Not necessarily so. Settlements in the civil process do not axiomatically indicate guilt and other explanations are available for various types of settlements aka civil resolution.
Michael Jackson lost four crucial motions in court.
These court motions were:
Motion For Trial Preference (Civil Trial) by Chandler - GRANTED.
Motion To Compel Deposition by Michael Jackson - DISMISSED W/O PREJUDICE
Motion To Compel Mr Jackson's Deposition by Chandler - GRANTED.
Request To Stay Ruling by Michael Jackson - DENIED.
Key to understanding these four motions and their significance is in knowing what the Chandler's civil lawsuit was about.
- sexual battery
- battery
- seduction
- willful misconduct
- intentional infliction of emotional distress
- fraud
- negligence
The civil lawsuit was filed whilst the criminal investigation was still ongoing.
Civil lawsuits allow hearsay and circumstantial evidence.
Criminal investigations do not allow these.
As a result, filing a civil lawsuit at the same time as a criminal investigation can lead to a defendant being prejudiced against or suffer self-incrimination.
So, on 14th September 1993, the Chandler's lawyer, Larry Feldman, filed their $30million lawsuit.
Michael Jackson's lawyer, Bertram Fields, filed Michael Jackson's answer to this lawsuit on 29th October 1993.
Discovery process can then start. This means:
- Depositions are taken
- Request for Production of Documents
- Request for Admissions aka admit to certain facts
- Form Interrogatories
A protective order can also be done which is blocking or limiting requests or limiting information requested.
At the same time as all of that going on, Bert Fields filed a Motion for Stay of Discovery and Trial on behalf of Michael Jackson.
Michael Jackson wanted Discovery AND a Trial in the civil case to be imposed until the six year statute of limitations ran out.
That would have meant ZERO discovery and ZERO criminal trial until 1999.
By then, the outcome of the criminal investigation would have been known well before 1999.
If this motion was granted to Michael Jackson, the Los Angeles and Santa Barbara District Attorneys would NOT have been able to use the civil trial in order to build a criminal case against Michael Jackson.
People either forget or don't know the Chandler's refused to cooperate with the police.
This forced the police to want to take information from the civil trial in order to attempt to prosecute Michael Jackson.
Los Angeles District Attorney, Gil Garcetti sought to change the law in order to compel Jordan Chandler to testify.
Why would he try to do that?
Simply because the Chandlers were not cooperating with law enforcement during the investigation.
So, we go on to the Motion To Compel Michael Jackson's Deposition.
The Chandler's lawyer, Mr L. Feldman, wanted to depose MJ and 11 other people including Anthony Pellicano, LaToya Jackson, Bianca Francia, Gayle Goforth, etc.
The discovery material they wanted from Michael Jackson was:
- Form interrogatories
- First Set of Special Interrogatories
- First Set of Request for Production of Documents
- Second Set of Request for Production of Documents
- Second Set of Special Interrogatories
Michael's legal team responded to all of this by asserting his Fifth Amendment Rights.
The Motion To Compel Michael Jackson's Deposition infringed Michael Jackson's constitutional rights due to his treatment for drug addiction. He needed to resolve his medical issues first.
The other reason given for the objection to Michael's deposition was that Michael Jackson should not be
deposed until the criminal investigation was concluded and any potential criminal prosecution disposed of.
When the Chandler's lawyer objected by pointing to Michael's Mexico deposition, Michael's attorney, Eve H. Wagner stated that MJ was glassy eyed, could hardly stay awake, had difficulty holding physical objects, slurred speech and could not focus on issues.
Therefore, Beechy Colcough issued a statement on 20th November confirming Michael had a drug problem requiring treatment.
"That Michael Jackson be given the same right to have his testimony heard for the first time at trial without fear that the prosecution will try to impeach his credibility.....the law enforcement agency has sought and gained access to all discovery in this action." - Johnnie Cochrane
Cochrane also opposed the Motion to Compel because some information sought by the Chandler's was irrelevant to the case, some was protected by Attorney-Client privilege and that it was too early to request Michael Jackson's financial information.
13th December 1993, Johnnie Cochrane takes the lead in Michael's case and issues a Motion For Protective Order.
He argued that Michael had a right to be protected from invasion of privacy, embarrassment and undue annoyance.
Same applies to the witnesses.
And that Michael Jackson had a right to receive a fair, impartial trial.
He argued that if this Motion For Protective Order was not granted, then Michael Jackson was entitled to a Stay of the Civil action because law enforcement were delaying their investigation in order to use any Civil Discovery against Michael Jackson.
All these motions were designed to protect Michael Jackson from violation of constitutional rights and self-incrimination.
The case Pacers v Superior Court was used to support this argument that it's unconstitutional not to stay the Civil action whilst a criminal investigation is pending.
Chandler's lawyer, unfortunately, argued that Jordan was entitled to a speedy trial because a child's memory is still developing.
Problem is that law they used to argue this was intended for young kids such as four year olds.
Anyway, Michael lost all four motions.
He couldn't take the depositions of Jordan, Evan and June Chandler or Dave Schwartz.
Since the motion for Trial Preference was granted to Chandler, the trial was to be held in March 1994.
Michael was handicapped in defending himself since he could not take their depositions.
Clear violation of the constitutional right to a fair trial, to defend himself and to question his accusers.
Unsurprisingly, all of this set the stage for the settlement itself.
In lieu of winning the motions Michael Jackson needed, reaching a settlement in the Chandler civil action was the SECOND BEST way for Michael Jackson to protect himself and his constitutional rights.
It meant, as a consequence, Michael Jackson could then focus on the criminal case and any potential criminal trial.
Finally, it is now NOT possible for any case involving felony charges to be resolved through a civil compromise aka settlement. Only misdemeanors can be resolved via settlements.
This change in State law vindicates Michael Jackson's legal team's argument for staying the civil case until 1999.
It's important to note that if a person receives reimbursement via a settlement, the District Attorney's Office could still attempt to pursue criminal charges against the defendant. Settlements do NOT end any criminal proceeding.