YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Michael Jackson 2005 Trial, Day 2, Part 3 | Martin Bashir

Michael Jackson 2005 Trial, Day 2, Part 3 | Martin Bashir — Transcript

by MJ Trial · 4,715 words · 843 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:03all right you may proceed whereupon a
0:06portion of a videotape people's exhibit
0:08number two was played for the court and
0:11jury to its conclusion
0:13do you anticipate needing the screen
0:15again for a while
0:17no sir i have no further questions your
0:20honor
0:24mr bashir my name is thomas mesuro and i
0:27speak for mr jackson
0:30thank you
0:31at some point in time you made an effort
0:33to contact mr jackson about doing this
0:36show correct
0:38that is correct
0:39and approximately when was that
0:42i think it was around april 2002
0:45and you contacted someone named uri
0:47geller correct
0:49objection your honor i think mr mesuro
0:52is now straying directly into the areas
0:54covered by the california shield law and
0:56the first amendment and we would ask the
0:58court to rule that that kind of inquiry
1:00is off limits
1:02before we rule on that objection i think
1:04we need to discuss the scope of the
1:06examination here
1:08as i see it the prosecution put him on
1:10simply to authenticate the tape
1:13i suspect you would like to examine him
1:15at length based on your opening
1:17statement about a lot of things
1:20yes your honor but he does give special
1:22thanks to mr uri geller at the end of
1:24the tape and the prosecution played that
1:27tape and i think they've opened the door
1:29on that one
1:31it's not even in for the truth of the
1:32matter stated your honor
1:35i think i'll do you have him under
1:37subpoena
1:38no what i think i should do is to limit
1:41your examination of him at this time as
1:43to the foundation of the tape
1:45so that's what i'm going to do
1:48mr bashir in order to produce the show
1:50we've just watched you had to speak to
1:52mr jackson true
1:55objection your honor again this is
1:57unpublished information it's clear from
2:00the face of the tape that mr bashir
2:02talked to mr jackson and that's
2:03published material and that's the limits
2:05of the proper examination
2:08i'll overrule the objection for the same
2:10reason i stated earlier would you be
2:12more comfortable to be at council table
2:14where you have a microphone
2:17that might be helpful your honor it
2:19might be better for the jury and they
2:21won't have to see me jumping up and down
2:23i don't want i'm a little uncomfortable
2:25taking one side or the other
2:28well i think you need to take a chair we
2:31won't assume you're taking anyone's side
2:34okay thank you and your honor may i just
2:37inquire on the procedure that the court
2:39is following
2:40because the approach the court took the
2:42initial objection was to ask mr bashir
2:45to decide whether to answer
2:47and i'm reluctant to have him make that
2:48decision without knowing that i'm going
2:50to be able to argue against a potential
2:52contempt finding based on the shield law
2:55so if the court could clarify the
2:56procedures that it's following that
2:58would be very helpful
3:00well the procedure i was following was
3:03to let you make your objection
3:05then i'll ask the witness if he wishes
3:07to answer the question and we will go
3:09from there
3:11will i have an opportunity if the
3:12witness declines to answer based on the
3:14constitutional shield law protecting
3:16journalists to then argue that the
3:18material's protected and the court
3:20should not hold mr bashir in contempt
3:23of course
3:25thank you your honor
3:27your honor the prosecution did go into
3:29mr bashir's qualifications may i
3:32cross-examine in that area
3:34yes
3:35thank you your honor
3:38first of all mr bashir i did ask you a
3:41question and that question i'll repeat
3:43in order to produce what the jury has
3:44just seen you had to make contact with
3:47mr jackson correct
3:49correct
3:50and you made numerous attempts to
3:52contact mr jackson true
3:55again your honor i object on the grounds
3:57that that's unpublished information and
3:59it's also unclear from the face of the
4:01tapes that he had contact with mr
4:03jackson
4:04your honor i have correspondence from mr
4:07bashir it's pretty obvious that in a
4:09non-privileged context he was trying to
4:11make contact and say what he wanted to
4:13do
4:14the objection is overruled do you wish
4:17to answer that question mr bashir
4:20i'm going to leave it to mr bashir it
4:23puts him in a difficult position because
4:25there's a very important legal principle
4:27that's taken it does not matter whether
4:29mr mesuro claims to have correspondence
4:31or that there's other documents
4:33that's the limits of the permissible
4:36i think i understand the legal
4:38parameters
4:39information i just want to make sure i
4:41preserve the record and that the
4:44you are doing an excellent job
4:47thank you your honor
4:49your honor my preface is to simply stand
4:51by the film as you've seen it and to
4:53testify as to its
4:54contents all right
4:57i'll object your honor and move to
4:59strike his comments
5:01they were not in response to any
5:02question
5:04well actually they were a response to my
5:06question if he wanted to answer the
5:08question
5:10sorry sir that
5:12so i won't let you strike that all right
5:15he is following his counsel's advice and
5:17he's not answering that question
5:20next question
5:21your honor i would move for sanctions
5:23against the witness or i would move to
5:25strike all of his testimony including
5:27the prosecution's playing of this tape
5:29if he refuses to be cross-examined
5:32the way i would like to proceed with
5:34this is that he
5:35he does have some protection under the
5:37shield law that his counsel has been
5:39pointing out
5:41that protection is against contempt of
5:43court what i think i'll do is let you
5:45ask him the questions let his attorney
5:47make the objections let him decide
5:50whether he's going to answer and then
5:52i'll make a record we have a record of
5:54those questions and then i'll review
5:56them later to determine whether or not i
5:58feel a contempt charge should be issued
6:01it's really a ticklish area of the law
6:04thank you your honor
6:06mr bashir you outlined some
6:08qualifications you have in the world of
6:10journalism correct
6:12i didn't outline any qualifications sir
6:15i just referred to the chronology of my
6:17career
6:18did you mean when you did that to
6:20explain that you're a qualified
6:22professional journalist
6:24i meant simply to explain my career
6:26chronologically sir
6:28do you consider yourself as a
6:30professional journalist
6:32i do sir do you consider yourself a
6:35professional journalist because you've
6:36had certain experience in journalism
6:39i do sir
6:41do you consider yourself to be a
6:43professional journalist because you're
6:44educated in the world of journalism
6:47academic studies were not in journalism
6:50they were in the arts and humanities so
6:52i don't have a formal qualification if
6:54that's what you're asking sir but i have
6:56the experience that comes with working
6:58in the profession
7:00now as a journalist in england you are
7:02regulated by a certain administrative
7:04agency correct
7:06could you repeat the question
7:09sure is there an organization or an
7:11administrative agency that goes by a
7:13title somewhat like british broadcasting
7:15standards board
7:16there is an organization called the
7:18broadcasting complaints commission would
7:20you be referring to that
7:22i think i am do you work with that
7:24organization in any capacity
7:27that organization doesn't employ
7:29journalists
7:30have you been sanctioned by that
7:32organization
7:33could you repeat the question
7:36have you been sanctioned by that
7:37organization
7:39by the broadcasting complaints
7:40commission
7:42yes
7:43the answer to that question is three
7:45complaints were made against me
7:47two of the key complaints were entirely
7:49rejected and they were to do with
7:50balance and fairness
7:52one of the three was upheld this is sir
7:55just so i can explain so people
7:57understand because they
7:59certainly
8:01because they may not understand the
8:03broadcasting standards commission is not
8:05a legal body and it has no particular
8:07merit in a legal setting
8:09nevertheless a complaint against you as
8:11a journalist was upheld true
8:14as i said sir three complaints were made
8:17the two key complaints were entirely
8:19rejected one complaint was upheld of the
8:22three
8:23let's talk about the one that was upheld
8:25sir there was a complaint against you
8:27that was upheld by that agency correct
8:31there was sir yes
8:33and what did they complain about mr
8:35bashir
8:36the complaint related to to what to what
8:38to how i described what i was doing with
8:40the story that i was working on
8:43and what were you doing mr bashir
8:46i was doing journalism
8:48could you put a little teeth on that and
8:50just tell the jury what we're talking
8:51about
8:53in relation to
8:54you don't know what we're talking about
8:57do you mean the specific program sorry i
9:00don't know whether sorry i apologize are
9:02you asking me about the complaint or are
9:05you asking me about the story the
9:06reporting that i was doing
9:09why don't you tell the jury about both
9:11your honor i'm going to object mr mesaro
9:14is now inquiring about unpublished
9:16information or unbroadcast information
9:18about another matter
9:20same objection well it's a compound
9:23question sustained
9:26okay
9:27please describe for the jury the subject
9:29matter of the complaint you just
9:30identified mr bashir
9:33the story was about a teenaged prodigy a
9:36mathematics genius who had run away from
9:38university had legally emancipated
9:40herself from her family
9:42and the story was to describe what had
9:44happened from both sides
9:46you were accused of misrepresentations
9:48true no that's incorrect
9:52you were not accused of misrepresenting
9:54anything in that complaint
9:56i was accused of unfairness which was
9:58entirely rejected i was accused of
10:00breaching an agreement which was
10:02entirely rejected i was accused of not
10:05representing the entirety of what i was
10:07doing with that broadcast to one of the
10:08individuals
10:10kind of what you've been accused of here
10:12right
10:13objection
10:15argumentative your honor
10:17sustained
10:19mr bashir how long was the film you did
10:21on mr jackson
10:24the total duration
10:26yes please
10:27i'm afraid i don't know in exact terms
10:30it's some time it's over two years since
10:32the film was broadcast
10:34i think it was around an hour and
10:35fifteen minutes
10:37and how many hours of footage did you
10:39obtain during the time you spent with mr
10:41jackson
10:43objection your honor unpublished
10:45information covered by the shield law
10:47and the first amendment
10:49the objection is overruled do you wish
10:52to answer
10:53no i don't
10:55next question
10:57you don't know at all can't even
10:59estimate
11:00he doesn't
11:01that's not what i wish to answer
11:04he chose not to answer
11:06your honor i would move that the entire
11:08testimony be stricken and the
11:10prosecution's evidence be stricken
11:13that's denied
11:14i would ask for contempt your honor
11:17the procedure that i'm going to follow i
11:19already outlined
11:21okay okay for the record your honor
11:24could i have a running objection if he
11:26refuses to answer a question or shall i
11:28make my request each time
11:30no you don't need to do that let me just
11:33understand what we're having a running
11:35record about
11:37yes
11:38if he if his attorney objects and he
11:40declines to answer based on his
11:42attorney's advice i will review that
11:44question for contempt proceedings
11:46without further necessity on your part
11:48to request that
11:50your motion to strike his entire
11:52testimony and evidence is denied
11:54okay your honor could i have that be a
11:57running objection as well
11:59yes
12:00okay thank you
12:02mr bashir you communicated with mr
12:05jackson's assistant by letter before you
12:07began filming this show
12:08correct again your honor i object it's
12:12unpublished information created and
12:14prepared in the course of news gathering
12:16and covered by the shield law and the
12:18first amendment
12:20do you wish to answer
12:22no
12:23same objection your honor
12:25and all reviewed the record
12:28mr bashir you wrote to mr jackson's
12:30assistant and said you would very much
12:32like to feature michael with a large
12:34group of children around 50 welcoming
12:36them and sharing with them his
12:37extraordinary home so that for one day
12:40their lives can be enriched correct
12:43same objection your honor
12:45do you wish to
12:47your honor excuse me could i add an
12:50objection to that also beyond the scope
12:52of direct examination
12:54sustained as to beyond the scope of the
12:56direct examination
12:59mr bashir you interviewed mr jackson and
13:01repeatedly asked him questions about his
13:03desire for an international children's
13:05holiday correct
13:07same objection your honor and that would
13:10seem to be beyond the scope of the
13:11direct examination as well
13:14sustained as to beyond the scope
13:17your honor will the court permit me to
13:19ask questions about what's actually on
13:21the tape
13:22no because the tapes being introduced
13:25not for the truth of the matter asserted
13:27but for a different purpose
13:29there are some areas however that i
13:31didn't instruct the jury on about the
13:33assertions that they wish to have
13:34considered for the truth of the matter
13:37and those would not be out of bounds
13:39because well let me ask the district
13:42attorney
13:43you do not intend to offer any other
13:45evidence of those statements that were
13:46the subject of the motion to have the
13:48court consider the statements for the
13:50truth of the matter
13:52no i think we outlined in our motion and
13:54the court made its ruling last week
13:57is that what you're referring to your
13:58honor
14:00well i'm asking you this is the only
14:02evidence you're going to have of those
14:04statements so
14:06yes sir
14:08then those statements open
14:09cross-examination as to those statements
14:12do you understand what i'm saying
14:15i think i do your honor the statements
14:18you had us isolate for purposes of
14:19constituting admissions
14:22yes
14:23is what you're talking about
14:25that's correct
14:26may i take a second just to obtain those
14:29yes
14:31thank you while we're getting those your
14:33honor if i may i'll just continue
14:36sure
14:37mr beshear you had michael jackson sign
14:40an agreement without a lawyer present
14:42true again your honor beyond the scope
14:46of the direct and covered by the shield
14:47law
14:49i'd overruled that objection will you
14:51answer that question
14:53mr jackson signed two agreements in
14:55which he asked for no conditions
14:57whatsoever and agreed that i was free to
14:59make the film with him
15:00and the first of those agreements was
15:02signed in november 2002 and the second
15:04agreement was signed in january 2003
15:07just about two weeks prior to broadcast
15:09of the british version of the film that
15:11you've just seen
15:13your honor i would move to strike the
15:15answer and request that the court order
15:16the witness to answer the question
15:19all right it's stricken and i'll ask the
15:22court reporter to read back the question
15:24so that you understand the question
15:26record red
15:28i renew my objection your honor that
15:30goes to newsgathering and relates to
15:32information prepared in connection with
15:34newsgathering
15:36the objection is overruled do you wish
15:38to answer that
15:40i think i agree with my attorney that i
15:42have protections under the shield law
15:44your honor
15:46all right
15:47same objection would be noted your honor
15:50i'm sorry your honor it's hard for mr
15:53jackson and for us to hear the witness
15:56i apologize it's my fault sorry i'm
15:59sorry
16:00speak up
16:01and yes you don't need to i'm going to
16:05review all of the questions
16:07thank you your honor
16:09mr bashir
16:11if you want to you can
16:14okay
16:15mr bashir you have been accused in
16:17england of forging signatures correct
16:20incorrect no one has ever made that
16:23accusation sir
16:25i'm going to object your honor hearsay
16:28lack of foundation beyond the scope of
16:30direct examination
16:33sustained on beyond the scope of direct
16:36mr bashir to qualify as a professional
16:39journalist do you have to fulfill any
16:41particular educational program
16:44in the united states or in the united
16:46kingdom sir
16:47anywhere
16:49i'm frankly unsure about how that
16:50applies in the united states and in the
16:53united kingdom there would be different
16:54ways of progressing your career
16:57some people would do it through the
16:58route of experience and others would do
17:00it through some kind of academic
17:02qualification i think others will have a
17:04mix of the two
17:06how did you do it
17:07a mix of the two
17:09could you please explain that
17:11i was given training during my
17:13employment at the bbc
17:15and i also took opportunities to work in
17:17print and radio journalism so i combined
17:19the experience part with the training
17:22you are currently a paid legal analyst
17:24for abc correct
17:27incorrect sir
17:29are you a paid employee by abc in any
17:31capacity
17:33i am sir
17:35could you please tell the jury what that
17:36is
17:37i'm employed as a correspondent for abc
17:40news which is owned by disney
17:43how long have you been paid as a
17:44correspondent for abc
17:47my contract began on the 1st of
17:49september last year
17:51are you covering this case as a
17:52correspondent who is paid
17:54objection your honor beyond the scope
17:57and again requiring him to cover
17:59news-gathering activities as covered by
18:01the shield law
18:03overruled do you wish to answer that
18:05question
18:07no i don't your honor
18:09same objection thank you
18:12noted
18:13mr bashir if you look at the two
18:15documents you referred to that you say
18:17mr jackson signed his signature appears
18:19to be different from document to
18:21document correct
18:23same objection your honor and same
18:26objection on the shield law your honor
18:28and beyond the scope of direct
18:31sustained beyond the scope
18:34mr bashir did you request that michael
18:37jackson bring macaulay culkin so you
18:39could film him at neverland
18:41same objection under the shield law and
18:43the first amendment your honor
18:45and beyond the scope of direct
18:48sustained on beyond the scope
18:51in the process of putting this film
18:52together mr bashir did you write to
18:55michael jackson's assistant and say you
18:57wanted to film the beautiful landscape
18:58encouraging all of us to become as
19:00little children again
19:02i'm going to object is beyond the scope
19:05you must let him finish his question
19:07before you interrupt don't interrupt as
19:09what i'm saying
19:11could i just object though the scope of
19:13the direct is very clear mr mesuro knows
19:16what the scope of direct is and now he's
19:19just knowingly asking questions that are
19:21beyond the scope of direct
19:23and i would ask the court to ask him to
19:24refrain from doing that
19:26that would truncate the examination
19:29i would like to be able to hear the
19:31question he's asking so that i can make
19:32a reasoned ruling on his question
19:36mr bashir you had not finished the last
19:39question would you read back his answer
19:41as far as you got it
19:43his question record read
19:46is that the complete question
19:49yes
19:50and the objection
19:52same objection beyond the scope of
19:54direct shield law first amendment
19:57mr bashir did you in the process of
20:00getting making contact with mr jackson
20:02so you could make this film misrepresent
20:05that you were putting together a trip to
20:06africa for mr jackson to visit sick
20:08children
20:10same objection your honor beyond the
20:12scope of direct shield law first
20:15amendment
20:16all sustain the objection beyond the
20:19scope of direct
20:21mr bashir did you allow mr jackson any
20:24editorial control over this film
20:27same objections your honor
20:29the objection beyond the scope is
20:31sustained
20:33mr bashir before this film was shown and
20:36i'm talking about the actual film itself
20:38not generally speaking
20:39i'm talking about what the prosecution
20:41has used in this courtroom today all
20:43right did you watch that actual reel
20:47same objections beyond the scope shield
20:49law first amendment
20:52i think we're discussing authentication
20:54your honor
20:55the objection is overruled do you want
20:58the question read back
21:00yes please your honor record read
21:03i don't wish to answer the question the
21:05question is is protected under the
21:07shield law
21:09your honor i would
21:11maybe you didn't understand the question
21:13i hope i did the question is did you
21:16watch this reel right here just before
21:18we showed it
21:20today
21:22today
21:23oh i'm happy to answer that question
21:25your honor
21:27is that your question
21:29yes your honor
21:31okay
21:32no i did not
21:34move to strike the prosecutor's evidence
21:36and testimony is being unauthenticated
21:39i'll take that under advisement i'll
21:41have to go back and look at it before
21:44you testified today did you discuss your
21:46testimony with prosecutor sneddon
21:49i did not
21:51before you testified today did you
21:53discuss your testimony with anyone
21:56i had private discussions with my
21:57attorney
21:59other than your attorney before you
22:00testified today did you discuss what you
22:02were going to say with anybody
22:05no
22:06no one with your company
22:08no
22:09never mentioned it to any other
22:11journalists mr bashir
22:13today
22:14yes sir
22:16i haven't been with any other
22:17journalists sir
22:19how about yesterday
22:21i wasn't with any journalists yesterday
22:23sir
22:25have you discussed with any other
22:26journalist at any time what you are
22:28going to say in this courtroom in this
22:29case mr bashir
22:32your honor what's the materiality of
22:34this question that has nothing to do
22:36with the direct examination
22:38overruled you may answer
22:41the only i've discussed this case with
22:43my attorney
22:44to your knowledge when did you receive a
22:46subpoena in this case mr bashir
22:50at the beginning of this year
22:52are you telling this jury under oath
22:54that since you received a subpoena or
22:56since you knew you received a subpoena
22:58till today you've never discussed what
22:59you were going to say with anyone other
23:01than your attorney
23:03i'm trying very hard to remember so that
23:05i can be accurate
23:06sir you can take your time
23:10thank you as far as my recollection goes
23:12i recall discussing the matter with my
23:14attorney
23:16let me state the question again because
23:18you may not have understood it
23:20you learned you had received a subpoena
23:21when
23:23at the beginning of this year
23:25since you learned you had received a
23:26subpoena have you ever discussed the
23:28fact that you were going to be a witness
23:30with anyone other than your attorney
23:32your honor i'm going to object that's a
23:35different question than discussing what
23:36he was going to say
23:38i'm not sure how he could discuss what
23:40he was going to say before the trial
23:43objection your honor these are speaking
23:45objections this is improper form
23:48the objections overruled
23:51you're free to answer
23:52and i can have it read back for you
23:55that's okay your honor thank you i'm
23:58happy to state that i discussed the
23:59matter with my attorney
24:02you may be happy to say that sir but
24:04would you please answer the question
24:07your honor that's argumentative
24:10sustained read the question back to him
24:12please record read
24:15i discussed the matter with my attorney
24:17sir your honor could i ask that the
24:19witness be ordered to respond to the
24:21question
24:23you haven't quite answered it
24:25i understand your honor the difficulty
24:27is i want to be completely accurate in
24:29my answers unequivocal and clear
24:32and what i know for certain is that i
24:34have discussed the matter with my
24:35attorney
24:37and no one else
24:39i'm pretty sure that's the case but i
24:40can't i can't be as unequivocal as i'd
24:42like to be and that's why i'm hesitant
24:46okay next question
24:48correct me if i'm wrong mr bashir and i
24:51might be you do not have a clear
24:53recollection of telling any other
24:54journalist since you learned you had a
24:56subpoena that you're going to be a
24:58witness in this case right
25:00no
25:01your honor i'm going to object to that
25:03question that was not the question that
25:05was asked
25:07it's another question
25:09then the framing of the question is
25:10improper
25:12it's not improper your honor
25:14the objection is overruled i'm going to
25:17have the question read back whenever
25:19there's an argument like that
25:22thank you
25:23we lose the question record read
25:26the fact of my subpoena sir was
25:28published in various forms of media so
25:30that everybody knew that i had been
25:32subpoenaed as a result of that
25:34it is possible that during my work for
25:36abc i may have mentioned that i had been
25:38subpoenaed
25:39if you were suggesting that i had a
25:41detailed discussion about what i was
25:42going to say that is completely untrue
25:45but it is possible as i say i wish to be
25:48as clear as i can but it is possible
25:50that i mentioned the fact of my subpoena
25:52to my colleagues
25:54but as you sit here today you just don't
25:56remember ever mentioning it to any
25:58particular colleague true
26:00that's not what i said
26:02what are you saying
26:04asked and answered and argumentative
26:07overruled you may answer i'll restate it
26:11your honor if it will make it easier
26:14mr bashir are you telling this jury
26:16under oath that you don't have a clear
26:18recollection of ever telling any
26:20journalist that you are going to be a
26:21witness in this
26:22case sir what i said was that news of
26:26the subpoena was published broadly and
26:27wide internationally
26:29and as i returned to my core task at abc
26:32news i may have mentioned the fact that
26:34i had received a subpoena
26:36are you telling this jury that you don't
26:38have a clear recollection of ever
26:39telling any particular journalist that
26:41you are going to be a witness in this
26:42case yes or no mr bashir
26:46sir
26:47i'm going to object to that it's
26:49argumentative
26:50i'm going to sustain the objection only
26:53because you said are you telling this
26:55jury as opposed to just asking a
26:57question
26:59i'll rephrase it
27:01everybody is telling this jury
27:03everything they're sitting right there
27:06mr bashir do you recall telling any
27:08particular journalist that you were
27:10going to be a witness in this case
27:13as i've said news of my subpoena was
27:15published and i'm quite sure that it's
27:17possible that i may have mentioned the
27:18fact that i had received a subpoena in
27:20relation to these proceedings
27:22what i am your earlier question which
27:24slightly confused me was that you were
27:26suggesting that i may have had a
27:28discussion with individuals about the
27:29content of what i would say
27:32mr bashir please tell us if you don't
27:34understand the question
27:36okay
27:37thank you
27:38do you recall ever telling any
27:40journalist that you were going to be a
27:41witness in this case yes or no
27:44i've answered the question
27:46may i ask that the witness be instructed
27:48to answer the question your honor
27:51you have not answered the question would
27:53you answer the question
27:56my answer to the question your honor is
27:58that i cannot specifically recollect a
28:00time a day and an individual with whom i
28:02had a detailed discussion about the
28:03subject of my subpoena
28:05what i am saying is it is perfectly
28:07possible that it was mentioned to me or
28:09by me as i returned to work
28:12mr bashir i'm not asking you about day
28:14or time i'm just asking you if at any
28:17time you told any journalist that you're
28:18going to be a witness in the case
28:21it's possible
28:23are you saying under oath you don't
28:24recall any specific individual that you
28:26spoke to about that
28:28that's what i'm saying sir
28:31and you don't recall any specific
28:32journalist you ever told i'm going to be
28:34a witness in the michael jackson case
28:37i just can't be specific i'm afraid sir
28:41is your office in new york with abc
28:44it is sir
28:46are there other offices near your office
28:47at abc
28:49there are so
28:51are there journalists who occupy those
28:52offices at abc mr bashir
28:56there are sir do you tend to chat with
28:59those journalists from time to time sir
29:02i have a private office and i tend to
29:04spend a large amount of time out on the
29:06road
29:07so opportunities to talk like that are
29:09not very frequent
29:11whose office is next to yours at abc
29:14your honor i'm going to object on
29:16relevance grounds and beyond the scope
29:18of direct and asked and answered and
29:20many things
29:22the problem is council that he said that
29:25he only spoke to his attorney about this
29:27and he has a privilege which we all
29:29understand
29:31the reason i have not sustained
29:32objections is counsel has been exploring
29:35whether or not he spoke to anyone else
29:37about that besides his attorney
29:39but guess what it's time for a break
29:43thank you your honor

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Michael Jackson 2005 Trial, Day 2, Part 3 | Martin Bashir by MJ Trial, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 4,715 words across 843 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.