Feb 10, 2005 By Tim Molloy Associated Press Writer 4 min read

VENTURA, Calif. (AP) – An appeals court considering whether to lift some of the secrecy in the Michael Jackson case questioned lawyers Wed-nesday about how to balance Jackson’s right to a fair trial with the public’s right to know. Questions from the three-judge panel of the state’s 2nd District Court of Appeal focused on whether releasing details of a criminal case involving a high-profile defendant could poison the jury pool, and on how to release some information while withholding such details as the name of the accuser, who is a minor.

Jackson is accused of molesting a 13-year-old former cancer patient. Key documents in the case that have not been released include a November 2003 search warrant for Jackson’s Neverland ranch, transcripts of the grand jury proceedings that led to his indictment, and the indictment itself.

Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville has said he is keeping some information secret to avoid influencing prospective jurors and to ensure Jackson a fair trial. He said he will release the indictment and grand jury transcripts once a jury is seated, which is expected to take several weeks.

During questioning, Associate Justice Arthur Gilbert noted that any information about Jackson would reach people in Santa Barbara County and beyond.

“If he clears his throat, it’s going to make the front page of the Karachi Times,” Gilbert said.

Justice Steven Z. Perren said at one point that Melville had tried “heroically, I think” to balance the release of documents with Jackson’s right to a fair trial.

Attorney Theodore J. Boutrous, representing The Associated Press and other news outlets, said close screening of prospective jurors would ensure that no one with strong biases would make the jury. Attorneys are scheduled to begin questioning prospective jurors Monday.

Boutrous said the public had a right to follow the allegations and Jackson’s responses to them in order to gauge whether prosecutors and defense attorneys were acting properly and making well-grounded arguments.

He said the obligation to release information was especially high in cases with intense public interest.

Gilbert asked if Boutrous could imagine a case in which the allegations were “so lurid and so gory that just repeating those could create revulsion” among potential jurors. Gilbert also pressed attorneys for Jackson and for Santa Barbara County, noting that “in 99 and nine-tenths of the cases, including lurid cases, everything is open to the public.”

Robert Sanger, an attorney for Jackson, said the singer didn’t want special treatment, but was entitled to a fair trial. Sanger said he was worried about the jury pool being contaminated.

The appeals panel did not say when it will rule.

Melville could opt to release documents in the case before the appeals court decision, if jury selection is completed quickly enough.

Jackson, 46, is also charged with giving the boy alcohol and conspiring to hold him and his family captive. The pop star has pleaded not guilty.

Questionnaires filled out by 242 potential jurors that were released Wednesday showed some have children who’ve visited Neverland ranch.

A scribbled comment by one said: “My disabled daughter was allow to go to Neverland, but Mr. Jackson was not present during her school visit.”

Another potential juror said her son works at the ranch and another son, 15, had gone to the ranch with a friend of Jackson’s “to ride and hang out.”

On another question, 67 people, or more than one in four of the respondents, said they knew someone who has met Jackson or spent time at his ranch.

The vast majority of the prospects said neither their feelings nor experiences with people from different races would affect their ability to serve. Nine said their sentiments and experiences would affect their judgment, and seven were not sure.