SANTA MARIA, Calif. — The mother of Michael Jackson's accuser completed her fifth and final day of testimony in the singer's child-molestation trial, insisting that she has never asked the King of Pop for money, never will and wants nothing more than justice for her family.

"Money can't buy happiness," she had said in a sober voice earlier this week.

Jackson's defense team hoped to make the witness choke on those words, painting her as a con artist who used her son's life-or-death struggle with a mysterious form of cancer as a way to grift celebrities out of cash. But the witness remained unflappable as she endured two-and-a-half days of intense cross-examination.

She never asked for more than prayers for her son, she maintained.

Story continues

advertisement

The mother was also questioned about the details of a 1998 altercation with JCPenney security guards in a mall parking lot, for which her family later received a settlement of more than $150,000.

She only wanted an apology from the guards, she said she initially told police.

"And a year after the incident, you changed your mind and decided you did want to sue, correct?" defense attorney Thomas Mesereau asked the witness.

She reiterated that she never got her apology.

Jackson, 46, is on trial for allegedly sexually molesting the 13-year-old cancer survivor, who was a frequent sleepover guest at the star's Neverland Ranch. He is also charged with conspiring to falsely imprison the mother and her three children after the broadcast of a damaging documentary, which showed Jackson in a loving embrace with the boy.

The singer maintains his innocence. He faces up to 20 years in prison if convicted.

Prosecutors announced Tuesday that they might complete their case by the end of next week.

'Smashed like a cockroach'

The mother's JCPenney civil case, like the criminal case for which Jackson is now on trial, revolves around the accuser, a sweet-faced boy who has been described as a troublemaker and "disciplinary problem" by some witnesses and a "great" kid with a "fearless spirit" by others.

Just 7 or 8 years old at the time, the boy was stopped in a mall parking lot by plainclothes security guards who caught him stealing two school uniforms from JCPenney. The boy was accompanied by his brother and his father.

The mother testified that she arrived shortly after an altercation began between security guards and her husband. In a strange twist, she had just accepted a job at the mall as a loss prevention agent, a plainclothes whistleblower who turns in petty thieves.

She said she was unaware her son had stolen clothes and that the people beating her husband were guards. She approached the fray, she testified, and was unintentionally caught up in a melee, with at least four guards beating her until she thought she was going to die.

"You said your head was being twisted like the 'Exorcist,' correct?" Mesereau asked while reading from her deposition.

"This is correct," she said.

In her deposition, she claimed the guards beat her with handcuffs and closed fists, pinched her nipples, did belly flops on her body, spit pumpkin seeds on her children, and left black and blue marks on her head, neck, legs, butt, thighs and calves. Her hand and her son's elbow were broken.

"You said you were smashed like a cockroach?" Mesereau asked.

"Probably so," she replied. "I was probably trying to give them a visual."

Her husband, she said, did nothing to help her: "He just stood there on the sidewalk."

The couple was arrested. Charges of burglary, petty theft and assault and battery were later dropped.

In the resulting $150,000 civil suit, she received $32,000; her husband received $5,000; the accuser got $25,595; and his brother received $8,576. The rest went to attorney's fees and medical bills.

The prosecution showed jurors graphic photos this week, which depicted dark welts and black marks covering the mother's bare legs, arms and her cheek. She testified that the photos had been taken immediately afterward, at the advice of a defense attorney, but could not pinpoint when.

Mesereau insinuated that the bruises were the handiwork of her ex-husband — who had been physically abusing the family, and their pets, for years — according to police reports the mother filed when she later divorced him.

The defense contends that the bruises helped her civil settlement, but the witness maintained that the marks depicted in photos were from the guards.

However, she also said that her mug shot did not show the mark on her cheek because she had been wearing makeup that day.

Earlier on the stand, when describing the wrongs she suffered under her Svengali-like ex-husband's control, she ticked off things she was not allowed to do, including wear makeup.

Nip and tuck

The accuser, now 15, is in remission from a virulent cancer that prompted doctors to remove a 16-pound tumor from his body, along with a kidney, part of his spleen, and his adrenal glands.

The mother was questioned about the thousands of dollars celebrities donated to her family, presumably to help pay for her son's battle with cancer.

Turning to the jurors as she gave her answers, the mother recounted how her ex-husband had sole reign over their finances. She said she was unaware of the pleas for money he had made to comedians Chris Tucker, George Lopez and Louise Palanker.

"[My husband] was in control of these friendships," she testified. She denied ever talking to Jay Leno on the phone or having any knowledge of anyone in her family talking to Leno.

She also claimed to be unaware of fundraisers that had been organized for her son's illness.

The defense pointed out, however, that she had opened a bank account specifically for donations and she was the sole signatory on the account.

She asked for prayers, never money, she insisted, because the medical bills were already covered by insurance.

She admitted that she endorsed a $10,000 check from Palanker, yet claimed that her husband took the money and she did not ask what it was for.

Jurors were previously told that the witness evoked her Fifth Amendment right to avoid questions about alleged welfare fraud, and Mesereau may have been trying to capitalize on that detail when he questioned her about her personal spending habits.

"Do you recall using money that had been donated for [your son's] medical bills for plastic surgery?" Mesereau asked.

"No, I used a credit card," she replied. The details of the surgery were not allowed, but the defense's point to jurors was clear: money might not buy happiness, but a welfare mother who undergoes cosmetic surgery while her son is dying of cancer typically wants more than prayers and apologies.