d'van and a few others: I'm not sure what you are saying. I think they showed extended footage of the famous documentary towards the end, in which Michael received a sideways chance to "testify." But the judge must have told the jurors they were not viewing that material for the "truth" of any statement made by Jackson therein (and not under oath), and on that limitation, the prosecution had no right to cross examine. It's a fine and yet confusing line, to be sure, when you have to listen to someone but not "for the truth of the matter asserted." I'm a little surprised they got that in for other purposes, given that problem, but the judge must have thought it was necessary and reasonably fair. Perhaps it was because the prosecution had shown shorter segments of the same material. (And maybe the prosecutor sought to introduce that as a way to taunt/tempt Michael into testifying.)