Key Witness in Spielberg Case Changes Story

Contradicting his earlier testimony before the county grand jury, a key prosecution witness told a Santa Monica jury Monday that the man accused of stalking director Steven Spielberg went to the film legend’s estate hoping to get a job in the motion picture industry.

In October, Charles Markovich told authorities that his friend, Jonathan Norman, 31, had acknowledged wanting to enter Spielberg’s Pacific Palisades estate so he could rape him.

Markovich’s change in testimony came on the fifth day of trial for Norman, who faces a single felony count of stalking Spielberg early last summer before being arrested by Los Angeles police. Norman, who was on parole at the time for a 1995 assault case in Santa Monica, faces the possibility of a “third strike” sentence of 25 years to life if convicted of stalking Spielberg.

According to authorities, Norman made at least four visits last June and July to Spielberg’s residence before his arrest. When taken into custody, authorities have said, Norman carried a day planner with detailed information about Spielberg and his family, as well as what Deputy Dist. Atty. Rhonda Saunders has described as a “rape kit” that included duct tape, a box cutter and handcuffs.

When the case was presented last year to the grand jury, Norman’s friend Markovich testified that the defendant told him that he went to Spielberg’s residence because he was sexually obsessed with the director and wanted to rape him.

But testifying Monday, Markovich, who has acknowledged a romantic interest in the defendant, said he remembered Norman talking about scaling a wall at Spielberg’s estate so he could “act out a script” idea and find employment in the entertainment industry.

At the time of Norman’s visits to Spielberg’s residence, the director was with his family in Ireland to make a film.

While changing that element of his testimony, Markovich stood by his comments to the grand jury that Norman was taking drugs on an almost daily basis before his arrest.

That testimony supports Norman’s contention that he was coming off several days of bingeing on methamphetamines at the time of his arrest.

Under questioning by Norman’s attorney, John C. Lawson II, Markovich said the defendant had been snorting crystal methamphetamine throughout most of May and June and that the drug could keep him awake for days at a time, resulting in bizarre behavior and paranoia.