Michael Jackson aired, Jackson had begun serving him and his younger brother wine, sometimes concealed in soda cans, showing them pornography and making sexual advances. He said that Jackson had masturbated him to ejaculation after they drank alcohol, and then told him that if men do not masturbate, they "might rape a girl". Challenged by Mesereau, who said that Gavin had told sheriffs that his grandmother had said this, Gavin said he was not sure what his grandmother had told him. Gavin also testified he had told his school administrator that Jackson had not molested him. Star Arvizo Gavin's younger brother, Star, told the court that he had twice seen Jackson molest Gavin. He also said that Jackson had displayed his erection and masturbated in front of them, telling them that "everyone did it", and encouraged them to try it. Star testified that Jackson had given the boys alcohol, sometimes in soda cans, which Jackson called "Jesus juice". Star also said Jackson had showed the brothers internet pornography on his computer. On cross-examination, Mesereau questioned Star about a 1998 case in which his family sued J. C. Penney. The family alleged that Star, his brother and their mother were beaten in a parking lot by security guards after leaving with clothes they had not paid for. Janet Arvizo also claimed to have been sexually assaulted and falsely imprisoned. The family received a settlement of £75,000. In a 2000 sworn statement for the case, Star had said his "mother and father never [fought]." Janet and her children claimed that David Arvizo physically abused them for seventeen years. Star admitted he lied in the statement. The admission was a major victory to the defense. Also, it was stated that the Arvizos had not visited Neverland since March 2003. However, when shown a pornographic magazine dated August 2003, 5 months after the family stopped visiting Neverland, Star claimed that was one of the magazines Jackson had shown them. Star would later attempt to recant this testimony too. Janet Arvizo The defense sought to portray Janet Arvizo as untrustworthy, with a history of perjury and fraud. She admitted to having lied under oath in an earlier lawsuit. The prosecution planned to have an expert on domestic violence testify that she may have lied because she had been beaten by her ex-husband, but the judge did not allow it, saying it would be irrelevant. The