Just wondered. Whether or not Michael Jackson did the things claimed, if his lawyers can make a strong case (as it appears they can) that she’s a grifter and a big time welfare cheat, will the govt come after her, or will she get some sort of immunity from the State Prosecutor?
On a separate note, can J.C. Penny come after her if it’s there’s compelling testimony she lied about being molested by the J.C. Penny’s security guard re the monetary settlement she got from them.
Caveat… IANA lawyer, just a law student.
The parts of a court case that cannot be relitigated are claims that have been fully adjudicated (under res judicata), or individual issues within a claim that have been fully decided (under collateral estoppel). However, courts have discretion to overrule issue and claim preclusion defenses if new evidence comes to light that was not available at the time of the trial. So JC Penny might be able to bring another suit on that claim. I doubt it’s worth the expense though.
As for the welfare issue, the defense wont likely try to get a court ruling on it in the MJ case. They are just going to use it to paint a picture for the jury that discredits her. If substantial evidence of wrong doing emerges the government can try her later if they want to, but I’m sure the prosecutor would like to keep the heat off his witness until after this trial concludes.