Actor Macaulay Culkin, long a friend of Michael Jackson and one of his most steadfast defenders, will be one of the early witnesses to take the stand in the pop star's defense against child molestation charges, NBC News reported Tuesday.
Culkin's testimony is expected to follow appearances by two other young men, Brett Barnes and Wade Robson, as the singer's defense begins this week, according to a report on NBC's "Today" show.
The three all spent close time with Jackson as boys, all have publicly denied being molested by the singer and no case has ever been brought against Jackson involving any of them.
Culkin, a longtime defender of Jackson, has repeatedly said their friendship was completely innocent.
In early April, one of Jackson's former maids, whose own son received a $2.4 million settlement after alleging he was groped by the singer, said that Culkin spent time alone at Neverland and slept in Jackson's bedroom.
Barnes, an Australian, first began a friendship with the pop star after he wrote Jackson a fan letter in 1991, when he was 11. Jackson apparently lavished gifts on the boy, who in the intervening years has been reluctant to discuss his time with Jackson.
Robson, also Australian, is a choreographer for Britney Spears who briefly appeared on an MTV program and was friendly with Jackson when he was younger. Two years ago, he admitted he had shared a bed with Jackson, but said it was innocent. Jackson's maid testified she saw Robson shower with Jackson during one of his Neverland visits.
Barnes' and Robson's mothers and sisters are also expected to testify.
Other boysEarlier in the trial, in a key setback for defense attorney Thomas Mesereau, Judge Rodney Melville ruled that testimony about Jackson's behavior toward five boys, including these three, could be used by prosecutors to establish a pattern of alleged grooming behavior leading up to any possible sex abuse.
At least one other possible victim named in Melville's ruling testified for the prosecution about his own alleged molestation by Jackson.
But these three young men, now all in their early 20s, may set a solid opening for Jackson's defense by denying any sexual impropriety and describing for jurors how Jackson innocently interacted with young boys who visited his Neverland ranch.
Their testimony would come in contrast against that of Jackson's current accuser, who alleges the pop star molested him in 2003 when he was 13, and other testimony during the prosecution's two-month case that has described alleged improper behavior by the singer.
Jackson, 46, is accused of molesting the young cancer patient at his Neverland ranch, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold the boy’s family captive to rebut the documentary, in which the singer said he shared his bed with children.
The prosecution, led by District Attorney Thomas Sneddon, could wrap up as early as Tuesday.
Dozens of callsJurors were presented more phone records Tuesday as prosecutors sought to bolster the conspiracy portion of the case against the pop star.
Sneddon's team has been presenting records showing dozens of calls on phones belonging to Jackson associates around the time a damaging documentary about the singer aired in February 2003.
During an initial round of records presented Monday a detective conceded that no calls were tied to Jackson.
On Tuesday, district attorney’s investigator David Saunders presented records he said showed that a man named Paul Hugo was in Brazil on March 2, 2003, and made calls to two men listed by prosecutors as unindicted co-conspirators, Marc Schaffel and Vincent Amen. Hugo was described as an associate of Schaffel.
Prosecutors contend that at the time members of Jackson’s inner circle were plotting to send the boy who is now Jackson’s accuser and his family to Brazil in the aftermath of the documentary. The program showed the accuser with Jackson, and the singer saying he allowed children to sleep in his bed but that the activity was not sexual.
On cross-examination, defense attorney Robert Sanger noted that phone calls only showed the phones were used, not who was speaking on the phones.
Asked if he could be sure of who made the calls from Hugo’s phone, Saunders said, “I’d say it’s a reasonable inference that he did.”