Uh-huh.
2 Q. And so part of the information, or part of
3 the focus of your investigation when you went out
4 there on the 20th was -- basically there were two
5 parts to it, correct? One, to see whether the kids
6 were well-kempt and whether she was a good mother.
7 A. Exactly.
8 Q. And the second part was neglect, lack of
9 supervision and whether any molestation had
10 occurred.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. So there were two things?
13 A. Two things.
14 Q. Okay. Now, with regard to the first aspect
15 of the investigation, that Mrs. Arvizo -- whether
16 she was a good mother or not, all right?
17 A. All right.
18 Q. And I just want to try to make it so it’s
19 easy for us.
20 A. Okay.
21 Q. With regard to the first part, you
22 determined, after your conversation with Mrs. Arvizo
23 and your personal observations of the kids, that you
24 didn’t -- you didn’t worry about that; that
25 everything was fine, correct?
26 A. Exactly. The kids were safe. The mother
27 was taking good care of her kids properly, and
28 that’s what it’s based on. 10697
1 Q. Okay. And you knew that she was a welfare
2 mother?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. She had very few resources, economic
5 resources?
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; misstates the
8 evidence.
9 THE COURT: Overruled.
10 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: And so in your opinion, in
11 finding the allegation unfounded, you determined
12 that she, with the meager resources she had, took
13 good care of her children, correct?
14 A. Of course. I mean, money has nothing to do
15 with how a parent takes care of their child. It’s
16 not economics.
17 Q. Okay.
18 A. You know.
19 Q. So you were impressed by the way that she
20 took care of those kids?
21 A. Yes, she was fine about her children, taking
22 care of them properly. She was not neglecting her
23 children.
24 Q. And just the fact that when you saw her in
25 April, that she was very concerned about her
26 children’s education, that she had taken them and
27 put them into tutoring to make sure they didn’t fall
28 behind, correct? 10698
1 A. Yeah, I think she told me that Major Jackson
2 was paying for it or something.
3 Q. Yes, ma’am.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And as a matter of fact, they had missed
6 some school?
7 A. Yes, she did tell me that.
8 Q. And they were trying to catch up so that
9 they could get caught up in their schooling?
10 A. Uh-huh. That was after the case was closed.
11 Q. Yes, ma’am.
12 A. So that’s off the record. What I mean is,
13 it’s just a conversation.
14 Q. It’s on the record.
15 A. This was a conversation that I was having
16 with her. She did tell me that, yeah.
17 Q. I’m just saying that nothing that occurred
18 afterwards was inconsistent with your opinion that
19 she did a good job of raising those children?
20 A. Oh, no problem. She did a well job, a good
21 job.
22 Q. Okay.
23 A. Yeah.
24 Q. Now, when you arrived -- I want to talk
25 about what happened on the 20th at the apartment.
26 A. Okay. All right.
27 Q. So we can just -- when you arrived there, I
28 think you said that there were two gentlemen, or men 10699
1 inside, correct?
2 A. Yes, I did.
3 Q. Okay. And could you describe those two
4 people to me?
5 A. Big.
6 Q. Both of them?
7 A. I don’t -- yes.
8 Q. Both of them big?
9 A. Yes. I mean --
10 Q. Buffed out?
11 A. You know, off -- all of them was big.
12 Q. Pardon?
13 A. All I remember, they were big.
14 Q. Do you remember what race they were?
15 A. Oh, God, I can’t remember. Maybe one was
16 black and --
17 Q. Do you recall telling officers that you
18 thought they were African-American?
19 A. Yeah, but I don’t think they were. I can’t
20 really remember because I wasn’t focusing on that.
21 I do remember them being there. I knew they were
22 big, you know. I can’t remember.
23 Q. And one of them was introduced to you as
24 Michael Jackson’s security guard, correct?
25 A. Yeah, I think. Yeah, I think that’s what he
26 said.
27 Q. And the young lady that was introduced to
28 you, the Aja Pryor young lady, she was introduced as 10700
1 a friend of the family, correct?
2 A. Yes, she was.
3 Q. She was the lady with the baby?
4 A. Yeah.
5 Q. Okay.
6 A. Little boy.
7 Q. Now, have you ever had a case before where
8 you went out, in your 30 years of experience, to do
9 an investigation into an allegation and you had a
10 security person there for the person that you were
11 investigating?
12 A. You know, I don’t know how to answer that
13 question. I mean, I’ve been to a lot of homes.
14 They might have been security guards. They might
15 have been -- I don’t know. To be fair with that
16 particular question, the answer probably would be
17 no, not really knowingly knowing who they were. I
18 mean --
19 Q. All right.
20 A. -- that’s the best way I can answer that
21 question for you.
22 Q. Would you agree with me that it’s highly
23 unusual, in your experience, to have a security
24 guard present representing the person who you are
25 personally investigating?
26 A. Knowing the nature of the case and what I
27 deal with, and I do deal with the Sensitive Case
28 Unit, a lot of things are probable, in that sense. 10701
1 If it’s a security guard -- I’ve been to homes and
2 I’ve had five police officers there.
3 Q. No, I’m talking about a person working for
4 the person that you’re investigating. This would be
5 a first, wouldn’t it?
6 A. Probably so. Probably so. I’ll answer yes
7 to that.
8 Q. Did it cause you any concern at all that
9 there was a security person there representing the
10 person that you were investigating?
11 A. Did it concern me?
12 Q. Yes, ma’am.
13 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Objection;
14 misstates the evidence.
15 THE COURT: Overruled.
16 You may answer.
17 THE WITNESS: I wasn’t overly concerned.
18 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: But it did set off a little
19 bit of a question mark in your mind?
20 A. I was wondering why.
21 Q. All right.
22 A. That was all. I’m not starstruck or
23 anything like that, you know. I was wondering why
24 all the hoopla? Why all the people? Why all the --
25 you know, I come here to investigate her.
26 Q. Seemed like an awful lot for just what you
27 were there to do was routine?
28 A. Yeah. Well, like I said, I’ve been around 10702
1 for a while, so I’ve seen a lot of things.
2 Q. Okay. Now, I want to talk a little bit
3 about the video.
4 A. Okay.
5 Q. The video that you saw that Mrs. Arvizo put
6 into the machine, that video was not the Bashir
7 tape, was it?
8 A. No, it wasn’t.
9 Q. And it was a video that showed Gavin Arvizo
10 when he had cancer, correct, was recovering from
11 cancer?
12 A. Yeah, I would assume that would -- yeah.
13 Q. He looked very frail?
14 A. Well --
15 Q. Didn’t have very much hair?
16 A. Not much hair, yeah. I think that’s the
17 same one where they were riding around on a train,
18 and they were going through Neverland and there’s
19 some swans or something.
20 Q. And he was a good deal younger than the
21 Gavin that you saw at the apartment that day,
22 correct?
23 A. He was 13 when I -- I think he was 13.
24 Q. Uh-huh. He looked younger and smaller?
25 A. He was younger. Maybe, what, 11? 11, 12.
26 Q. Do you know whether that particular video
27 that you saw that day on the 20th that Mrs. Arvizo
28 showed you had ever been shown publicly anywhere? 10703
1 A. I don’t know. Maybe so. I don’t know.
2 Q. Did you ever see it?
3 A. Do you mean like on television or --
4 Q. Yes, ma’am.
5 A. Is that what you’re saying?
6 Q. Yes, ma’am.
7 A. I’m not aware of that. I mean, I’m not
8 aware of that.
9 Q. Okay. All right. Let’s talk a little bit
10 about the process. Ordinarily when you interview
11 somebody, it’s confidential, correct?
12 Let me go back. Let me just start over
13 again.
14 When you go out to investigate an allegation
15 of neglect --
16 A. Uh-huh.
17 Q. -- for child abuse - okay? --
18 A. Right.
19 Q. -- child sexual abuse particularly in this
20 case --
21 A. All right.
22 Q. -- you have certain procedures that you try
23 to follow in the way that you do your work, correct?
24 A. Exactly.
25 Q. And one of the things that -- the reasons
26 that your unit was created was because there had
27 been leaks in the past when information came into
28 your office in high-profile cases about the facts 10704
1 and circumstances of an alleged molestation,
2 correct? That’s why you have your unit?
3 A. I understand that’s why it was created.
4 Q. Okay.
5 A. Actual documentation, in actual policy and
6 procedure, I don’t know how this unit got created.
7 But I do understand that that was one of the reasons
8 why it was created, because there was too many
9 people handling other cases.
10 And so what they did was centralize it,
11 localize it, rather, and put it in one spot so we
12 knew who -- the social workers who had that
13 particular case.
14 Q. And one of the reasons for that was to
15 provide accountability in case anything leaked out,
16 correct?
17 A. Leaked out. Well, all our cases are high
18 confidentiality. All our cases.
19 Q. So the goal --
20 A. How that is treated any different -- not
21 that the case is treated any different, but --
22 Q. I’m not suggesting that, ma’am.
23 A. Okay.
24 Q. I’m just trying to find out in your opinion,
25 based on your experience --
26 A. In my opinion --
27 Q. -- that one of the things that your unit
28 tries to accomplish is to make sure that the 10705
1 information you obtain remains confidential?
2 A. You’re correct.
3 Q. And it does not get out to the public?
4 A. You’re correct.
5 Q. I’m sorry if I was too hard getting there.
6 And so that is one of the reasons why, on
7 the morning of this interview, that your supervisor,
8 Mrs. Walker, requested that the people who were in
9 the room leave, the two -- the security person and
10 the other one, and Mrs. -- Miss Pryor and the baby,
11 correct?
12 A. Yes. But I will tell you this --
13 Q. Okay.
14 A. -- that if a parent decides they want
15 someone else to hear what we’re saying, they have
16 that right.
17 Q. Okay. So if she wanted to have an attorney
18 present, she could have?
19 A. She has that right, yes.
20 Q. And if she had wanted to insist on the fact
21 that Aja Pryor stay, she could have done that?
22 A. Yes, she could have.
23 Q. And if she had wanted to insist upon having
24 the big guy stay, she could have done that?
25 A. Yes, she could have. But it was our
26 intentions to try to give us as much confidentiality
27 as we can.
28 Q. Okay. And you told her that, and she went 10706
1 along with it, correct? She asked them to leave?
2 A. Yeah, she did.
3 Q. In fact, she even apologized for the fact
4 that they were there, and that it was her fault that
5 she’d invited them, correct?
6 A. I don’t remember her apologizing for it.
7 She may have said something to that effect, that,
8 “I’m sorry I did” -- you know, but I can’t really
9 remember that.
10 Q. But in any case, the reality is, what you’re
11 trying to do is create as much confidentiality about
12 these meetings as you can?
13 A. Exactly.
14 Q. Now, obviously if anybody tape-recorded any
15 of those conversations, that would be a breach of
16 that confidentiality?
17 A. It’s illegal.
18 Q. All right. That would be a breach of the
19 confidentiality?
20 A. Yes, it is.
21 Q. And you did not know that at the time that
22 you were -- you arrived at the apartment, that you
23 were being tape-recorded, did you?
24 A. No, I did not.
25 Q. Now, did you see a tape-recorder any time
26 while you were there that morning?
27 A. No. I would have said something.
28 Q. And wasn’t one of the things that Mrs. 10707
1 Arvizo said to you during the course of your
2 conversation before you began the interview was that
3 she was afraid that the report would not be
4 confidential and that like her name would end up on
5 a billboard as a bad mother; isn’t that what she
6 said?
7 A. You know, I think she did say something to
8 that effect.
9 Q. So she was worried about the confidentiality
10 issue, correct?
11 A. Of course she was. And we reassured her
12 that everything was confidential, you know. We had
13 a pretty good rapport, you know.
14 Q. And when you -- when you talked to Mrs.
15 Arvizo, did you -- did you ever take her separately
16 into another room and talk to her?
17 A. I went into a room, yes, I did.
18 Q. And talked to her?
19 A. I -- yes, I did.
20 Q. Okay. And you were sort of explaining to
21 her why you were there?
22 A. Yes, I did.
23 Q. And when you did that, the other people were
24 still out in the other room?
25 A. Yes, I did. I did do that.
26 Q. Now, did you at some point see Mrs. Arvizo
27 go into a room with the big guy, one of the big guys
28 who was there, before you commenced your interviews? 10708
1 A. No, I didn’t. I don’t recall.
2 Q. You don’t recall?
3 A. No. Huh-uh.
4 Q. Is it possible?
5 A. It’s possible.
6 Q. Well, at some point I think you told a
7 defense investigator that you didn’t think that Mrs.
8 Arvizo was out of your presence from the time that
9 you arrived till the time you commenced your
10 interview. Did you not say that?
11 A. No, she was not out of my sight. She was --
12 we were in a one-bedroom apartment, small apartment.
13 Q. So if you saw her walk into a bedroom,
14 you --
15 A. Yeah, if I saw her, she did not walk into a
16 bedroom with -- since we’re talking, she did not
17 walk into a bedroom with anyone else.
18 Q. And do you recall a time when actually Mrs.
19 Arvizo excused herself and went into the rest room
20 for a while, before the conversation occurred?
21 A. In the beginning?
22 Q. Yes, ma’am.
23 A. When we first started talking?
24 Q. After the video.
25 A. After the video?
26 Q. Yes, ma’am.
27 A. Perhaps she did.
28 Q. Isn’t it maybe -- isn’t it true that 10709
1 actually after the video was completed, you took her
2 into another room and you talked to her about what
3 you were trying to do, and to ease her -- she was
4 anxious, and you were very nice to her, and you were
5 trying to tell her what it was all about, and you
6 kept saying it was your higher-ups that told you you
7 had to go do this and things like that, right?
8 A. Yes, that’s part of my job.
9 Q. Yes, ma’am. And right after that, when you
10 came out, you said people had to leave, correct?
11 A. I think they were gone after that -- before
12 I did that.
13 Q. But at some point before they left, Mrs.
14 Arvizo and one of the big guys went into a room
15 separately, correct?
16 A. I could not answer that. I could not be
17 very sure of that, if that happened or not.
18 Q. All right. Now, one of the other things
19 that you have a procedure about, that’s a general
20 procedure - not in all cases, but a general
21 procedure - is that when you interview families, and
22 particularly children, where you believe there may
23 be an allegation of sexual misconduct, that you
24 attempt to try to do the interview separately,
25 correct?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. In other words, you separate each of the
28 children, and you separate the parent and then you 10710
1 interview each person individually?
2 A. You attempt to.
3 Q. Yeah. And that was your plan on this day?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And it didn’t work out because Mrs.
6 Arvizo --
7 A. Because she requested that she be present.
8 Q. -- insisted that she be present?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Okay. And as I understand it, that then the
11 follow-up to that is that you have a procedure that,
12 where that occurs, that you attempt to go out and
13 contact the child either at school or at another
14 location to independently interview them again, with
15 the parent not present; is that correct?
16 A. That’s if I have any kind of observation
17 that this may have occurred. What I’m saying,
18 it’s -- had they said anything that would warrant me
19 going to another interview, I would have done it.
20 Q. Well --
21 A. You attempt to try to do that, yes. Yes,
22 you do. You’re correct. But I was -- I didn’t get
23 in contact with them about this.
24 Q. You didn’t attempt to do that?
25 A. I did call a couple times, but, no, I
26 didn’t, no. Huh-uh.
27 Q. And you told us before that you wouldn’t
28 necessarily expect a teenaged boy to reveal an 10711
1 allegation to you on a first meeting, didn’t you?
2 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. Misstates the
3 evidence; no foundation.
4 THE COURT: Asked and answered. Sustained.
5 THE WITNESS: Do you want me to answer it?
6 MR. SNEDDON: No. I guess I’ve already
7 asked it. You already answered it. That’s fine.
8 THE WITNESS: Okay.
9 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: All right. Let’s talk a
10 little bit about the second part of your interview
11 process, if we can.
12 The second part dealt with the family’s
13 relationship with Mr. Jackson, correct?
14 A. Uh-huh. Yes, it does.
15 Q. She has to hear you say that.
16 A. I’m sorry. Yes, she did. I mean -- uh-huh.
17 Q. And you had a little script of questions
18 that you asked to make sure that you asked everybody
19 the same question consistently, correct?
20 A. Yes, I did.
21 Q. And the first question that you asked was
22 what was the nature of the relationship between
23 whoever you were talking to, let’s start with Janet,
24 and Michael Jackson, correct?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. Okay. And when you asked that question,
27 Mrs. Arvizo said to you, “Michael is like a father
28 to my children,” correct? 10712
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And when you asked that same question to
3 Gavin, which was the very first question you asked
4 in the interview of each of these people, what was
5 his relationship with Michael Jackson, he said,
6 “Michael has been like a father to me,” correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Isn’t that what your report says?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And when you asked that very same first
11 question to Star, Star said, “Michael is like a
12 father to me.” He said the same thing, correct, as
13 his brother?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And when you asked that question to
16 Davellin, the first question you asked her, what was
17 the nature of the relationship, she said, “Michael
18 is like a father to all of us,” correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Did that not concern you, that each one of
21 them began their description of the relationship
22 with Mr. Jackson exactly the same way that the one
23 before them did?
24 A. No, it didn’t.
25 Q. Now, you were aware, when you went out
26 there, that part of the allegations against -- that
27 you were to investigate was whether or not Gavin was
28 sleeping in the same bed with Michael Jackson, 10713
1 correct?
2 A. Allegations of sleeping in the same bed with
3 Michael Jackson. That’s what’s on the referral.
4 Q. Yes, ma’am. That’s what I said.
5 A. Okay.
6 Q. That was it, correct?
7 A. Right.
8 Q. Now, when you were talking to Janet Arvizo
9 about the second part of that interview, which was
10 the relationship with Mr. Jackson, she told you that
11 the children were never alone with Mr. Jackson,
12 correct?
13 A. That’s what she said.
14 Q. Okay. Yes, ma’am. And she told you that
15 there was always somebody around when they go to
16 Neverland, correct?
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. And actually, she said sometimes they stay
19 in the visitors’ quarters, “But mostly I’m in the
20 main house.” Isn’t that what she told you?
21 A. She said she was in the main house.
22 Q. Didn’t she say in your report, “Mostly in
23 the main house”?
24 A. “Mostly in the main house.” I wrote it like
25 she said it.
26 Q. Okay. That’s fine.
27 A. Okay.
28 Q. But by that statement, did you assume that 10714
1 Mrs. Arvizo was in the main residence occupied by
2 Mr. Jackson?
3 A. Say that again. What are you saying?
4 Q. Yeah. When she told you that, what you
5 thought was she was in the same house. Not the same
6 room, but in another part of the house?
7 A. I don’t know the setup, so “main house”
8 would mean where the living quarters are. Am I
9 correct? I mean --
10 Q. Okay. You said mostly --
11 A. That’s what I was thinking. That’s what I
12 was thinking, yeah.
13 Q. And she also told you that one of the
14 reasons that she felt that nothing could have
15 happened in this case was because she was up
16 wandering around the house late at night?
17 A. She did tell me that, yes.
18 Q. Didn’t it strike you as a little strange
19 that this woman is walking around this house late at
20 night?
21 A. No. Not for her, no. I’m sorry.
22 Q. Not for her?
23 A. No. Scratch that. No.
24 Q. It’s “strike it” in our vernacular.
25 A. Strike that.
26 THE COURT: I like “scratch it” better.
27 (Laughter.)
28 MR. MESEREAU: Objection. She’s not 10715
1 completed her response.
2 THE WITNESS: It just did not. It just
3 didn’t.
4 Q. BY MR. SNEDDON: And from the conversation
5 with Mrs. Arvizo, did you draw the conclusion that,
6 in your opinion, the boys were never alone with Mr.
7 Jackson in his bedroom?
8 A. That’s the picture that was painted to me.
9 Q. There was always an adult around?
10 A. That’s exactly what she said. She say she
11 was aware of everything that was going on. She has
12 a vigilant eye over her children. She would never
13 put them in harm’s way.
14 Q. Okay. And she also told you that the
15 defendant’s room had no doors and was always open,
16 correct?
17 A. Yes. She tried to give me a visual
18 description of it.
19 Q. Okay.
20 A. And it was as if it was just wide open. It
21 was huge, big bed, and -- and I did the best I could
22 with my visual.
23 Q. You envisioned a situation where people
24 could come and go with easy access, and if they
25 wanted to check on what’s going on, that was fine,
26 there was no problem getting in or out of the place
27 at all?
28 A. Yes, that’s what I envisioned. 10716
1 Q. You’ve never been to Neverland Ranch, right?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Did you, in the course of your
4 investigation, before you wrote your final report,
5 attempt to verify what the sleeping arrangements
6 were like at Neverland Valley Ranch?
7 A. That’s out of our jurisdiction.
8 Q. Well, the issue you were investigating was
9 whether or not there had been some allegations about
10 Mr. Jackson’s sleeping in bed with Gavin Arvizo,
11 correct?
12 A. The incident happened in Santa Barbara
13 County. It was out of our jurisdiction. We go to
14 the address that is listed on the referral, which
15 was in Los Angeles. That’s when I came to the
16 Department of Children & Family Services in Los
17 Angeles.
18 Q. Well, I guess what I’m just asking you is,
19 you created a report based upon statements given to
20 you by the family into allegations about whether
21 anything inappropriate happened to the children,
22 correct?
23 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; unintelligible.
24 MR. SNEDDON: I’ll rephrase it.
25 Q. Was the focus of your investigation whether
26 anything inappropriate had happened with those
27 children and Mr. Jackson?
28 A. The focus is on -- is whether the mother was 10717
1 generally neglecting the children by putting them in
2 a situation that would be unsafe.
3 Q. And “unsafe” meaning sleeping in the same
4 bed with Mr. Jackson?
5 A. Yes. You’re correct.
6 Q. Okay.
7 A. Correct.
8 Q. And whether anything -- and that’s why you
9 asked them in the very last question whether
10 anything inappropriate happened, right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Okay. And was it your impression -- well,
13 I’ve already asked that, so let’s put it this way --
14 A. Okay.
15 Q. -- you were given information from Mrs.
16 Arvizo. Did you attempt to verify the accuracy of
17 the information that she was giving you, whether, in
18 fact, Mr. Jackson’s room was wide open and
19 easy-come/easy-go access?
20 A. That’s not part of my job.
21 Q. Okay. So you accepted the information, but
22 you don’t go out to independently verify it?
23 A. No.
24 Q. That’s not part of your job?
25 A. I’d still be there.
26 Q. Were you aware of the fact that Neverland
27 Valley Ranch had some guest cottages?
28 A. She told me about -- is it a media room or 10718
1 something? There’s a room, I guess, that they may
2 stay in. I think her daughter told me something
3 about that. There was another arrangement or
4 something. I’m not sure.
5 Q. So you didn’t do any independent
6 verification of what the sleeping arrange -- whether
7 there were any guest cottages or other locations
8 where this family could have been staying at the
9 time?
10 A. She did tell me she stays sometimes in other
11 quarters. Is that the guest -- is that the
12 guesthouse? Or -- I would assume that it had a
13 guesthouse.
14 Q. Okay. And -- but you didn’t independently
15 investigate that?
16 A. No, I did not.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 Now, when you talked to Gavin, you also
19 asked Gavin whether or not he was ever left alone
20 with Mr. Jackson, correct?
21 A. Yes, I did. I asked him if he ever slept in
22 a bed with Michael Jackson. He told me no. But he
23 had slept in the bed.
24 Q. Well, before you asked him about sleeping in
25 the bed, didn’t you ask the question whether he was
26 ever alone with Mr. Jackson?
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. Okay. And he told you, “No”? 10719
Subject: May 17, 2005 
Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:34 am
