Skip to content

The Chronicle of Tom Sneddon’s Vendetta Against Michael Jackson. THE SAGA OF ARROGANCE AND DESPERATION

July 29, 2012

We’ve been waiting for this chance for so long that it would be totally inexcusable if we missed it.

I am talking of William Wagener’s decision to hand to the County Santa Barbara Supervisors on August 14, 2012 an Affidavit Of Criminal Conduct By Tom Sneddon demanding an official investigation of the three felonies committed by the former Santa Barbara District Attorney. These three felonies include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Manufacturing false finger prints

2. Manufacturing false phone conspiracy evidence

3. Conspiracy amongst the prosecutors to do the first two felonies listed above.

Here is William Wagener’s address to Michael’s supporters:

On August 14th, at 9:00 am on the Betteravia Government center, in Santa Maria, Ca. Addressing the monthly meeting of the County S.B. Supervisors, I shall give the supervisors official notice by affidavit that Sneddon committed 3 felonies in the trial, of MJ in 2005.

William Wagener will present to the County Supervisors of Santa Barbara, for the 1st time, ever, An Affidavit of Criminal conduct by Tom Sneddon, former Dictrict Atty. and demand a independent investigation and INDICTMENT of Tom SNEDDON for committing THREE felonies during the Michael Jackson TRIAL in 2005. Specifically to get Michael Jackson convicted false evidence was presented at court and caught by the Defense Atty.s Thomas Mesereau and Susan YU.

William Wagener invites all those who love justice or Michael Jackson to come and add 1 minute speeches after William Wagener’s presentment. And demand, like Mr. Wagener, that a special Prosecution of Thomas Sneddon be started by hiring a Special Prosecutor from outside Santa Barbara or even outside California, to investigate and Prosecute Thomas Sneddon.

Once this is done, the FRAUD is exposed and the statue of Limitations starts to run out. FRAUD by the Santa Barbara Dist. Atty. OFFICE “on the court”un-identified, and Uncorrected for the past 7 Years has prevented the Statute of Limitations from running out.

If you are coming to California anyway in August and can be there. Please be there. Show up for Michael’s sake. 9 am 1st Floor in the BetteraviaGovernmentCenter in Santa Maria, August 14th.

– William J. Wagener –

Each of the above three felonies is about fraud upon the court which is so severe a crime that fortunately it is not subject to any statute of limitation. Mary Brookins, one of the coordinators of the project, explains:

In the United States, when an officer of the court is found to have fraudulently presented facts to court so that the court is impaired in the impartial performance of its legal task, the act, known as “fraud upon the court”, is a crime deemed so severe and fundamentally opposed to the operation of justice that it is not subject to any statute of limitation.

Officers of the court include: lawyers, judges, referees, and those appointed; guardian ad litem, parenting time expeditors, mediators, rule 114 neutrals, evaluators, administrators, special appointees, and any others whose influence are part of the judicial mechanism.

“Fraud upon the court” has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to “embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication”.

In Bullock v. United States, (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated “Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. … It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function — thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted.”  Source: Wiki

But even though there is no statute of limitation on these crimes, from William Wagener’s information I gather that beginning from the date of his Affidavit the statute of limitations will start to run out.

William Wagener:

  • No man is above the law, and I realize the Statute of Limitations will begin to click away as soon as the Affidavit is submitted to the Board of Supervisors, hence, it is of utmost importance that you act, not only responsibly, but also expeditiously, to bring justice to a situation that is long overdue.

So it means that if the Affidavit on Tom Sneddon and demand to investigate his crimes does not reach its goal now there might never be another chance??? Such an outcome is impossible even to imagine, so the only way out left for us is make this investigation happen NOW.

What I mean is that we should provide all support for this project we are only capable of, and make the investigation of Sneddon’s crimes take place even despite all odds.  We cannot miss this chance simply because there might not be another one. We cannot afford to sit, wait and be indifferent.

We cannot afford not to win.

William Wagener asks us to be in California in the Betteravia Government Center in Santa Maria, August 14th at 9am, so those of us who can be there, please be there. And all the rest of us please shower the authorities with demands that Sneddon should be held accountable for the crimes he committed against Michael Jackson and the legal system as a whole.

If every person seeks the post of a prosecutor to square with those whom he personally dislikes the prosecution system will quickly turn into a place for taking revenge on one’s personal enemies and persecuting the innocent. And enjoying oneself greatly in the process as it will require not a single penny of his own money and will be done at the expense of other people (the taxpayers).

If each prosecutor is allowed to falsify evidence against those who they are after, the system of justice will soon turn into a body of repression, which will be no better than the one in totalitarian states.

If Sneddon’s example of vicious prosecution remains without proper legal assessment it will open the door to others who see that people can easily get away with a personal vendetta if it is done by someone who is in a position as powerful as the one Thomas Sneddon had.

At the moment it is not yet clear to what address we should send our support for William Wagener’s historical initiative, so while we are waiting for proper instructions I suggest reviewing some of Tom Sneddon’s misdeeds against Michael Jackson and other innocent people. (UPDATE: To see the email addresses and the suggested forms of letters please scroll to the bottom of this post)

These misdeeds were chronicled by the MJ Fan Club whose remarkable members conscientiously and thoroughly reported the progress of the 2005 trial. While reading their impassionate and highly informative bulletins one cannot help realizing how flimsy the prosecution case against Michael Jackson was, how arrogant Sneddon was in thinking that this could be enough for putting an innocent man into jail and for two decades too, and how desperate he was in finding really incriminating evidence against Jackson – desperate enough even to falsify it.

The 2005 trial records of the MJ Fan Club come in a chronological order enabling us to refresh in our memories the timeline of the events as well as relive what Michael Jackson and the public went through due to an unscrupulous man like Tom Sneddon.  This sort of a dossier on Sneddon and the 2005 trial will be certainly far from complete – Sneddon was reason for so much injustice that it is simply impossible to list all his offences against the truth in one place.

The MJ Fan Club collection will be supplemented by some articles on the issues not covered by the Club. These were written by the mainstream media sober minds who saw through Tom Sneddon’s actions even at the time their colleagues went totally hysterical over the absurd case he concotted against Michael Jackson.

All of it will have a minimum of comment on my part to enable readers to come to conclusions on their own. For the sake of brevity some articles have been shortened. The post will still be long, and only the most inquisitive minds will make it to the end – however no one pushes you to read it in full as the idea of Sneddon’s personal vendetta against Jackson will be clear enough from the very start of it.

The facts compiled here are addressed not only to Michael Jackson’s fans but to all those who are not indifferent to the future of their country’s legal system. Please read it and do what your sense of duty tells you to do.


November 18, 2005

Police Raid Jackson Ranch

By Gil Kaufman

Dozens of Santa Barbara County sheriff’s deputies armed with warrants swarmed Michael Jackson’s Neverland Valley ranch Tuesday morning to search the compound. The officers arrived at the gated ranch at 8:30 a.m. to conduct the searches, which are part of an ongoing investigation, Sgt. Chris Pappas said in a statement.

Court TV reported that the raid was tied to allegations made by an unnamed twelve-year-old boy, though authorities would not comment on those reports. Jackson’s spokesperson could not be reached for comment.

The raid came on the same day that Jackson’s Number Ones greatest hits album was released. The collection features the new song “One More Chance,” written by R. Kelly. A Jackson TV special is scheduled to air on CBS on November 26th.

Jackson and his three children were not at Neverland during the raid because he has been in Las Vegas for three weeks filming footage for the TV special.

Isn’t it an interesting coincidence that the Neverland raid by 70 police officers was made on the same day when Michael Jackson’s long-awaited Number Ones hits album was released? Exactly on the same date?  Of course the suspicion that it was an intentional move was brushed off by Sneddon as nonsense and was explained by another nonsense that the date of the raid had to do with too much traffic on Halloween…

November 20, 2003

Why Is The DA In The Michael Jackson Case Smiling?

For Tom Sneddon, this case is personal

By Corey Moss

Santa Barbara, California, District Attorney Tom Sneddon’s cheerful smile at Wednesday’s press conference announcing the latest child-molestation accusations against Michael Jackson said it all.

This case is personal.

The apparent vendetta most likely stems from two events. Sneddon was the prosecutor on the child-molestation case against Jackson 10 years ago, only to find himself without a victim willing to testify when Jackson reached a multimillion-dollar settlement with the alleged victim’s family (that case led California to change its laws regarding witness testimony in child molestation cases).

Secondly, Jackson later attacked the district attorney in his music.  Jackson’s 1995 double album, HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book 1, includes a song called “D.S.” featuring the chorus, “Dom Sheldon is a cold man,” according to official lyrics. His pronunciation of the title character, however, sounds much closer to “Tom Sneddon is a cold man.”

Sneddon addressed the song earlier this year in an interview with the National District Attorney’s Association (NDAA). “I have not — shall we say — done him the honor of listening to it,” he said.

Prior to releasing “D.S.,” Jackson indirectly expressed his frustrations with Sneddon in a television announcement, noting the excruciating experience of being stripped naked and photographed during the 1993 investigation. Before the accuser halted the investigation by declining to testify in court, Sneddon said the photographs were necessary to verify the boy’s description of intimate parts of Jackson’s anatomy.

The district attorney, a father of nine, is known for his take-no-prisoners courtroom demeanor, which earned him the nickname “Mad Dog” early in his career, according to the NDAA.

Sneddon served in the Vietnam War and worked at the Los Angeles district attorney’s office but has been with Santa Barbara County since 1969. He was elected district attorney in 1982 and has been re-elected ever since, prompting the local newspaper to call him “arguably the single most powerful person in all of Santa Barbara County.”

On Wednesday, Sneddon maintained a grin for most of the press conference and even made some jokes, such as when asked if the timing of the charges was connected to Tuesday’s release of Jackson’s Number Ones hits album. “Like the sheriff and I are really into that kind of music,” Sneddon said.

As a short comment on the above let me note that Sneddon did not need to have a ‘willing witness’ to testify in the 1993 case. If the photos of MJ obtained during the humiliating strip-search had really matched the boy’s fantasy description, it would be quite enough for arresting MJ then and there, and eventually convicting him. After all prosecutors do manage to convict murderers even though their victims are not able to testify, don’t they? So what difference does it make here?

Let us accept the finality of it at last – the photos did not match the description, Sneddon had nothing against Jackson, the story was bogus, and that is all there is to it.

November 20, 2003


Some observers said Sneddon, a former boxer at Notre Dame who earned the nickname “Mad Dog” for his tenacious courtroom demeanor, had waited a long time for another shot at Jackson. … Sneddon, a prosecutor for 34 years and D.A. for nearly 21 of those, appeared to be grandstanding at the news conference and seemed to take delight in announcing a warrant for Jackson’s arrest had been issued.

Sneddon joked with a roomful of reporters, at one point saying drawing chuckles when he welcomed them to Santa Barbara with the line, “I hope that you all stay long and spend lots of money because we need your sales tax to support our offices.”

“It was baffling, perplexing and it didn’t have a particularly serious tone,” said Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola University LawSchool. “A good defense lawyer is going to say he was too personally invested and you can’t trust the investigation.”

During the earlier investigation, Sneddon ordered photographs taken of Jackson’s genitalia. At the time, Sneddon told Vanity Fair the photos matched descriptions of Jackson’s genitalia given by boys to investigators.

The ordeal was the inspiration of a 1995 song titled D.S.that Jackson included on his HIStory album. The song is widely believed to refer to the district attorney, and contains these lines: “They wanna get my ass / Dead or alive / You know he really tried to take me / Down by surprise / I bet he missioned with the CIA / He don’t do half what he say.”

In a February 2003 profile, the National District Attorneys Association called Sneddon “the only D.A. in the nation to have an angry song written about him by pop megastar Michael Jackson.”

Sneddon, who is in his early 60s, graduated from UCLA Law School in 1966 and then served in the Army for two years. He has been a prosecutor for his entire law career since then.

Those who have worked with Sneddon say he is tenacious and tough, particularly when he has made up his mind about a case — sometimes to a fault.

“There were times, and there still are, that his tenaciousness gets in the way of his better judgment and he has to step back. That’s maybe more difficult for Tom than other people,” Slater said. “He can be a pretty tough article.”

The point about Sneddon providing Vanity Fair with information makes me note that Tom Sneddon should be held accountable not only for the three felonies enumerated in William Wagener’s message, but he should also answer for spreading lies about the so-called “match” of the 1993 accuser’s description and real photos of MJ’s private parts.

This lie was refuted by the simple fact of no arrest made after MJ’s strip search, as well as by statements in USA Today and Reuters the next day after the Chandlers settlement saying that there was no match.  However despite this clearly stated fact Sneddon was still spreading lies in the press and Maureen Orth of Vanity Fair faithfully repeated them like the Bible truth  thus slandering a completely innocent man!

December 18, 2003

Who Is Tom Sneddon? A Look At The Man Pursuing Michael Jackson

LOS ANGELES, Dec. 18, 2003

By Tatiana Morales

(CBS)  Child molestation charges could be filed Thursday, Dec. 18, against Michael Jackson. Santa Barbara district attorney Tom Sneddon, who’s been in office more than 20 years, plans to personally try the case.

Sneddon has pursued Michael Jackson twice over 10 years on allegations of child molestation. Jerry Roberts, editor of the Santa Barbara News-Press tells The Early Show national correspondent Hattie Kauffman, “I think people do feel that he is a man on a mission. You know, this is going to be the signature case of his career.”

At a news conference on Nov. 19, 2003, Sneddon said, “Within a very short period of time, there will be charges filed against Mr. Jackson.” He sounded confident and cocky. With laughter, he also said, “Like the sheriff and I really are into that kind of music.” He was forced later to apologize for the light tone.

Jim Thomas, former Santa Barbara County sheriff, noted, “I suspect that if he had the opportunity to do it again, he may do it a little differently.”

In over two decades as D.A., Sneddon has clashed with plenty of defense attorneys, including Gary Dunlap. Dunlap says, “Last year, I was wrongfully prosecuted for a number of crimes, crimes I did not commit.” The D.A. had charged Dunlap, a frequent critic of the department, with perjury and witness intimidation. Dunlap notes “We went to a jury trial and I was acquitted on all counts.”

Now Dunlap is suing Sneddon for malicious prosecution, and wonders how strong the D.A.’s case against Jackson really is.  Dunlap says, “He said he had a very strong case against me. The problem was that his whole strong case was manufactured.”

“It’s not a vendetta,” Jim Thomas says. “He’s a professional, and he’s no one that is going to look back and say, ‘You know, we didn’t get you last time; we got you this time.'” Dunlap says, “He lost his opportunity against Michael Jackson in 1993, and he doesn’t want to leave office without paying that score back.”

But Sneddon’s motivation may be simpler than that. Roberts says, “He’s a law-and-order guy who sees the world in black and white. There’s bad guys and good guys, and he sees himself as the good guy.”

A short note on attorney Gary Dunlap’s case:

  • In November 2003, Santa Barbara defense attorney Gary Dunlap filed a $10 million lawsuit against Tom Sneddon, accusing him of racketeering, witness tampering, conspiracy and malicious prosecution. Earlier that year, Sneddon had charged Dunlap with perjury, witness intimidation, filing false documents and preparing false documents in a case that Dunlap had handled.
  • Dunlap was acquitted on all charges but claims his reputation has been irreparably harmed as a result of the proceedings. In an interview with Online Legal Review’s Ron Sweet, Dunlap claimed that Sneddon stacked the charges against him in order to get a conviction on at least one count; apparently, this is a common occurrence in Sneddon’s office. Dunlap also discussed Sneddon’s frequent abuse of power and claimed that there are other lawyers who have seen this.
  • In related news, Dunlap’s lawyer Joe Freeman recently sent a complaint asking that federal, state and county officials investigate Tom Sneddon and members of the Santa Barbara Police Department for misconduct.  In response to the allegations, the SBPD’s attorney Jake Stoddard said that Sneddon and his employees are immune from legal action because they are prosecutors.

Mr. Dunlap said regarding the Santa Barbara Police Department:

  • “It’s a very bad situation here in the north county, and the general public is very unaware of it because Tom Sneddon and his assistant up here have pretty much dominated the justice system in Santa Barbara County for several years.”“His office is very powerful and public officials are intimidated by them, court personnel are intimidated by them, I mean, they just have had it their own way, and they pretty much do whatever they want. And the problem with it is, they do not take any kind of a leadership role with regard to law enforcement in the sense of protecting the public interests against excessive force. Rather, they promote excessive force by the various law enforcement agencies, by their attitude of protection and prosecution of cases that are clearly inappropriate.”


April 29, 2004

Does Memo Suggest DA Vendetta Against Jackson?

ABCNEWS has exclusively viewed documents that raise potentially troubling questions about the investigation into the child molestation allegations against Michael Jackson as the “King of Pop” prepares to face his arraignment on the charges brought by a grand jury.

Jackson has professed his innocence and claimed the allegations against him are false. He and his defense have said that Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon has a vendetta against him and is determined to convict the pop star legend at any cost — a charge Sneddon has denied.

ABCNEWS has seen documents — including a memo apparently written by Sneddon himself — that will likely add to the controversy about the district attorney’s role in the case.

A memo that bears Sneddon’s name and is dated last November says Sneddon personally investigated aspects of the case against Jackson. Jackson defense sources told ABCNEWS that Sneddon took on parts of the investigation that are almost always handled by police investigators or junior prosecutors.

According to the memo, Sneddon drove to Los Angeles and met alone with the mother of Jackson’s alleged victim in a parking lot behind a federal building. The memo says that Sneddon took pictures of the office of a private investigator who worked for Jackson. Sneddon, the memo claims, handled all these matters by himself, without the presence of a law enforcement officer or an investigator. Sources close to Jackson told ABCNEWS that Sneddon also executed his own stakeouts.

In addition, a Santa Barbara County police report says that Sneddon met alone with Jackson’s alleged victim’s mother on another occasion.

Linda Fairstein, a leading sex crimes prosecutor, said this alleged personal sleuthing by Sneddon was unusual.

“It’s way too personal. It’s way out of line,” Fairstein told Good Morning America. “If he does any substantive parts of an investigation, he may become a witness in the case.”

Fairstein added that Sneddon’s close involvement in aspects of the investigation could be grounds for a mistrial and gives Jackson’s defense team ammunition to attack the prosecution.

Legal experts also believe jurors are more likely to question the case against Jackson they sense it is motivated by a personal grudge from the district attorney.

Citing a gag order in the case, Tom Sneddon declined to comment on the memo and charges of a personal grudge against Jackson. He has said the evidence will speak for itself in court.

The summary of the ABC News information is provided in the MJ Fan Club bulletin on the same day with very much accuracy, only adding  to it a little bit of sacrasm:

  • The headline from ABC News could be laughable were it not Michael Jackson’s life on the line. Actually, it should read “The Media Finally Notices That D.A. Sneddon Has A Personal Vendetta Against Michael Jackson.”

The zeal with which the Prosecution was handling the case against Michael Jackson was indescribable:

June 6, 2004

Phone Records Being Seized

The prosecution is now seizing telephone records from around the country in further attempts to build a case against Michael Jackson for child molestation. The records are sought from 17 companies including Verizon, Nextel, Bell South, PacBell Pacific and Southwestern Bell. The warrant was issued on May 20. The gag order that has been placed on the case attorneys and others prevents commenting and the documentation available does not provide details as to why the records have been requested.

In April, a warrant was issued for records of RCN Internet. In May, more warrants were approved to gain access to records from Bank Of America, TransUnion, Equifax and Experian.

The issuing of the latest batch of warrants indicates an on going attempt to gather evidence that would add support to the prosecution’s case against Michael. The information regarding the warrants surfaced when the prosecution requested that the information contained in the documents remain sealed. The prosecution stated that disclosure of the materials would compromise the investigation.

However a year later, during the trial, all of the effort turned into an embarrassing flop:

May 3, 2005

Jackson prosecutors present phone records

SANTA MARIA, Calif. (AP) — The jury in Michael Jackson’s child molestation trial was presented more phone records Tuesday as prosecutors sought to bolster the conspiracy portion of the case against the pop star.

Prosecutors have been presenting records showing dozens of calls on phones belonging to Jackson associates around the time a damaging documentary about the singer aired in February 2003.

During an initial round of records presented Monday a detective conceded that no calls were tied to Jackson.

On cross-examination, defense attorney Robert Sanger noted that phone calls only showed the phones were used, not who was speaking on the phones.

In a key question during cross-examination, Sanger asked the witness, sheriff’s Detective Craig Bonner, if Jackson could be linked to the calls.

“In all these phone records you had were you ever able to determine if Michael Jackson was on a single call?” the attorney asked.

“No,” said Bonner.

Bonner also acknowledged that the records only reflected whose phones were used to make the calls, not who actually spoke, and that some brief calls to offices probably involved only a receptionist.


Of all journalists covering the case Roger Friedman turned out to be the most observant one. He noticed that despite a gag order from the judge and Sneddon not allowing a single paper to be leaked from the prosecution side, the documents  from the previous 1993 molestation allegations, biasing the public against Michael Jackson,  mysteriously surfaced just at the most crucial moments of Michael Jackson’s life.

For example, the so-called Declaration by Jordan Chandler was leaked the very next day Bashir’s documentary was shown in the US. This was clearly done to turn the public against Jackson (and possibly give ideas to a new potential accuser and prompt him the text?). Larry Feldman, the lawyer of Jordan Chandler vehemently denied the leakage from his office but hinted that ‘a little connecting of the dots’ would point to the name of the guilty party which released this highly confidential document.  Out of the two suspects – Feldman and Sneddon – this leaves us only with Sneddon, doesn’t it?

Another instance of a leakage against Jackson occurred a year and a half later, in June 2004 when the confidential Settlement Agreement of 1994 with the Chandlers was also released direct into Diane Dimond’s hands.

The article below speaks about both these instances and comes from the MJ Fan Club records.

June 16, 2004

Friedman On Leaked Documents

… The Jackson camp is scrambling this morning in the light of the unauthorized release, to Court TV’s intrepid Diane Dimond, of the settlement agreement between Jackson and his pre-teen accuser from a decade ago.

The “release” of the settlement agreement is a scoop for Dimond, but it does raise the question of where the papers came from. They were sealed by the court, and, I am told, destroyed by some of the lawyers in the case so they could never be fingered as sources.

Certainly the family of the accuser from 10 years ago didn’t want the papers to come out. You don’t have to be Columbo to figure out that leaves Feldman and prosecutor Tom Sneddon as prime suspects.

Interestingly, in February 2003, literally right after the special “Living with Michael Jackson” aired on ABC, the highly salacious complaint against Jackson from the 1993 case, which had also been sealed, surfaced.

The papers had a court stamp and were drawn up on Feldman’s letterhead, something I asked him about at the time. He insisted they did not come from him, but said the guilty party was close at hand and that “just a little connecting of the dots” was needed to get a name.

Now that sealed documents have twice surfaced and wound up in the same place — Court TV/The Smoking Gun Web site — maybe it’s time to think about who had access to them and how they could possibly have gotten out.

Source: FoxNews; Fox411 Roger Friedman by special permission / MJFC

June 18, 2004

Statement Of Michael Jackson


CONTACT: Raymone K. Bain

Michael Jackson issues the following statement regarding the recent release of confidential information:

I respect the obligation of confidentiality imposed on all of the parties to the 1993 proceedings. Yet, someone has chosen to violate the confidentiality of those proceedings. Whoever is now leaking this material is showing as much disrespect for the Santa Maria Court’s “gag order” as they are a determination to attack me.

No action or investigation has been taken to determine who is leaking this information or why they are permitted to violate the law in such a manner. I respectfully request that people see these efforts for what they are.

These kinds of attacks and leaks seek to try the case in the press, rather than to a jury who will hear all of the evidence that will show that I did not, and would not, ever, harm a child. I have always maintained my innocence, and vehemently denied that these events ever took place. I reluctantly chose to settle the false claims only to end the terrible publicity and to continue with my life and career.

I ask all of my neighbors in Santa Maria, the people whom I give my loyal trust and admiration, to keep an open mind, and give me a chance to show that I am completely innocent of these charges. I will not let you down.

Source: Raymone K. Bain / MJFC


July 8, 2004

Michael Jackson’s Defense Lawyers Seek To Dismiss Indictment

On Tuesday, Michael Jackson’s lawyers filed papers requesting Judge Melville dismiss the case of child molestation against Michael. Today, some limited information regarding what is contained in that request has been made public through a heavily edited copy that removed the names of witnesses and references to specifics of the indictment.

Michael’s lawyers claim that prosecutors bullied and argued with witnesses and “ran the proceedings as if they employed the grand jurors.” The motion, signed by attorney Robert Sanger, stated that “There is no case in the history of the state of California that has condoned anything like the abuse of power demonstrated in this grand jury proceeding.”

The defense accused the prosecutors of using “innuendo and sarcasm, impugning Mr. Jackson by ridiculing those associated with him and even those who sought to legally represent him.”

Russel Halpern, attorney for the father of Michael’s accuser, [David Arvizo] was one witness whose testimony was offered as a lengthy example.

In a section quoted in the transcript, Mr. Halpern and D.A. Tom Sneddon argued over Mr. Halperns’ efforts to gather information from Sneddon’s office. Mr. Halpern says “I found the D.A.’s office to be hostile when I called. I found the head D.A, that being yourself, to be very uncooperative.”

Mr. Halpern asked Sneddon if it was his client’s son making the molestation claims. “You initially refused to tell me,” he testified to the grand jury. “I asked you if my client’s son was dying. You initially refused to tell me. It was only after I told you that I might have to tell the press of your reaction that you called back and then told me.” Sneddon snaps back “That is not the way that conversation went and you know it.” “You know it, too” replies Mr. Halpern. This was given as an example of the prosecutor testifying rather than asking questions.

Mr. Halpern could not comment Wednesday due to the gag order. He did, however, say that “Mr. Sneddon has misused his powers as district attorney to try to keep me from talking at all. I am not a potential witness, and his description of me as a potential witness is disingenuous.”  Source: AOL / AP / MJFC

July 8, 2004

Roger Friedman On Private Audio Tape

There’s a smoking gun in the Michael Jackson child-abuse case, but it’s not going to help the prosecution.

An audiotape made by private investigator Brad Miller on or around Feb. 20, 2003, may solve the whole case.

On the tape, Miller working for Jackson defense attorney Mark Geragos interviews the 13-year-old boy now accusing Jackson of impropriety. Also interviewed are the boy’s brother, sister and mother.

This tape, I’m told, is the reason behind all those closed-door arguments among the lawyers in the case and the subject of Judge Rodney Melville’s sealing of evidence. The tape, and a lot of documents that have nothing to do with Jackson, were found in a police raid on Miller’s office the same day cops charged into Neverland last November.

That’s the problem. Miller’s lawyer, as well as Jackson’s, claim that Miller worked for Geragos and not for Jackson, making Miller part of the defense team and everything in his office thus off-limits to prosecutors. I’m told that the search warrant against Miller, however, incorrectly stated that he was Jackson’s employee.

Miller, under instructions from Geragos, interviewed the family members about their relationships with Jackson. He asked them a lot of questions, including whether or not there had been any sexual misconduct. The answers, I’m told, were emphatically “no.”

Prosecutors may suggest the three were coerced or forced to read from a script. But it appears they were not alone during the taping session. Major Jay Jackson, the boy’s mother’s boyfriend, was with them the whole time, my sources say. “If Jay Jackson didn’t like what they were being asked, he could have said something,” one source says. “He didn’t.”

It’s a big issue that the prosecutors are in possession of this tape.

Under the law, they are not allowed to listen to it until the judge rules whether or not it’s part of the defense. But District Attorney Tom Sneddon may have listened to it. (No one from the prosecutor’s office will comment on this or any other part of the Jackson case, invoking the court’s gag order.)

The tape may also play into the ever-shifting timeline in the Jackson case. When Sneddon filed charges against Jackson [in December 2003], he alleged that the child molestation took place between Feb. 7 and March 10 of 2003. Later, when he re-filed, the dates were changed: Feb. 20 to March 12, 2003.

“That’s because the tape was made later, around February 16 or 18,” says my source. “Also, that’s when the family was interviewed by the Los Angeles child-welfare people. Sneddon is trying to re-set the time line so it all matches.”

An interviewer from the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services spoke to the family during the same week they made the tape. I’m told the same answers came back nothing untoward had happened.

Sneddon, it’s suggested, had to change the dates of the charges so that they began after the tape was made and the interview was conducted.

“And we’re to believe that Michael, knowing about the tape and the interview, then decided to molest the kid,” my source says incredulously.

Source: FoxNews; Fox411 Roger Friedman by special permission / MJFC

July 9, 2004

Michael Jackson Defense Says Sneddon Did Surveillance

Days before Michael Jackson’s arrest on charges of molestation, Santa Barbara District Attorney, Tom Sneddon, personally took charge of surveillance of the office of private investigator working for Michael. This is a highly unusual action for a DA.

The defense has made public a filing wherein they charge that police “invaded the defense camp” in a search conducted in November at private investigator Bradley Miller’s office. At that time, Miller was working for Michael Jackson’s then attorney, Mark Geragos. The defense claims that the police had no right seizing materials from the office, citing attorney – client privilege. (Attorney – client privilege bars the prosecution from knowledge gained from communication between a defendant and their lawyers.)

Those materials included computer hard drives and videotapes. The defense has requested that the evidence removed from Miller’s office be disallowed at trial and returned to Michael’s attorneys.

Unbelievably, the police who executed this “search” used a sledgehammer, no less, to break into Miller’s office and conference rooms. The ransacking of the investigator’s office personally led by DA Sneddon further demonstrates the overzealousness of his continuing campaign to convict Michael Jackson.

In the document unsealed Wednesday requesting that the grand jury indictment be dismissed, the defense accused Sneddon of being unusually aggressive in his treatment of one witness in particular.

In yet another example of just how far DA Sneddon will go, the defense cited a memo by Sneddon that said that in an effort to locate Miller’s office, he, himself, had gone to the building where the office was located. He then photographed a list of offices in the building and climbed several flights of stairs in an attempt to find Miller’s. He was unsuccessful that time.

The prosecutors responded to these charges by saying that they did not know that Miller was working for Mark Geragos. The prosecution also claimed that they had the right to search the office if they believed that it held materials in evidence that were not covered by attorney – client privilege.

Source: AOL / AP / MJFC

July 9, 2004

Friedman: DA Sneddon’s Grand Jury Circus

Court filings by Michael Jackson’s lawyers, released on Wednesday, depict a different kind of grand jury proceeding than the usual, respectful environment.

Transcripts from the Jackson grand jury, included in the defense papers and redacted so that much of it is missing, still depict Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon on a rampage to control the proceedings.

According to papers filed by Jackson’s attorney Robert Sanger, Sneddon continually browbeat witnesses, fought with them and was often belligerent. Sneddon also gave little respect to the grand jury foreperson, often ignoring her wishes.

According to Sanger, “the grand jury was utterly dependent on the prosecution in every way,” including asking for permission to go to the bathroom or even have lunch. “The prosecutors decided when the grand jury would take breaks and when it would adjourn without asking the foreperson.”

Sanger’s papers indicate a few of the people who were called as grand jury witnesses, including Jackson’s accuser, mother, father and the father’s attorney. The latter two were treated by Sneddon almost as hostile witnesses, with several sharp exchanges occurring between the DA and each man during questioning. At one point, Sneddon tells the accuser’s father that when he speaks to his attorney “maybe you can tell him how I was so mean.”

It’s also been revealed in the last day or so that Sneddon allowed the boy’s mother to tell the grand jury of Jackson “I would never take the devil’s money.” Insiders are said to be amused by her choice of words there. It was Jackson himself from whom she probably got the “devil” idea. The pop star publicly accused former Sony Music executive Tommy Mottola (search) of being “very devilish” two summers ago.

As for “the devil’s money,” I’m told there are endless receipts to show just how much of it the boy’s mother happily took and spent during the time she says she was held by Jackson’s employees “against her will.”

Source: FoxNews; Fox411 Roger Friedman by special permission / MJFC

July 23, 2004

Report: Jackson prosecutor sent letters out to keep some quiet about case

The district attorney prosecuting Michael Jackson for molestation said his office kept people from speaking publicly about the case by notifying them they could be called as witnesses, according to a published report.

“We sent letters to some people saying we intended to call them as witnesses in order to keep them off TV,” Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon was quoted as telling fellow prosecutors Tuesday at a conference in Vancouver, Canada.

The Vancouver Globe and Mail reported that Sneddon made the remarks at a conference of the National District Attorneys Association.

Sneddon’s spokeswoman, Susan Tellem, said she understood the remarks were made in a closed-door meeting and didn’t know how a reporter got in. She also said she doesn’t know if Sneddon was quoted accurately.

Attorneys contacted by The Associated Press late Thursday said that if Sneddon was purposely limiting speech by those he knew wouldn’t be called as witnesses, he should be disciplined for abusing his power.

“He’s saying I misused my power as district attorney in order to shut people up. … That is a big, big violation,” criminal attorney Russell Halpern said. “I think the state bar should investigate.”

Halpern represents the father of Jackson’s accuser in cases separate from the Jackson molestation case. He said he received a letter from the Santa Barbara district attorney’s office in January saying he could be called as a witness, though he had no firsthand knowledge of the Jackson case. He has not been called.

Halpern said he was considering a lawsuit against Sneddon for violating his First Amendment rights.

“I have a lot of things I could say and I haven’t voiced them because I’ve actually been intimidated to some degree,” he said. “I felt all along that he was (disingenuous) when he sent me a letter saying I was a potential witness. His real interest was to stymie any comments made about his case.”

Defense attorney Steve Cron, who has handled high profile cases, called Sneddon’s remarks “shocking” and “totally unethical.”

“I am just astounded. He is saying that he’s using the judicial process untruthfully and improperly,” he said. “I’m not surprised someone would do it. I’m surprised he would think there is nothing wrong with it.”

Source: by special permission / MJFC

It is extremely interesting to note that to some people, who were not even possible witnesses, Tom Sneddon did send letters keeping them from appearing on TV (and speak in support of Michael Jackson), but at least in one case when a person could really be a prosecution witness at the trial Sneddon did not bother to do it.

I am talking of Ray Chandler who self-published a defamatory book about Michael Jackson prior to the 2005 trial and claimed he had important documents to prove MJ’s “guilt” in his nephew Jordan Chandler’s case. Despite all these declarations Tom Sneddon did not spread a gag order onto him as a possible witness, and Ray Chandler went on and on making endless rounds of TV shows and freely telling his lies about Jackson.

Finally it was the Defense of Michael Jackson which subpoenaed Ray Chandler as a “custodian of important documents” of the 1993 case, but the good old uncle didn’t accept the invitation and fought the subpoena tooth and nail in order not to present his case in court. Eventually he hid behind the Sheild law which protects both journalists and publishers, the latter of which unfortunately covered Ray Chandler  too.

July 25, 2004

D.A. Sneddon Attempts To Clarify Remarks

It seems that even with the assistance of a free publicist, Tom Sneddon seems unable to keep his foot out of his mouth.

Facing criticism that he misused his power by sending out letters to an extensive list of individuals, warning of possible call to testify in the Michael Jackson molestation case, Sneddon is now attempting to “fix it.” Many of the individuals who received letters from the D.A.’s office, like the lawyer of the accuser’s father, only have minimal involvement in the case. Receiving the letter effectively stopped the recipient from speaking about the case.

But now Sneddon says that he never really meant to prevent people from speaking publicly about court cases. And he was not really referring specifically to the Michael Jackson case.

The remarks were made during a “training session” at a conference of the National District Attorneys Association that he thought was not going to be covered by the press.

Sneddon called an Associated Press reporter in an attempt to lessen the impact after his remarks at the conference became publically known. Sneddon has been heavily criticised for his handling of the Michael Jackson case.

Source: AP / MJFC

August 1, 2004

DA’s Search Of Michael Jackson’s Private Investigator Unlawful

Tom Sneddon continues to stumble through the Michael Jackson case. Now, in what has been called “an unusual move,” Judge Melville has ordered Sneddon to testify at an upcoming hearing next month.

You will remember that Sneddon personally led the heavy – handed raid on the offices of Private Investigator Bradley Miller. Mr. Miller was working with Michael’s then-attorney Mark Geragos. You might also recall that there was some question about the zealousness that Sneddon conducted the search. It just might be that the only correct procedure that Sneddon followed was that he authorized the search warrant. Reportedly, Sneddon conducted his own personal surveillance on Miller’s office building weeks prior to the raid and knew that Miller had been hired to assist in the defense.

According to Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville, the court is “very concerned about the factual issue, whether or not the district attorney…knew that Mr. Miller had been retained by Geragos.”

If Tom Sneddon knew that Miller was, indeed, working for Geragos, then why did he so obviously ignore the attorney – client privilege?

Jonna M. Spilbor, FindLaw Columnist special to, today wrote why this is so illegal and what the courts should do about it.

The attorney – client privilege insures the confidentiality of communication between the lawyer and client. An honest exchange of knowledge and information is necessary to ensure the client receives the very best representation possible.

In California, this is interpreted very broadly to include virtually all information exchanged by client to attorney during the course of their relationship. This includes conversations, written information, photographic and other communications.

In addition, this privilege extends to those third parties “who are present to further the interest of the client in the consultation or to accomplish the purpose for which the lawyer is consulted. These third parties are needed in order that the lawyer do his job efficiently. This extends to experts, paralegal, secretaries and in this case, private investigators who are retained by the client’s counsel. Therefore, it follows that the private investigator retained by the lawyer to represent a suspect cannot be forced to reveal the results of his investigation.

So what was Sneddon thinking? Are we to believe that Sneddon wanted this prosecution so badly that he “forgot” this very basic guideline?

The prosecutor, himself, is claiming ignorance. As in he didn’t realize Miller’s relationship to Michael’s defense. That seems very improbable.

Following the obvious trail of what the prosecution knew: Mark Geragos represented Michael Jackson. They knew Michael or Geragos had hired Miller. Otherwise, why go through all the trouble of staking him out, getting a search warrant and breaking down the investigator’s door? The grand back – firing of this logic shows that Sneddon could provide probable cause enough to persuade a judge to give him the warrant.

Sneddon apparently knew the Jackson – Geragos – Miller connection well enough to pull off three separate, simultaneous searches in Santa Barbara and Beverly Hills all at the same time. Considering all the man power involved, how is it possible that no one realized Geragos and Miller were working in tandem?

Ironically, the prosecution could have conducted a legal search of Miller’s office. The law governing client – lawyer privilege does allow such a search, but there is a specific procedure that has to be followed. Basically, when a search warrant is issued, the court appoints an independent person who is not associated with either the police or the presecutors to oversee the procedure. If the person who’s premises is being search states that particular materials, such as documents, are privileged, they must be sealed by the independent “special master” and then taken to court for a hearing.

It’s doubtful that Sneddon simply did not know these laws. The question then becomes why were they not followed? Jonna Spilbor speculates that the reason might be that this would spoil Sneddon’s “sneak attack” strategy.

After all, there would be obvious advantage to a surprise search in three separate areas held simultaneously. The defense can’t be everywhere at once in order to observe the proceedings.

So what might happen now that this situation has been brought to light? If the search at Private Investigator Miller’s office resulted in materials that the prosecution could use, the judge has the right to declare that they were illegally seized. Any materials coming from the office could be judged inadmissible as “fruit of the poisonous tree.” But Spilbor feels that more should be done.

Simply suppressing evidence is not enough, according to Spilbor. There’s a difference between zealous prosecution and prosecutorial misconduct and many argue that Sneddon has crossed over the line. His vendetta against Michael has, once again, caused him to act improperly. Spilbor feels that “only additional sanctions will properly punish and deter.”

Spilbor notes, however, that the system is not exactly set up to mete out justice to those who are supposed to be trusted officers of the court. She notes that imposing fines is an option. And another possibility, although rarely used, would be to recuse the offender or even the entire District Attorney’s office.

This is a viable response if the court is convinced that the D.A. employed it’s powers in order to deprive the defendant of a fair trial. And Spilbor feels that, in this case, there is a strong argument that it did.

Finally, there is the remedy that ensures resolution for the accused and a punishment for the prosecution that fails to play by the rules and that is a dismissal of the charges.

Spilbor writes “Here… the evidence of the defendant’s guilt is tenuous at best — and what evidence exists, may be less than credible.”

“In this case, then, dismissal might not be too extreme a sanction. The critical import, however, is that suppression of evidence is not enough when misconduct is as grave as occurred here. “

Source: CNN / MJFC

August 4, 2004

Did Sneddon Violate Gag Order?

As we reported on July 23, 2004, district attorney Tom Sneddon said at a conference in Vancouver, Canada on July 20 that his office kept people from speaking publicly about the case by notifying them they could be called as witnesses. These remarks immediately raised eyebrows among legal experts. They suggested that Sneddon’s remarks were inappropriate as they seemed to indicate that he was using the power of the grand jury to silence people who he did not intend to call as witnesses.

Now on Monday, lawyers for Michael Jackson suggested in court papers that Sneddon had also violated a “gag” order by talking at the conference. Lead attorney Tom Mesereau wrote in the court papers:

“Mr. Jackson respectfully requests the court for clarification as to whether the … statements by Mr. Sneddon violate the protective order.”

Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville has largely barred case participants from discussing it in public without his permission.

Susan Tellem, Tom Sneddon’s spokeswoman, simply said in response to the court filing:

“Mr. Sneddon has said publicly that he has not violated the gag order.”

Source: AP / MJFC

The article that comes next tells us, among other things, that all cases of Sneddon’s (alleged) improprieties in investigation of cases against the accused were either settled out of court by the taxpayers’ money or covered by the insurance:

August 7, 2004

Jackson Case May Be Unraveling: Who’s Bad?

Analysis of the Current Case by K. C. Arceneaux, Ph.D. Ms. K. C. Arceneaux:

There is growing evidence that the child molestation case against Michael Jackson may be unraveling. Jackson‘s song “Bad” may be an accurate description, not of Jackson, but of the DA prosecuting the case.

In the latest in a series of alleged abuses of power in the conduct of the case, Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon has revealed that he notified people that they were potential witnesses in the Jackson case, for the purpose of preventing them from talking to the press.

It was reported by thirty year veteran news-man Robert Matas that Sneddon said, “We sent letters to some people saying we intended to call them as witnesses in order to keep them off TV.” Sneddon’s statements, made at a conference of the National District Attorneys’ Association, in Vancouver, Canada, have drawn heavy criticism. Jackson’s attorneys have called for an investigation as to whether the gag order was violated by Sneddon’s public discussions of the Jackson case.

In at attempt at damage control, Sneddon has said first, that he did not make the statement, and then, that the statement he did not make was taken out of context.

He said, “I would have to be criminally dumb to get up and say that.” Criminal dumbness is an unfortunate description of the DA’s conduct, but it may be accurate. Matas stands by his story, and says that he took notes during the proceedings. Matas said, “It’s definitely accurate. My notes were accurate.” Sneddon also said that he thought the session at which he spoke would not be covered by the press. Matas was the sole reporter present.

After the session at which Sneddon spoke, reporter Matas asked him a follow-up question about the Jackson case, saying, “I went up and asked him what he was most surprised about. He said that he’s been accused of doing this in revenge.” Sneddon continues to deny that this is a revenge case. From its inception, Jackson’s attorneys have alleged that the case against Michael Jackson is the result of a vendetta.

Evidence has been growing steadily that Jackson’ s attorneys are right in their assertions. There are many alleged improprieties and abuses of power in the case. Jackson’s attorneys have filed a motion to dismiss the indictment against Jackson, saying that Sneddon engaged in outrageous conduct and bullied the Grand Jury. Jackson’s attorneys have also said that Sneddon violated attorney/client privilege when he confiscated materials from the office of Bradley Miller, a private investigator employed by then Jackson attorney, Mark Geragos. It has been discovered that Sneddon investigated aspects of the case himself, and conducted surveillance.

Sneddon also met with the mother of the accuser alone in a parking lot; and that, according to Fox News columnist Roger Friedman, Sneddon’s business card was found under the accuser’s mother’s door on Feb. 16th, long before the allegations were made.

Concerning alleged improprieties unrelated to the Jackson case, Burbank civil rights attorney Joe Freeman has called for an investigation of Sneddon, sending letters on May 24, 2004, to the California Attorney General, the Santa Barbara County Grand Jury and the California State Bar Association. Freeman’s letters read, in part, “In my opinion, the matters to be investigated are the possible criminal violations of several felony and misdemeanor statutes, including conspiracy, illegal taping, deceiving a court and a prosecutor illegally assisting the defense of a case.” Freeman is calling for an investigation, and for the appropriate sanctions if wrong-doing is verified.

Russell Halpern, the attorney for the father of Jackson’s accuser, has also called for an investigation of Sneddon, for allegedly violating his right to free speech by sending him a letter stating that he may be called as a witness. Halpern has said that he has no direct knowledge of the Jackson case, and it is unlikely that he will testify.Halpern’s allegations tend to validate Sneddon’s statements made at the District Attorneys’ Convention, that letters were sent for the purpose of shutting people up.

Adding to the evidence that points to abuses of the power of his office, DA Sneddon has been sued many times for alleged civil rights violations and prosecutorial misconduct, including false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, unreasonable search and seizure, and other alleged violations.

These cases were either settled out of court, or resulted in losses in Federal Court for Sneddon and the Santa Barbara DA’s office. The settlements and judgments were paid by county funds and insurance. Currently there are at least two similar cases pending against Sneddon, one by Solvang attorney Gary Dunlap who is suing Sneddon for ten million dollars for malicious prosecution, false arrest, and other alleged civil rights violations, and another by Santa Maria City Attorney Art Montandon, who is suing Sneddon for “discriminatory, abusive, and defamatory” behavior, among other charges.

That the District Attorney may have abused the power of his office does not automatically point to Jackson’s innocence, but the many alleged improprieties in this and other cases are beginning to gain public attention as a pattern emerges. Among the many irregularities in the Jackson case, the fact that Sneddon made contact with the accuser’s mother before allegations were ever made, and the fact that he has pursued the case with a relentless and uncommon zeal, cast doubts on the motivations behind the charges against the pop-star. If vendettas have been business-as-usual with the Santa Barbara DA, then public scrutiny of the case against Jackson may prove to be Sneddon’s undoing. Sneddon’s public relations firm, Tellem Worldwide, has declined to respond to these issues, citing the gag order in the case.

Source: Ms. K. C. Arceneaux, Ph.D., / MJFC

Short information on attorney Art Montandon’s case (so Sneddon was not above harassing even attorneys?):

  • Santa Maria City Attorney Art Montandon filed a claim against the Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s Office, alleging that they falsely accused him of bribing a defense attorney in a case that Sneddon was prosecuting. Montandon had evidence favourable to the defense and prosecutors tried to stop him from interfering by threatening to bring bribery charges against him. A judge later ruled that Sneddon’s office had no right to stop Montandon’s involvement in the case.
  • In a letter, Montandon denied any wrongdoing and lashed out at Sneddon and his employees, saying: “Unlike (Assistant District Attorney Christie) Stanley and current and former members of her office, I have never had my license to practice law suspended by the State Bar, have never been convicted of a crime, and have never been terminated from any attorney job.”
  • At the end of his letter, Montandon said he would reveal in court: “the full and complete story of not only the District Attorney’s unprofessional conduct, but the inappropriate conduct and motives of others working behind the scenes to cause community conflict.”
  • Recently, Montandon requested that the State Bar investigate Sneddon and his office for obstruction of justice.

August, 2004

Deputies Exceeded Bounds Of Warrant

According to Michael Jackson’s employees, one the property manager and the other the chief of security at Neverland Ranch, sheriff deputies searching the ranch entered areas that they did not have court approval to access. According to their testimony, the deputies told them that they would have those areas included into the warrant, but never did. One of the deputies said in later testimony that he never made that promise.

Property manager Joseph Marcus said that he was initially cooperative when the 40 plus sheriff deputies arrived on the scene on November 18, 2003. The search would last 15 hours. “I worked with them all day,” he stated. Marcus said that he studied the warrant to make certain that he restricted the search to those areas specified.

One of the areas not specified on the warrant was Michael’s office. The deputies said that they only wanted to establish that the locations not listed were secure and that no one was on the premises.

“I cooperated and opened the door, but then they decided they wanted to do a search. I objected because it was not in the scope of the search warrant,” Marcus testified.

A deputy told Marcus that he would make a phone call and have the warrant amended to include the areas, but as far as he knew, that call was never made.

The deputy in question, Jeff Klipakis, denied this in later testimony. He also denied that authorities were ever pressured.

Violet Silva, chief of security at Neverland, testified in a similar way. She questioned authorities regarding the reach of the search warrant, pointing out that Michael’s office and video library were not included, although a security office in the same building was listed. She agreed with earlier testimony that there was a discussion regarding having the warrant amended by a judge, but that it was never followed through.

Silva testified:

“I shouted out ‘Did you get that addendum?”

She said that a deputy shrugged and indicated that it had not been obtained.

Source: AP / MJFC

August 25, 2004

Sheriff Makes Statement

In a December 2003 interview with “60 Minutes,” Michael Jackson had stated that he was handled roughly during the arrest proceedings on November 20, 2003. The sheriff’s department denied these accusations, but an investigation was launched.

On August 24, 2004, Santa BarbaraCounty sheriff Anderson held a news conference in this matter. He said:

“After interviewing 163 witnesses and expending in excess of 2,500 investigative hours, the California Bureau of Investigation determined that Mr. Jackson was not injured at the hands of Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department personnel.”

Last week, Thomas Mesereau Jr., Michael’s defense lawyer, had stated in court that his client never made a formal complaint about his treatment or requested an investigation, although he had bruises and received medical treatment.

Source: AP / MJFC

October 6, 2004

Lawyers File Motion To Remove Sneddon From Case

On Monday, Michael Jackson’s lawyers filed a motion to remove the Santa BarbaraCounty district attorney’s office from the child molestation case.

The motion was one of several filed under seal by attorney Robert Sanger. He said sealing the motion was necessary because “the content of the motion includes reference to details in under-seal material including discovery materials, grand jury transcripts, investigative reports, exhibits and identities of witnesses.”

The reasons for the motion were kept secret. However, Michael’s lawyers have said in the past that DA Tom Sneddon had a personal vendetta against the entertainer after failing to get charges filed against him in a 1993 allegation.

Motions to remove a DA from a case often are based on claims of personal involvement and conflict of interest. According to criminal defense attorney Steve Cron lawyers often claim in such motions that the chief prosecutor is so personally embroiled in the case that he can’t make fair and dispassionate decisions:

“The odds of being successful are very slim. It would be highly unusual for a judge to take the whole district attorney’s office off a case.”

Loyola University Law Professor Laurie Levenson said that if the motion was granted and upheld on appeal, the state attorney general’s office would have to take over the prosecution:

“This was a natural motion to file. Even if the chances of success are not great, it’s worth taking a stab at it.”

Source: AP / MJFC


January 7, 2005

Roger Friedman: A Blueprint For The Case Against [Jackson]?

My sources tell me that Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon used his 1993 case against Michael Jackson as a blueprint for the current one.

In fact, in legal papers summarized on The, it appears that some of the actual wording from the ’93 case worked its way into the latest one.

Sneddon, my sources say, based most of his complaint against Jackson last winter on the ’93 case, using it as a comparison and a foundation until he could dig up more current evidence.

Interestingly, testimony ascribed to the mother of the boy — we’ll call her Janet X — in the new case sounds exactly like similar complaints from the parents in the ’93 case.

According to The Smoking Gun: “The boy’s mother said that, during 2001, she complained to Jackson about the length of his telephone chats with her son — and that Jackson was upset with her criticism. Asked by investigators about her recollections of those calls, she said that her son mentioned things that struck her as ‘peculiar.’ For instance, Jackson’s favorite color was the same as her son’s favorite color. And ‘whatever [her son] liked, Michael liked as well.'”

Jackson‘s defense attorneys may be able to dredge up almost the exact wording from articles and books about the boy in the 1993 case. They could point out that Janet X and her military boyfriend, now her husband, Jay Jackson (no relation to Michael’s family), could have studied those stories and statements by the parents of the first boy.

Similar anecdotes, for example, can be found in “All That Glitters,” the self-published book by the first boy’s uncle Ray Chandler. Stories that are themselves re-lived from previous incarnations.

The Smoking Gun people have done an incredible job of piecing together affidavits, warrants and testimony previously unavailable or redacted in the latest case. But even their writers seem incredulous about some things offered by Jackson’s teen accuser and his brother, who is a year younger.

For example, the brothers claimed to officials the reason why they couldn’t pinpoint any dates or times was because “there are no clocks or calendars at Neverland. It’s a like a sealed Las Vegas casino.”

In fact, The Smoking Gun writers point out that there’s a huge outdoor clock right in the middle of the estate. My own sources laughed when I read them this part of the boys’ accusations.

“There are clocks everywhere, everyone has watches and there are calendars in the offices. There’s a big clock in the kitchen” where the accusing boy and his brother gave their famous TV interviews to Martin Bashir, a source said.

There’s more, but much more, and that’s what’s going to prove interesting as the case moves ahead now to trial: whether this is all the material the prosecution has, and if it can hold up to scrutiny in court.

Source: FoxNews; Fox411 Roger Friedman by special permission / MJFC

January 12, 2005

FYI: Prosecutors Seek To Admit “Prior Bad Acts”

Prosecutors in the Michael Jackson case are expected to argue that evidence of “prior bad acts” by Michael Jackson should be admitted as evidence.

On Wednesday, January 12, 2005, an “1108 hearing” will be held for this purpose. An “1108 Hearing” refers to section 1108 of the California penal code, amended in 1995, that allows evidence of prior bad acts to be admissible in sexual molestation trials. This is to demonstrate possible patterns of behavior and/or the defendant’s propensity to commit the same acts again.

An example of evidence that would fall into this category would be the psychiatrist report from Jackson’s first accuser in 1993.

Courtroom observers believe it is likely that such evidence will be permitted.

Source: Court TV / MJFC


January 13, 2005

FYI: Graphic Details Surface In Michael Jackson Case

According to an ABC News report, whose program “Primetime Live” reviewed more than 1,900 pages of grand jury testimony in the Michael Jackson Case, the testimony of Jackson’s accuser contained graphic details of sexual abuse.

The judge has kept these transcripts sealed, along with other documents in the case, to ensure that Michael Jackson receives a fair trial. However, a full report is planned for Thursday’s edition of “Primetime Live”.

Source: AP / MJFC

January 13, 2005


Mr. Jackson’s lead Defense Counsel Thomas A. Mesereau, Jr., releases the following statement in response to the leaking of the Grand Jury testimony:

We strongly object to the “leak” of the Grand Jury testimony in this case. This Grand Jury material had been ordered sealed by Judge Melville in open court.

The witnesses who testified before the Grand Jury were never subjected to cross-examination or impeachment by the defense. By law, no judge or defense lawyer was allowed to be present in the Grand Jury room. Furthermore, the defense had no opportunity to call its own witnesses to refute or criticize this one-sided proceeding.

“This case will be won in the courtroom and not through “leaks” in the media. When he has his day in court, Michael Jackson will be acquitted and vindicated.

Source: MJJSource / MJFC

January 14, 2005

Friedman: […] District Attorney Upsets Jersey Family

There was yet another leak from Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon’s office in the Michael Jackson case yesterday. This time, it was grand jury testimony from the now-almost 15-year-old boy who’s accusing the pop singer of molestation.

Isn’t there a gag order in this case? Can’t Sneddon be sanctioned by Judge Rodney Melville? And why hasn’t he been already?

The testimony given by the boy is about Jackson serving wine to minors in his wine cellar.

I can tell you now, through my exclusive sources, this account will be refuted if it makes it to the stand. That’s because Sneddon takes on Jackson’s most ardent supporters and surrogate family, the Cascios of Franklin Lakes, N.J.

Curiously, even though Sneddon leaked this information yesterday, he has not subpoenaed any of the Cascios, including Frank Tyson. And the Cascios, I am told, are furious that he involved their minor children in a publicity scheme to promote the prosecution’s case.

Source: FoxNews; Fox411 Roger Friedman by special permission / MJFC

January 16, 2005

FYI: Diane Diamond To Release Book?

According to the New York Post, Court TV reporter Diane Dimond is planning to release a book based on the Michael Jackson child molestation case. William Morris is shopping the book and the proposal just landed on publishers’ desks.

No additional details on the book have been provided.

MJFC has also learned that Diane Diamond signed another deal with ‘TODAY’ to be an analyst on the show during the trial.

Source: NY Post / MJFC

January 20, 2005

Judge Lets Jackson Respond To Transcripts

Judge Melville has given Michael Jackson permission to make a televised statement responding to leaks of potentially damaging grand jury testimony given by his teen-age boy accuser, which had been leaked to ABC News last week.

A Fox News spokesperson confirmed that an interview with Fox News’ Geraldo Rivera has been taped and that Jackson read a statement approved by Judge Melville in response to the leaked transcripts.

Judge Melville has occasionally allowed Michael Jackson to issue brief statements that were approved in advance. But the court-sanctioned statement Michael Jackson gave Rivera would mark the first time the judge has permitted the entertainer to go on national television to comment on the case.

Grand jury transcripts normally are made public in California 10 days after they’re received by a defendant. The judge, however, has kept the Jackson transcripts sealed, along with most other documents in the case.

The leaked grand jury transcripts were called a “one sided proceeding” by Michael’s attorney, Thomas Mesereau Jr. “The witnesses who testified before the grand jury were never subjected to cross examination or impeachment by the defense” he said.

Source: FoxNews/ MJFC

January 25, 2005

Sheriff’s Investigators Deny Leaks

An investigation has been started to discover who is the source of the recent leaks to the media in the case against Michael Jackson.

Through a posting on the sheriff’s web site on Monday, it has been said that the information that was leaked was covered by the gag order issued in the case.

“We consider the release of these materials to be a violation of the law” the statement reads. It goes on to say that they realize that some media have alleged that the sheriff’s department are responsible, to which they strongly deny.

The leaks come, in part, as a graphic description of the alleged molestation given under testimony. Those quotes come from ABC News, who have not revealed how it received more than 1,900 pages of grand jury testimony.

Source: NBC / AP / MJFC

January 26, 2005

Sheriff’s Department Press Release

Sheriff Anderson / D.A. Sneddon Response to Alleged Leaks – Jackson Case

Recently there has been a noticeable increase in the release to the public of highly confidential transcripts, investigative reports, and documents about the Michael Jackson case. These materials are squarely covered by Judge Melville’s Protective Order. We consider the release of these materials to be a violation of the law. Some media commentators have alleged that we are responsible for these leaks. We are not. These accusations are irresponsible, unfounded and untrue.

We are actively investigating this matter. In the meantime, if anybody has any information about who or under what circumstances these materials were released, please contact the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department, Detective Bureau at (805) 681-4150. Any individual wishing to provide written information should do so by registered receipt so full accountability for any information provided can be achieved.

Source: Santa BarbaraCounty Sheriff’s Department / MJFC

January 30, 2005

Michael Jackson Releases Statement

Earlier today, Michael Jackson released a video statement, the contents of which were approved by Judge Melville. The statement was in response to the leaked grand jury transcript. The statement is as follows:

“In the last few weeks, a large amount of ugly, malicious information has been released into the media about me. Apparently, this information was leaked through transcripts in a grand jury proceeding where neither my lawyers or I ever appeared. This information is disgusting and false. Years ago, I allowed a family to visit and spend some time at Neverland. Neverland is my home. I allowed this family into my home because they told that their son was ill with cancer and needed my help. Through the years I have helped thousands of children who are ill or in distress. These events have caused a nightmare for my children, my family and me. I never intend to place myself in so vulnerable a position ever again. I love my community and have great faith in our justice system. Please keep an open mind and let me have my day in court. I deserve a fair trial like every other American citizen. I will be acquitted and vindicated when the truth is told. Thank you.”

Source: ABC news / MJJSource / MJFC


February 3, 2005

Has Key Evidence Been Compromised?

In a ‘Celebrity Justice’ piece, they report that some crucial evidence may have become compromised. As you may remember, during the 2003 raid on Neverland Ranch, it was reported that authorities seized “adult material” that included one magazine that reportedly had the fingerprints of both Michael Jackson and his accuser on the same page. Judge Melville ruled this evidence could be submitted. However, there might be a big problem with this evidence. According to “Celebrity Justice” producer and attorney Harvey Levin, the evidence might be contaminated.

“Based on what we’ve seen, this evidence may have been compromised.” Levin reports. “We know when this accuser testified before the grand jury he handled these magazines. At one point, one of the grand jurors asked, ‘Have these magazines been fingerprinted?’ And the sheriff said, ‘No.’ That leaves the door wide open for the defense to argue, ‘How do you know when the boy touched the magazine? At Neverland? Or before the grand jury?'”

Source: MJFC / Celebrity Justice / Special thanks to Amy.

February 6, 2005

Prosecutors Aim To Protect Accuser’s Mother

Prosecutors are hoping to protect the mother of his accuser in the upcoming trial.

Santa Barbara County District Attorney Thomas Sneddon has asked Judge Rodney Melville to “limit introduction of evidence of prior litigation” by the family. In other words, they have asked that the court suppress evidence of prior lawsuits filed by the mother. They have also requested that the defense refrain from bringing details of the mother’s personal life into the courtroom, including her use of “psychiatric medication” and “any alleged extramarital conduct.” 

Court documents state that the mother of the child obtained a substantial settlement from a department store, totaling more than $100,000, after claiming that the security guards assaulted her and her two sons. In May, the family filed suit against Los Angeles child welfare officials over a leak of a confidential memo that stated the investigation against Michael Jackson did not produce any evidence that he sexually assaulted the accuser.

Michael Jackson’s defense team has repeatedly referred to the mother as a greedy opportunist and liar who has a history of filing lawsuits strictly for financial gain. They have made it known from the beginning that they intend to attack the credibility of both the mother and her children.

A hearing for this matter has been set for February 10, 2005.

Source: MJFC / AP

February 11, 2005

Is There A ‘Witch Hunt’ For Michael Jackson?

In 1993, during the initial child molestation investigation against Michael Jackson, Santa Barbara authorities called in several potential witnesses to question them about their relationship with Jackson. Among them, was former child actor, Corey Feldman.

Feldman was questioned by Santa Barbara Sheriff Sgt. Deborah Linden, the same investigator who wrote the affidavit in 1993 to get court approval for photographs of Michael Jackson’s private parts. During questioning, Feldman repeatedly told her that nothing inappropriate had ever occured between him and Jackson, but the questioning continued for over an hour. Some excerpts are as follows:

Sgt. Linden: “Is it your belief in him and your love for him getting in the way of you telling us things?”

Feldman: “Everything I’ve told you is true and there’s….I mean, nothing happened.”

Sgt. Linden: “I’m so concerned that if something happened you’re not going to tell us because it would be so hard to tell us”

Feldman: “No”

Feldman: “You don’t know how many times I have racked my brain and gone, ‘Is there someting I’m forgetting? Is there something that, you know, I’m thinking didn’t happen but it really did?’ If I could find something I would love to be able to tell you, but nothing happened.”

Celebrity Justice spoke with Beverly Hills defense attorney Jay Jaffe. After hearing the tape, Jaffe stated that although Feldman repeated his statements and sounds believable on the tape, the investigators ‘want to hear what they want to hear and not what the witness wants to say’.

He added that the investigators did not break the law, but their aggressive questioning could support the claim that Tom Sneddon has been on a ‘witch hunt’ for Michael Jackson.

Jaffe also added,

“I think the defense would try to show that the investigators on this case are, in fact, not objective in their fact-finding process. What they have is an agenda and they’re looking for something against Michael Jackson, even in the face of a claim that nothing really existed.”

Source: MJFC / Celebrity Justice

February 15, 2005

Michael Jackson In Hospital

Michael Jackson fell ill on the way to his court appearance today. He has been rushed to the MarianCenter in Santa Maria. Judge Rodney Melville told prospective jurors that Jackson had the flu and that jury selection would resume February 22, 2005.


Mr. Jackson has been evaluated in our Emergency Department for a flu-like illness with vomiting.  He is undergoing testing and is being treated with intravenous fluids.  He is in stable condition and we expect a full recovery. He will be released when we feel he’s well enough.

Source: MJFC / AP

February 17, 2005

FYI: Indictment Transcripts Revealed

The controversial website, The Smoking Gun, has released the complete Grand Jury Indictment against Michael Jackson on charges of molestation and conspiracy. The 1,903 page document includes more than a dozen testimonies including those from his accuser, the accuser’s family, a former Neverland employee, and others involved in the case.

In a separate story, “Search and Destroy?”, the Smoking Gun reveals evidence seized from former Jackson associate P.I. Bradley Miller. Prosecutors are planning to use this evidence, which includes surveillance videos of the accusing family and recorded phone calls, to corroborate the claim that the family was harassed by Jackson after they left Neverland.

Source: MJFC / Smoking Gun

February 17,  2005

Press Release: Michael Jackson Leaves Hospital

Mr. Michael Jackson has been discharged from the MarianMedicalCenter in Santa Maria, California to continue his recovery at home. Mr. Jackson would like to thank the doctors and staff at the MarianMedicalCenter for the care they extended to him.

Source: MJFC / Raymone K. Bain

February 23,  2005

Michael Was Cleared By Sheriff’s Department

Celebrity Justice today announced a “stunning development” in the Michael Jackson case.  They learned that the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s department actually closed its case against Michael, clearing him, only months before then arresting him on molestation charges.

On Feb. 20, 2003 at 10:00 a.m., three social workers with the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services went to the apartment of Michael’s accuser and interviewed him, his brother, sister and mother.  Celebrity Justice sources said that all members of the family said that Michael did not molest the boy and stated that in no uncertain terms.

The three workers returned to their office.  At 3:00 p.m. on the same day, they received an unusual phone call.  A lieutenant from the Santa Barbara County Sheriffs Department was calling to say “do not interview the boy or his family.”  The source said this puzzled the social workers.  They had “never gotten a request like that before.”

The social workers forwarded their information to the Sheriffs Department.  A detective investigated and in April of 2003 closed the case against Michael, effectively clearing him.  Celebrity Justice has found that detective is no longer employed at the sheriff’s department.

Prosecution sources told Celebrity Justice that they have evidence that shows that the mother was coerced and threatened by Michael’s employees, even though they admit no one from Children’s Services saw this.  But according to Celebrity Justice sources, the social workers said that there was absolutely no sign of duress.  The workers said that they have “done this for a long time” and it was clear to them that this family was speaking freely and without threat.

Source: MJFC / Celebrity Justice

February 26, 2005

New Possible Witness To Be Deposed

ABC News is reporting that a witness has emerged in the Michael Jackson case who will be deposed by both the prosecution and defense on Saturday February 26, 2005 inLos Angeles. This witness is a paralegal who worked for the attorney representing the accuser’s mother when their family sued J.C. Penney and won a $137,500 settlement in October 2001.

It is reported that the paralegal has claimed to the Jackson defense team that Jane Doe, as the accuser’s mother is known in court papers to protect her son’s anonymity, lied under oath and fabricated the charges against J.C. Penney security guards.The paralegal has alleged to the defense team that the bruises Jane Doe said were inflicted by the guards were actually perpetrated by someone else and that she coached her son to lie during his deposition against J.C. Penney.
Source: MJFC / ABC News


Yes, it is coming as a big surprise to all of us that all of the above was only a preliminary stage to the trial and the court proceedings are starting only just now. All of us were under the impression that the trial has been going on for a long time!

This isn’t a mere illusion on our part – it is a reflection of the reality Michael Jackson was living in. The public trial of Michael Jackson started very long ago, at the time the first allegations against him were made, in the year 1993. Ever since then the media and public campaign against him never ceased and actually turned into a never-ending court of public opinion in which Michael Jackson was forced to lose loooooong before the actual February-June 2005 trial even started.

February 26, 2005

Mesereau Previews Michael’s Defense Team’s Strategy

Thomas Mesereau Jr., Michael’s lead attorney, presented Michael’s defense team’s strategy by alleging that Michael’s accuser’s mother (1) gave contradictory testimony in court, (2) hid money in order to collect welfare, and (3) underwent cosmetic surgery with money her cancer patient son had been given by other celebrities.

Mesereau’s presentation occurred as he sought to admit evidence relating to the credibility of the family of Michael’s accuser. Mesereau sought to admit as evidence the lawsuit which the mother of Michael’s accuser filed against J.C. Penney—in which she claimed that security guards beat her family, held them against their will, and even groped her.

Mesereau told the court that the day after that alleged beating, the accuser’s mother returned to J.C. Penney and hugged employees. Then, she filed that lawsuit and even later amended it to include the groping claim. Mesereau also stated that the accuser’s mother testified in that case that her husband had never hit her. However, during their divorce she later alleged that he had beaten the family for years. Mesereau also noted that she had accused her ex-husband of inappropriately touching her daughter.

Her lawsuit against J.C. Penney resulted in a $150,000 settlement. Mesereau claims that the accuser’s mother then hid assets from that settlement in order to receive welfare from Los Angeles County. Mesereau also claims that the accuser’s mother had the accuser ask other celebrities, such as Jay Leno, for money.

Mesereau claims that the accuser’s mother even spent some of that money on cosmetic surgery for herself. Mesereau said, “She got a breast enhancement and a tummy tuck and then told Mr. Jackson and all these people that she was destitute.” Mesereau argued that the accuser’s mother’s pattern of behavior is ultimately indicative of fraud.

Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville agreed to allow the jurors to hear about the lawsuit against J.C. Penney. In response to Mesereau’s presentation, Judge Melville said, “You almost laid out your whole case, not for me, but for other people.”

The prosecution alleges that Michael molested his accuser after the airing of the documentary entitled “Living with Michael Jackson.” Prosecutor Ron Zonen said, “The question is whether a man who admits to sleeping with children was sleeping with this child, and what he did with this child. That’s what this case is about.”

Judge Melville ruled that the prosecution may not show the jury the entire “Living with Michael Jackson” documentary, but may only use a clip. So, the prosecution plans to use a two-minute long clip. The prosecution’s first witness is expected to be that documentary’s maker, Martin Bashir.
Source: MJFC / AP

CNN called the opening statement of Prosecutor Sneddon “disorganized” and “hard to follow”. No wonder why – Sneddon faced a huge difficulty of explaining why the alleged molestation allegedly took place  after the police and whole world started watching Neverland. And since this fact is impossible to explain, Sneddon decided not to explain it at all, which is why he “didn’t address the key issues in the case” and even “tried to sort of get around them”:

March 3,  2005

CNN Reviews Opening Statements

CNN’s senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin gave an interesting review of the Monday opening statements of both the prosecution and the defense:

CNN anchor Wolf BLITZER: What did we learn today? How did it go, Jeff?

TOOBIN: To get to the bottom line, Wolf, this was, in a high-profile case, one of the worst opening statements I’ve ever heard by a prosecutor and one of the best opening statements I’ve ever heard by a defense lawyer. It was really a striking contrast.

BLITZER: What was so bad about what the prosecutor had to say?

TOOBIN: Well, it was disorganized. It was hard to follow. It was boring. And it didn’t really address many of the key issues in the case that were raised immediately and very effectively by Tom Mesereau, the defense attorney.

BLITZER: So he was very good in his defense, in his opening statement. Based on what you learned today — and you’re a close observer of this kind of legal proceeding — how strong of a case does the prosecution seem to have?

TOOBIN: Wolf, a lot less strong than I thought this morning. I mean, this case very much hangs and rises and falls with the testimony of the accuser and the accuser’s family.

Toobin also commented on the fact that, according to the prosecution, the abuse took place after the actual investigation started – following the airing of Martin Bashi’s documentary:

TOOBIN: What the defense pointed out, which the prosecution tried to sort of get around, was that the abuse in this case was alleged to have taken place after all these investigations started, that the two allegations of abuse only took place after all these people were investigating — which is peculiar, to say the least.

Source: MJFC / CNN

March 03, 2005

Mesereau Continues With Opening Statements

Day two in the Michael Jackson child molestation case is underway.

The day began with the conclusion of Defense Attorney Thomas Mesereau’s opening statements. Mesereau began his opening statements yesterday following District Attorney Thomas Sneddon’s three hour long opening statements for the prosecution.

In his opening statements, Mesereau stated that it was an honor to represent Michael Jackson. He laid out the foundation of his case by informing the jurors that he intends to prove that the mother of Jackson’s accuser is an opportunist who has used her son’s illness to extort money from Michael Jackson and a list of other celebrities and has manipulated her son into fabricating stories. Mesereau claims she is using the criminal charges to build a civil case against Michael Jackson in order to get a financial payoff. He stated that the woman’s attorney, Larry Feldman, who also represented the boy accusing Jackson in 1993, had lunch with CNN Host Larry King and informed him that the mother “wants money”. Mesereau also mentioned a number of the family’s previous incidents, including the now infamous “JCPenny” case, in which the mother made false allegations of sex abuse to receive large sums of money. He then informed jurors that he will prove that the family was not being held against their will, as they have claimed.

Another important issue brought up my Mesereau, that was not brought up in the prosecution’s opening statements, is the timeline of the alleged incidents. Mesereau informed the jury that the alleged incidents are said to have occured during the time Jackson was under investigation because of the “Living With Michael Jackson” documentary, which would be “absurd”.

Mesereau also made several statements in regards to the behavior of the accuser and his brother. He said the children, at times, seemed “out of control” and would read Jackson’s adult magazines and break into his alchohol without the singer’s permission. He added that Jackson had caught the accuser with an adult magazine and took it away and locked it in a briefcase, explaining why both fingerprints were found on the item [VMJ: later on it was found that the evidence was simply falsified]

“Mr. Jackson will freely admit that he does read girlie magazines from time to time. He absolutely does not show them to children.”

He stated that the boys, while spending time at Neverland, memorized security codes and codes used to start the amusement rides. The security codes allowed the boys access to Jackson’s room when the singer was not present.

At one point, according to Mesereau, the boys were found throwing things at people and animals, from the top of Jackson’s Ferris Wheel, which they had started. They were also found intoxicated with bottles of alcohol in their possession when Jackson was not around.

Mesereau is expected to conclude his opening statements by mid-day, or sooner. At that time, the prosecution will call it’s first witness.

Source: MJFC / AP / Court TV

March 03, 2005

Accuser’s DNA Not Found

Michael Jackson Defense Attorney Thomas Mesereau informed jurors that authorities investigating allegations of child molestation against Jackson did not find his accusers DNA during their search of his bedroom at the Neverland Valley Ranch.

Mesereau added that the lack of such evidence supports that the current claims are false.

Source: MJFC / AP

March 03, 2005

Friedman: Mystery Witness: Accuser’s Family Planned It

A close friend of the family involved in the Michael Jackson child-molestation case has a startling statement ready for when she’s called by the defense.

“She will say that the daughter told her they would own Michael Jackson’s home.”

So says H. Russell Halpern, attorney for the father of the children involved in the case.

Halpern says that at some point before all of this started, the couple in question’s oldest child, their daughter, went to stay with a family friend after she fought with her mother.

She told the friend that they were going to wind up with Michael Jackson’s house,” Halpern told me. “The daughter also claimed that her mother beat her. Later, she recanted and said it was her father.”

The daughter, now 18, moved away from her mother and brothers and in with her maternal grandparents in 2003, just as the Jackson scandal broke. My sources have long argued that she did so because she disagreed with the mother’s actions in the case.

Yesterday, in his opening remarks, Jackson’s defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. depicted the mother as a grifter on the make who bilked lots of people, especially celebrities, out of money, using her kids’ illnesses and apparent poverty as bait.

So Mesereau has a mound of evidence that will show the mother did more than, as lead prosecutor Tom Sneddon said yesterday in his own opening remarks, “make a lot of mistakes.”

Mesereau will set out to prove, if he can get all his ducks in a row, that the only “mistakes” made by the mother was leaving a bread-crumb trail of lies right to her own front door.

Source: MJFC / FoxNews; Roger Friedman by special permission

March 03, 2005

Jurors View Michael Jackson’s Bedroom

Early this morning, jurors in the Michael Jackson trial were given a tour of the star’s master bedroom suite courtesy of a DVD filmed by a Santa Barbara County Sherriff’s Department photographer, Albert Lafferty. Lafferty showed jurors images of the suite because it is the location where the alleged molestation is said to have occured.

While the tape showed a clutter of videos, photos, dolls, figurines, and more, no explicit magazines were seen, although the prosecution claims they were found in the suite.

The footage was taken by Lafferty during the November 2003 raid of the Jackson’s ranch.

Source: MJFC / Contact Music

March 03, 2005

Friedman: Accuser’s Family Set Jackson Up

What I’ve tried to tell you all along about this Michael Jackson prosecution came to light yesterday in court: the D.A. has a bad case. Not just a weak case, but a bad one. No matter what you think Michael Jackson did or didn’t do in the past, this family has set him up.

Granted, I have no idea if he did or didn’t molest the now 15-year-old boy at the center of the case. But I do know that the boy’s mother and her now-husband invented the story of the family’s kidnapping.

Yesterday the 18-year-old sister of the boy broke down on the stand and admitted to defense attorney Thomas Mesereau that she’d lied already in her testimony.

“So you’d lie about certain things and tell the truth about certain things, depending on what you are asked, right?” Mesereau asked the woman. “Yeah,” she replied.

That’s the beginning of the end for the prosecution.

Add that to what I already told you this week about how the mother sold her story to a British tabloid for $4,000, before she and her kids went to Miami and then on to Neverland with Jackson. All of this, of course, was after the airing of the Martin Bashir special on Feb. 6, 2003.

And in that same interview, comedy club owner Jamie Masada claimed that the boy — then 13 — was smart enough to report if anything inappropriate happened between him and Jackson.

A big part of the sister’s testimony this week concerned a video that was shot overnight on Feb.
19-20. The family claimed that they were forced to make the video by Jackson’s associates, who they said wrote a script for them extolling Jackson’s virtues.

…The sister has already said that Jackson’s German manager “wrote a script” for the family to perform.

Again, my insider laughed: “Dieter Wiesner barely speaks English, forget about writing it. Christian Robinson, the cameraman, wrote out some questions to ask the family. Their answers were their own.”

According to my sources, the mother’s boyfriend, an Army major, was present when the filming began. “But he got so bored, he left,” the source said. “He didn’t even stay to take the family home.”

The major didn’t mind that the family would be chauffeured by a Jackson staffer. Apparently he hadn’t gotten the memo that they were being held against their will.

Source: MJFC / Fox News; Fox 411; Roger Friedman used With special permission

March 03, 2005

Accuser’s Family Lived Stylishly

The Associated Press reports that the family of Michael Jackson’s accuser lived pretty stylishly, although they did not have much money themselves. They rode in chauffeured limousines, were whisked across the country in private jets and were treated to spas at luxury resorts. What emerged from the trial’s early stages was a portrait of a family from the wrong side of the tracks who managed to infiltrate the circles of celebrities, including actor Chris Tucker, George Lopez, LA Lakers star Kobe Bryant.

But the most generous celebrity seems to have been Michael Jackson. The mother herself said on a video shown in court:

“We were broken and Michael fixed us.” “God worked through Michael to help us. When we saw no hope, Michael said there was hope.’

We weren’t the right Zip code, the right race. All the doors closed on us and Michael said ‘My doors are open.”

Source: MJFC / AP


The article below says that some vital video materials were missing in Michael Jackson’s own video, but in contrast to what one might think we learn that the cuts made were positive to Michael and were found missing after the video had been seized by the prosecution (or at least I understood it this way).

March 03, 2005

Roger Friedman: Vital Video Tapes May Be Missing

Something’s wrong in the world of Michael Jackson evidence.

It has to do with the 40-minute video, shown to the jury last week, in which the accuser and his family defend Jackson.

My sources say the version the jury saw was incomplete, with 30 to 50 minutes of material missing. They also insist that the original footage was shot on Betamax tape; the jury was shown a DVD.

The entire video was shot overnight on Feb. 19 to 20, 2003 by Jackson’s videographers, Hamid Moslehi and Christian Robinson. They used two cameras and three or four 30-minute tapes. One camera was always kept running as other camera’s tape was being changed, creating a “B-roll” that the jury did not see.

The supposition is either that Moslehi had already removed some tapes before his office was raided by Santa BarbaraCounty investigators, or that the prosecution showed the jury an edited version without explanation.

No mention was made in court of a motion to show an edited video, however.

The missing tapes would have shown more footage of the family, my source says, “fooling around and having a good time.”

This would be in stark contrast to the family’s claim that it was coerced into making statements it didn’t believe.

What’s missing from the original footage, my sources believe, is everything shot between the questions that were asked and lots of “backstage” material, all of which would be positive for the defense. Some of the footage could show the mother’s then-boyfriend, now husband, U.S. Army Major Jay Jackson.

“If they play the rest of the tapes, wherever they are, you’ll see the mother coaching the kids telling them what to say, not the filmmakers telling them. But [defense attorney] Tom Mesereau may not know this,” a source said.

Source: MJFC / Fox News; Roger Friedman used With Special Permission

March 03, 2005

Motion To Dismiss Jackson Trial

On Tuesday, South Bay attorney Carl A. “Tony” Capozzola filed briefs with the state Supreme Court on behalf of Michael Jackson that allege Jackson is the target of an overzealous prosecution. The papers ask for an immediate halt to the trial in Santa Maria.

The briefs claim prosecutor Sneddon and his office did not give the defense adequate time to review tens of thousands of pages of documents in evidence, did not turn over complete witness lists and has wrongly continued a prosecution based on unverifiable information. The involvement of Sneddon in the case is also attacked. Specifically, the papers note that no other district attorneys in the state personally take cases to trial, and add that a prosecutor’s personal interest in the case is grounds to disqualify him or her from the proceedings.

“The public ridicule of Mr. Jackson by calling him ‘Wacko Jacko’ is just one of the instances where his personal involvement has crossed the line,”Capozzola said about an interview Sneddon gave to Court TV in November 2003.

“I would like to see the public opinion be acknowledged in the hope — in the hope — that the district attorney in Santa Barbara will do the right thing and stop this unjustifiable prosecution.”

Capazzola shares photographs of himself with the entertainer taken during a visit on February 13 to the Neverland Ranch. During that visit the star signed a retainer hiring Capozzola to pursue appeals in his malicious prosecution lawsuit against Santa Barbara District Attorney Thomas Sneddon.

What he discovered at Michael Jackson’s home was that Jackson “is a giant kid who wouldn’t hurt a kid.” The father of five added:

“I truly believe that he is a person who loves children, but not in a sexual way. But the world of Michael Jackson is different from our world.
I would not have taken this case if I did not firmly believe in the innocence of Michael Jackson and I have never been more confident that he will be exonerated.”

Legal expert Laurie Levenson said the timing of the filing is no accident and, while the high court is unlikely to act on the request, the maneuver highlights the problems with the prosecution’s case.

“It’s almost impossible to win these motions. But I don’t blame him for trying and it has good PR value.”

Source: MJFC / Daily Breeze


Finally we get a confirmation from the Prosecution side that the accuser was allowed by the police to first look through the adult magazines belonging to Jackson and only after that his fingerprints were tested!

A detective in the case confessed that they had mishandled the key evidence!

March 17, 2005

Police Mishandled Evidence

A detective in Michael Jackson’s case has confessed that police investigating the claims mishandled vital evidence.

The detective, Paul Zelis, played a major role in the raid on Neverland Ranch in 2003.  He told the court yesterday that Gavin Arvizo, Michael’s accuser, was allowed to look through the pornographic magazines that were seized by the police before the items had undergone forensic testing.  That is, before they were dusted for fingerprints.

Gavin and his brother, Star, have already been on the stand, testifying that Michael showed them the pornography.  The defense counters that the two discovered the magazines when Michael was not present.

Source: MJFC / Contact Music

The information about the evidence contaminated by the Prosecution was so shocking that the media tried to sweep it under the rug. However even the simple fact that the adult magazines were so much focused on made the legal experts wonder:

March 21,  2005

Legal Experts Question Showing Of Magazines

The showing of adult magazines and books in the Michael Jackson trial, including commercially available magazines such as ‘Barely Legal’ and ‘Penthouse’, has been questioned by several legal experts. The prosecution intended from the outset to haul the reading materials before jurors, implying that Michael Jackson used the magazines to arouse young boys.

But Jackson is on trial for allegedly molesting a teenage boy, not for his taste in magazines. Laurie Levenson, a former prosecutor and professor at LoyolaUniversityLawSchool, says:

“They want the jury to get the sense of Michael Jackson as a pervert who doesn’t live by the rules and is obsessed with sex. But this could backfire.”

“It sounds like a distraction, but as a trial strategy you can’t keep the jury distracted forever. It may be that stronger points of (District Attorney Tom) Sneddon’s case are yet to come, but it’s always hard to overcome a weak accuser.”

Also jurors might question why a battalion of deputies had to scour Michael Jackson’s enormous library for books that his accuser might never have seen. The accuser and his brother said they saw this type of magazine when they were in Jackson’s bedroom. In one case, they said, they found the publications on their own while poking through Jackson’s belongings. Now, the prosecution is having a hard time showing that Jackson and the boy handled the magazine together – an important premise of the case.

On Friday, the defense noted that only one magazine submitted in court has a single fingerprint each from Jackson and his accuser. And that magazine was shown to the boy on the witness stand during grand jury hearings and was not tested for prints until after the grand jury returned an indictment.

Prosecutors insist the boy did not put his fingerprint on it at the grand jury. But fans of the television show “CSI” – and there are some on the jury – might wonder why the tests were not done earlier.

Additionally the defense has asserted that many of the books were gifts from famous photographers who wanted to set up sessions with Jackson.

Source: MJFC / AP

March 24,  2005

Thursday’s Testimonies On Forensic Methods

On Thursday, the main subject was fingerprints in the Michael Jackson trial. A Secret Service forensic scientist testified about fingerprinting techniques. This was to lay the groundwork for the prosecution’s testimony about prints found on adult magazines seized at Neverland.

The expert, Antonio Canto, did not test any of the magazines himself, but was only there to explain the fingerprinting methods commonly used.

The prosecution says that one magazine has both Michael’s and the accuser’s fingerprints on it.  The defense contends that the magazine was not fingerprinted until after a grand jury hearing in March – April of 2004 when the accuser had the opportunity to handle the magazine. Defense attorney Thomas Mesereau also contends that Michael once discovered the boy looking at the magazines and took them away.  This would explain why the two sets of prints were left on the magazine.

Robert Sanger used cross – examination of the prosecution’s forensic evidence to undermine the reliability of fingerprint evidence, first suggesting that it could degrade over time. One magazine supposedly has a single fingerprint from the accuser and one of Michael’s. The defense notes that the accuser was given the magazine to examine during a grand jury procedure prior to it being subjected to fingerprinting. Sanger asked Cantu if he thought that the analysis would be done after the materials had already been given to the grand jury.  Cantu responded:

“You would expect to do that analysis first.”

“Were you aware that the fingerprint analysis in this case was not done until after the evidence was seized?” Sanger asked.

“I was not aware of that” Cantu replied.

He then acknowledged that the test should have been done immediatly. While Santa Barbara County Deputy District Attorney Gordon Auchincloss tried to say that it really would not make much of a difference just when the materials were analyzed as long as it was properly bagged and preserved, Cantu said that chemically, the residue from fingerprints can change over time, raising the issue of degredation.

The back and forth questioning continued when sheriff’s technician, Lisa Memman, was called by the prosecution to discuss methods of examining evidence from Neverland. She attempted to offer an explanation of why fingerprint analysis was not immediately done.

“We wanted to preserve DNA evidence. Processing for fingerprints could destroy DNA. So you do the testing for DNA before you do the fingerpring testing.”

The jury has already heard to no DNA from either the boy or his family was found.

Source: MJFC / AP


March 21, 2005

Prosecution To Wrap Up Soon?

Prosecutors could finish presenting evidence about accusations of sexual molestation as early as this week. However, they are still waiting to see if evidence of alleged prior offenses also can be included.

Still expected to testify are investigators who searched the Neverland Valley Ranch on November 18, 2003, and Stan Katz, a psychologist who interviewed the accuser and his brother about the alleged molestation.

What comes after these testimonies will depend on whether Judge Rodney S. Melville will allow prosecutors to present evidence of alleged past molestations by Jackson. The judge announced a decision in this matter for March 28, 2005. If the judge agrees to admit the evidence, the prosecution may begin presenting additional witnesses immediately after the ruling.

After presenting evidence on the molestation, prosecutors will focus on the next stage of their case: the allegation that Jackson held the accuser’s family captive.

Source: MJFC / Fox News

March 22, 2005

Michael Jackson Press Release

March 21, 2005

Washington, D.C. .. In response to numerous media inquiries, Mr. Michael Jackson continues to suffer from excruciating back pain. He has not felt much relief in his back since visiting the Emergency unit at the Santa Ynez Cottage Hospital on Thursday, March 10, 2005.

Again this morning, Mr. Jackson’s back spasms were becoming intolerable. He was taken again to the Santa Ynez Cottage Hospital on his way to court by his Chief of Security, Kerry Anderson. The on-site attending Emergency physician, Dr. Bert Weiner, who treated Mr. Jackson during his March 10, 2005 visit, also attended to him this morning. Dr. Weiner indicates that tests were taken of Mr. Jackson’s back, and also indicated that he accompanied Mr. Jackson to court because he could best explain the nature of the problem that Mr. Jackson is experiencing.

Due to patient confidentiality, Dr. Weiner will not be releasing any information regarding Mr. Jackson’s test results. When asked how he felt upon leaving court, Mr. Jackson responded,

“I am hurting very much. I’m in pain…in pain.”

Mr. Jackson also acknowledged that his doctor had prescribed medication for his back pain. There is no “quick fix” for back pain, but it is Mr. Jackson’s hope that he will begin experiencing some relief soon.

Source: MJFC / Raymone K. Bain, Michael Jackson’s official spokesperson

March 24, 2005

Key Prosecution Witness Jailed

One of the prosecution’s most important witnesses has been jailed in Las Vegas on charges of burglary, robbery and first-degree kidnapping, all with a deadly weapon. Chris Carter (25) was arrested on February 19, 2005 and is being held at the Clark County Detentio nCenter in Las Vegas.

His arrest would not prevent him from testifying at the trial, and authorities in Santa Barbara County, California, still want him to testify. He has been approved for transport to Santa Barbara for an April appearance. However, a source close to the case says the defense could use the arrest to try to put his integrity in question.

Carter had been Michael Jackson’s personal bodyguard during the time the alleged molestation took place and has been cooperating with the prosecution. His testimony is expected to provide more corroboration of the accuser’s story than that of any witness aside from a family member. He is the only witness independent of the accuser’s family who has put Michael Jackson and the boy drinking together.

According to grand jury transcripts, Carter said he saw Michael Jackson and his accuser drinking alcohol on a flight from Miami to Santa Barbara after the Bashir documentary. He said they drank alcohol out of soda cans.

“Mr. Jackson was drinking, and then [the accuser] had the Coke can or the Pepsi can, it was a can, with drink — with alcohol in it. I seen [the accuser], he had it in his hand. And then Michael had it and was drinking.”

Carter said he knew there was alcohol in the soda cans because he saw the flight attendant add alcohol to them.

“It was just clear liquor, like a vodka looking. It’s small ones they have on the plane.”

In his grand jury testimony, Carter also said he saw children drinking at Jackson’s Neverland ranch, that he saw the accuser drunk and that the accuser said Jackson was “OK” with it, and that the accuser and his younger brother frequently slept in the Michael Jackson’s room. Carter also said that Jackson called alcohol “‘Jesus juice” in front of children.

“He said, ‘Jesus drank wine, so we shall be more like Jesus.”

In his grand jury testimony, Carter gave an account of discovering the accuser drunk on the grounds of the Neverland estate.

“On one occasion, I seen [the accuser] stumbling around. And I had walked up to him, ‘Hey, man, what’s going on?’

“We had a little talk, and I told him, you know, ‘You shouldn’t be drinking,’ and everything. And he said, ‘Well, I can handle it. Michael said if I can handle it, it’s OK. It’s part of being a man.'”

In separate questioning before the grand jury, Carter said the accuser admitted to him that he had been drunk.

“He was pretty bad.”

Carter also told of other children drinking at Neverland. “Some of the kids would go off and grab the key to the wine cellar, run down and pull whatever they wanted out, and then come and run around with Mr. Jackson drinking.”

Asked where the accuser and his brother slept when they were visiting Neverland, Carter replied:

“Mainly they would sleep with Mr. Jackson in Mr. Jackson’s room.”

Carter’s testimony is considered important because he spent a lot of time in the presence of Michael Jackson, including occasions when the entertainer was with the accuser and his family.

Source: MJFC / ABC News


Though the story of LeMarques (whose asking price for their fantasy about Macaulay Culkin depended on how salacious they would make their story)  is well known to many of us, I somewhat belatedly noticed that  the person who had LeMarques’ tapes passed them over to Gil Garcetti, the LA District Attorney, in 1993.

Since Gil Garcetti was joined by Tom Sneddon in his investigation of the 1993 case I doubt it very much that Tom Sneddon would not have known about it, and this makes me wonder how he could subpoena both LeMarques and Macaulay Culking as prosecution witnesses at the 2005 trial? From the earlier tapes he must have known full well that the story told by LeMarques was a complete lie! 

In this connection please make sure that the following statement does not escape your attention “Barresi wound up turning over his taped interviews with the couple to then-Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti. They are now in the hands of Jackson’s prosecutor”.

We also get acquainted with a new character in the long saga of Michael Jackson’s harassment – a woman called Taylea Shea whose bunch of lies about Jackson and others was readily published by tabloids at the time.

March 25, 2005

Roger Friedman – Was There an Unknown (Jackson) Accuser?

Was there a kid who made a deal with Michael Jackson before his first accuser settled with the pop star for $20 million in 1993?

Tape recordings left behind by a deceased National Enquirer reporter would suggest there was, but on closer inspection, it turns out there probably wasn’t.

In fact, the tapes show that there was a zealous push on the part of the supermarket tabloids 12 years ago to find any boy who might have been abused by Jackson.

This will be a disappointment for Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon, who has not been able to produce any other Jackson “victims” so far.

Sneddon is prepared to subpoena every ex-Jackson employee and cop who was involved in the first case, even those who’ve since sold their stories to the tabloids. The result could be a veritable list of the supermarket tabs’ sources and leakers from a dozen years ago.

Like a tabloid Richard Nixon, National Enquirer and Globe writer Jim Mitteager taped most of his conversations about Jackson when he covered the story in 1993-94.

Mitteager, who was later dismissed from the papers for sexual harassment, talks to his sources and his editors very candidly.

The result is a revealing look at how the tabs salivated to get the most salacious story about Jackson, often disregarding the exact truth for kernels of plausible items that could be inflated into screaming front-page headlines.

Mitteager bequeathed the tapes to Paul Barresi, a self-styled investigator, trusting him to “do the right thing with them.” Barresi thought the tapes had value, but could not have guessed what historical importance they would acquire.

Mitteager inadvertently kept a record of much of what is in the news today concerning Hollywood’s underbelly. The tapes include anecdotes about many celebrities and lawyers, as well as incarcerated private eye Anthony Pellicano, who once worked for Jackson.

Barresi has a long history of involvement with the Jackson story.

In 1993, the pop star’s former cook and housekeeper, Philip and Stella LeMarque, asked him to sell their story about sexual abuse at Neverland.

The LeMarques, who were slight acquaintances of Barresi, had only worked at Neverland for about 10 months and left after the first molestation case broke in 1993.

Like many disgruntled former Jackson employees, the LeMarques are now on Sneddon’s witness list. The Quindoys, another couple who also sold their story, are ready to testify as well.

But Barresi realized early on that the LeMarques were probably not telling the truth.

“I concluded that it was all about the money and not about protecting a child from a predator,” he told me.

The couple, he said, began embellishing their story when they came to believe they could get $500,000 for it. In the end, they received nothing.

Barresi wound up turning over his taped interviews with the couple to then-Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti. They are now in the hands of Jackson’s prosecutor.

The coup de grace, Barresi says, happened later, when he listened to Mitteager’s tapes. On one of them, it’s noted that the LeMarques had tried to sell their story of child molestation at Neverland long before the first case broke in 1993.

“They couldn’t get any takers,” recalls Barresi. “But why didn’t they just go to the police?”

Often the Globe printed stories, written by Mitteager, that were based on the flimsiest of evidence. Mitteager, at least in the case of Jackson, relied heavily on a sketchy stringer named Taylea Shea. Her veracity consequently became integral to a lot of tabloid reporting at the time.

Shea, who seems to have gone by a number of aliases and had a long list of addresses and phone numbers, could not be contacted for this story, despite many tries.

Neighbors at the Los Angeles address at which she lived the longest do not remember her fondly. They recall a hustler and con woman who was always on the take.

“She should be in jail, if she hasn’t been already,” one former friend and neighbor said.

On one tape, Shea reads what sounds convincingly like a legal document drawn up between Jackson and a 12-year-old boy named Brandon P. Richmond, who is represented by his mother, Eva Richmond.

Brandon, according to the document, received $600,000 from Jackson. He and Jackson would no longer have any contact with each other.

Shea read the document, which is dated July 1992, to Mitteager the following year.

This would have been a blockbuster, if true, because it would make Brandon, not the differently-named boy who settled with Jackson in 1993, the first of Jackson’s accusers.

Shea also says on the tape that the legal document came from the offices of famed Hollywood lawyer Bert Fields, Jackson’s attorney at the time.

No reason is given why Jackson and Brandon Richmond should be separated. The implication, however, is clear.

The Globe published the story without using names. Over time, it was assumed that Brandon P. Richmond was in fact Brandon Adams, a boy who had appeared in Jackson’s “Moonwalker” video.

Discussions on the tapes indicate that the tabloids also believed the two Brandons were one and the same. But there’s a problem with Shea’s story: Nothing adds up.

For one thing, a source close to Fields says the document uses language uncommon to their usual agreements.

Then there’s the actual family.

According to the Adamses, whom I met in January, they don’t know an Eva Richmond.

Brandon Adams’ mother is named Marquita Woods. And Brandon’s grandmother assures me she knows nothing of a $600,000 payment. The family has lived in a modest home in Baldwin Hills, Calif., for 30 years.

Brandon Adams, who is now 25, is a struggling actor. He appeared in “D2: The Mighty Ducks” and the indie film “MacArthurPark,” and is currently working on building a music career.

“I wish I had $600,000,” he said. “I’m broke.”

The Adamses pointed out that Brandon never visited Neverland, just the Jackson family home in Encino.

For a short time they were friendly not only with the Jacksons, but with Sean Lennon and his mother Yoko Ono, who were also part of “Moonwalker.” But the relationship seems to have ended well before Taylea Shea’s big scoop.

Was Shea simply lying to Mitteager to collect a big fee? It would seem so.

On the tapes, Mitteager tells an editor that Shea also has “shocking” material about David Geffen and Keanu Reeves, among others. None of it would turn out to be true, but all of it was tabloid fodder that spread to more mainstream publications for a short time.

Curiously, nobody I spoke with who worked at the tabloids could remember Shea. And her own alleged main source — an attorney then associated with the office of Larry Feldman, the first accuser’s lawyer — insists vehemently that she did not know Shea and had little knowledge of the case anyway.

Suddenly, the value of the Mitteager tapes takes on a new meaning.

Barresi, a sometime investigator and tabloid source in the past, is aware that he’s in possession of materials that demonstrate how the supermarket tabloids operated in their heyday — the era of O.J. Simpson, Jackson and other scandals.

But one tabloid editor still in the business cautioned, “Don’t paint all of us with the same brush. We did a lot of excellent work on Simpson.”

Indeed, though it’s hard to separate them in our minds, the Globe — then under a different owner — had a much lower standard of proof than did the Enquirer in the early 1990s. And Mitteager came from the Globe’s mentality, according to sources with whom I have spoken.

At one point, in running down lists of kids who’d spent time with Jackson, Mitteager rattles off the name of a boy with the conviction that Jackson, who had befriended him, must have also acted inappropriately with him.

But it was only wishful thinking on the part of a tabloid reporter.

It turns out that the boy was 9 years old in 1993 and died shortly thereafter from leukemia. He’d met Jackson through the Make-A-Wish Foundation.

Even Jackson’s staunchest critics would agree that it is hard to fathom how this boy could have been the object of the singer’s romantic interests.

Source: MJFC / Fox News; Roger Friedman used with special permission.

March 25, 2005

Judge Reminds Jury

On Friday (March 25, 2005), twenty minutes before court normally breaks for the day, Judge Rodney Melville cut the witness off, saying:

“I can’t take it anymore” thus ending the days proceedings.

The jurors laughed heartily and, in a special listening room for the media, there was a round of applause.

Before dismissing the jury for the weekend break, the Judge lectured the jury about avoiding the media. The judge warned the jury especially to avoid talking to relatives about the case. Source: MJFC / AP

March 28, 2005

Roger Friedman – Past (Jackson) Allegations OK’d As Evidence

In a huge blow to Michael Jackson’s defense, the judge in the pop star’s child molestation trial ruled Monday that jurors can hear evidence about five past allegations that the singer molested or groomed children for molestation, including actor Macaulay Culkin.

Also among the five is choreographer Wade Robeson, who has worked with Britney Spears.

District Attorney Tom Sneddon said one past accuser, Jason Francia, will come forward to testify along with his mother. Francia was allegedly involved in a 1990 incident and received a $2.4 million settlement from Jackson in 1994.

Sneddon also promised testimony from the mother of a boy who reached a multimillion-dollar settlement with Jackson in 1993, the most well-known prior case.

Judge Rodney Melville was very specific in his ruling, listing the names of the five boys allegedly involved in previous sexual offenses or “grooming” incidents: Francia, Robeson, Culkin, the boy at the center of the 1993 case and Brett Barnes.

He excluded two boys named by the prosecution but did not say why.

In the cases of the two boys who reached financial settlements with Jackson, the judge said jurors would be told that settlements were reached but would not be told the amounts unless the defense brings it up.

In arguing for admission of the evidence, Sneddon described inappropriate activities by Jackson including kissing, hugging and inserting his hands into children’s pants.

“All of these children are basically within the ages of 10 and 13” at the time of the alleged offenses, Sneddon said.

Most of the hearing was consumed with discussions of state Penal Code section 1108, which was passed by the California Legislature in 1995 specifically to address cases of child molestation. In most criminal cases evidence of past behavior is not admissible against a defendant, but that was altered. It also applies to domestic violence cases.

Melville also said he would limit testimony by some witnesses including former Jackson aide Bob Jones, who has recently recanted accounts he gave of witnessing inappropriate behavior by Jackson.

“Only one part of Bob Jones’ testimony will be admissible regarding one physical act,” the judge said.

In his argument, Jackson’s lawyer Thomas Mesereau Jr. promised a spirited defense, making each past allegation into a virtual mini trial.

Mesereau claimed that the so far the prosecution case “looks real bad and it’s going to get worse.”

He attacked the concept of having third-party witnesses testify about alleged incidents.

“There’s Macaulay Culkin who has repeatedly said he was never molested,” Mesereau said.

He referred to some of Sneddon’s third-party witnesses as “the gang.” The reference was to former Jackson employees who sued the singer in the past and lost, and were then ordered to pay the singer $1 million in damages.

FOX News legal analyst Jim Hammer said Monday’s ruling was very bad for Jackson.

“What’s going to happen is one of those boys will step into the courtroom, testify that Jackson molested him and third-party witnesses saying that they witnessed kissing, fondling. The stakes have gone way up for Jackson. This is a huge blow to the defense. And a great day for the D.A.,” Hammer said from the courthouse in Santa Maria.

Source: MJFC / Fox News; Roger Friedman used with special permission.

Later Thomas Mesereau would comment as follows on this decision:

  • “The prosecution was permitted to introduce evidence that Jackson had settled other claims of child molestation in civil court. The actual dollar amounts were not admitted (as if anyone hadn’t heard them!). It was also permitted to introduce evidence of alleged prior similar acts of child molestation. Prosecutors were permitted to introduce such evidence extending back 10 years. As icing on the cake, the court permitted them to call third-party witnesses actual alleged victims testify who watched the alleged acts without any requirement that the actual alleged victims testify”.

Let me also make a short note on the above. Considering that “the Penal Code section 1108 was passed by the California Legislature in 1995 and this was done specifically to address cases of child molestation” and that the changes concerned the possibility of admitting “the evidence of past behavior” into the follow-up cases,  it seems that Tom Sneddon was getting ready for a future, new case against Jackson already in the year 1995. 


Now I cannot forgive myself for not storing a link to the information where Thomas Sneddon admitted that he and his people made good use of Victor Gutierrez’s book,  inappropriately called “Michael Jackson was my lover”. If I remember it right Tom Sneddon even said that the whole of his department had read the book. This I can easily believe as we do know that Victor Gutierrez was the first person who was questioned back in 1993 about the allegations against Michael Jackson. Surprisingly Tom Sneddon never called him to be a witness in either of the cases…

So Roger Friedman is absolutely right when he says that Sneddon’s “evidence” is based on porn, and even child porn as Gutierrez’s book is nothing else by a pedophilia-oriented book. This was the real reason why it was banned in the US.

Roger Friedman is also correct in saying that Tom Sneddon was determined to turn the 2005 trial into the case he was unable to tackle in the year 1993.  The 2005 trial did not concern only the Arvizos. The non-guilty verdict passed by the jury in 2005 applied to all earlier allegations taken together as Tom Sneddon brought in the full assortment of witnesses who spanned the period of 1993 – 2003 and collapsed one after another under Thomas Mesereau’s scrutiny.  

March 29, 2005

Roger Friedman – Sneddon’s Evidence Is Based on Banned Porn

What’s really interesting is that every boy District Attorney Tom Sneddon would like to paint as a victim of Michael Jackson comes from a book by Victor Gutierrez. The book, “Michael Jackson Was My Lover,” was not published in the U.S. because Jackson won a libel suit against the author.

Gutierrez writing is several times more pornographic than anything the police say they found at Neverland. The boys involved are Macaulay Culkin, Wade Robson, Jimmy Safechuck, Jonathan Spence and Brett Barnes. Gutierrez, it is rumored, made up a lot of his material after stitching together bits and pieces of speculation from the Chandlers’ maid.

Sneddon doesn’t have a boy who is not named by Gutierrez, or one who has spent any time with Jackson. The judge himself ruled out testimony about Safechuck and Barnes. Culkin, Robson and Spence categorically deny anything inappropriate ever happened to them at the hands of Michael Jackson.

The most interesting witness allowed by Judge Rodney Melville could be June Chandler. She hasn’t seen her son in 11 years and he hasn’t spoken to her or his younger sister in that time. June Chandler’s desperation to appear as a her son’s defender and champion on the stand is understood. But she received $1.5 million from Jackson in 1994, and defense attorney Thomas Mesereau could make her feel worse than she already does in his cross-examination.

No Surprises With Jacko’s ‘Prior Acts’

District Attorney Tom Sneddon made an impressive announcement yesterday of about 30 witnesses he plans on bringing into court to explore Michael Jackson’s alleged “prior acts” of sexual abuse. In his plea to the judge, he didn’t use names. Instead, he read off what they would say.

But in the end, there were no surprises when Judge Rodney Melville read the names of the nine witnesses he would allow the prosecution to grill. In fact, Sneddon appears to be trying the 1993 case he never got to tackle. He will not offer a single witness with anything to say about Jackson covering the last decade.

The witnesses Melville read off are the aforementioned Bob Jones, plus June Chandler, mother of the boy who received $20 million in 1994; former Jackson maid Blanca Francia and her son, Jason, who received $2 million from Jackson in 1994; and a group of disgruntled former Neverland employees including Philip and Stella LeMarque. Four former employees who sued Jackson for wrongful dismissal and lost will also testify: Ralph Chacon, Charli Michaels, Adrian McManus and Charmagne Sternberg.

In other words, Sneddon will offer no bombshells or surprises. Only Jason Francia promises first person recital of some kind of sexual abuse. For that, his mother took $2 million from Jackson and $20,000 from the TV show “Hard Copy.” All the others will bring third party reporting.

Source: MJFC / Fox News;  Roger Friedman used with special permission.


March 29,  2005

Roger Friedman – (Jackson’s) Former Flack Will Not Lie

Michael Jackson’s former PR guy is not going to lie for his ex-boss. And that’s a good thing.

Bob Jones, who was with Jacko for over 20 years and knows all his secrets, got caught in the whirlpool of the pop star’s scandal yesterday.

In court, District Attorney Tom Sneddon fingered Jones as a key witness who would come in and testify that he saw inappropriate activity between Jackson and an underage boy.

But it turns out that Sneddon may have gotten his signals crossed. Apparently, he got his hands on a book proposal submitted by agent Laurie Liss of the Sterling Lord Literistic Agency in New York. The proposal was co-written by sometimes Jackson associate and sometimes cable news network contributor Stacy Brown and Dennis Love. The authors’ previous work was a dismissed biography of Stevie Wonder’s mother, currently hovering around No. 450,000 on’s bestseller list.

In the proposal, Brown and Love claimed that Jones had seen Jackson do something “inappropriate” to the boy who received a $20 million settlement from Jackson in 1994. But later in court, defense attorney Tom Mesereau announced that Jones had recanted his statement.

Indeed, my sources say that Jones never claimed to have seen anything unsavory. He’s very upset about the book proposal getting out and having something wrong in it, my insider says. In fact, if Jones takes the stand he will only say that he saw Jackson curled up in airplane seat with the boy on a trip home from Europe. No kissing, touching, licking or anything else.

This entire episode is proving to be something of a nightmare for Jones. I told you back in September that he was shopping the book proposal as the result of Michael’s brother Randy firing him without notice on June 10, 2004.

Jones was so affronted by Randy’s lack of care in handling his dismissal that he immediately consulted an attorney and became, at least for a time, Jackson’s potential enemy, my source said.

March 29, 2005

Further Prosecution Evidence Expected In 2 Weeks

In a hearing on Monday after jurors left the courtroom, district attorney Sneddon announced that he plans to begin presenting evidence of the past allegations in about two weeks. The judge said he would give jurors special legal instructions on the issue of past acts before that testimony is offered.

Source: MJFC / AP

March 30, 2005

Flight Attendant Thinks Accuser Is A Weird Kid – Updated

Tuesday’s court day ended with the testimony of Cynthia Ann Bell, a charter jet flight attendant who served Michael Jackson and members of the accuser’s family on a trip from Miami to Santa Barbara.

Cynthia Ann Bell contradicted a prosecution claim that Michael Jackson ordered wine to be served in Coke cans and then shared the wine with the accuser. She said she did not see Jackson share his drink with anyone and that she saw the accuser sitting next to Jackson – but that Jackson’s children Prince and Paris were always either beside him or on his lap during the flight. She also described the accuser on that flight as “loud, obnoxious, like ‘Serve me my food, this isn’t warm.’ It was embarrassing to have him on board.”

Bell also said the idea of serving Jackson alcoholic beverages in soda cans was her idea, and that it became a routine on all of his flights:

“Mr. Jackson is a very private drinker I initiated serving him wine in a Diet Coke can. . . . I serve other clients that way.”

“Whose idea was this?” the prosecution asked.

“It was mine,” she responded.

“Did Mr. Jackson ever tell you to serve him wine in a Diet Coke can?”

“No, he did not.”

“Did you ever see him share his can of wine with anyone else?” the prosecutor asked.

“No,” she replied.

She also described Jackson as a nervous flier who could not stand turbulence and sometimes had a flight land because of it. She suggested the drinking was to relieve his anxiety.

When Bell identified a photograph of the accuser, defense lawyer Mesereau asked her:

“You told the grand jury he’s a weird kid?”

“Yes, I did,” she replied.

In contrast, she described Mr. Jackson as “soft-spoken.”

“Typically, I’d have to kneel to gain eye contact with Mr. Jackson. He would touch my arm when we were communicating.”

Cynthia Ann Bell’s testimony appeared to frustrate prosecutors. And it made jurors raise their eyebrows, especially when she revealed that the accuser’s older sister ordered wine on the flight from Miami. The sister had testified that the only time she drank alcohol was when Mr. Jackson gave it to her and her brothers at Neverland Valley Ranch and that she didn’t like it. She had also testified that she saw Mr. Jackson sharing his Diet Coke can with her brother, who appeared intoxicated. The boy himself testified that he drank a little on the flight, but was not drunk.

However, under cross-examination by defense lawyer Mesereau, Ms. Bell said she did not see Mr. Jackson give wine to the boy and denied that the youth was intoxicated.

On her way out of court, Bell shook hands with Michael Jackson.

Source: MJFC / AP / Santa Barbara News Press

March 30, 2005

Friedman – (Jackson’s) Accuser’s Dad Set Up As Fall Guy

After comedy club owner Jamie Masada and comedian George Lopez testified in the Michael Jackson trial this week, one thing is pretty clear: District Attorney Tom Sneddon is trying to separate the accuser’s parents in the minds of the jury. The goal is to paint the father as a bad guy and grifter, while the mother is simply religious and pure.

But guess what? The father is not going to take this lying down. His attorney told me yesterday that the father is not the selfish moneygrubber depicted by Lopez and Masada. For example, when the accuser’s mother was awarded $163,000 in her settlement from JC Penney, the father’s “take” was a mere $5,000. What happened to the remaining dough?

“You’ll have to ask her,” the attorney said.

Listening to Lopez and Masada, as well as to Lopez’s articulate wife Ann, the jury got an earful about the accuser’s mother. What’s really come to light is that she had an usual knack for eliciting money and gifts without actually asking for it.

Masada said in his often contentious and humorous testimony that the mother never asked him for things. Rather, she would present a dire situation — no money, no furniture, need for karate lessons — and let him finish the sentence. Masada, overly generous by his own description, would rush to fill the void.

It was a clever method of passive aggressive greed on the part of the mother. And while the district attorney would like the jury to think her ex-husband was the only one who was conning celebrities, Masada told a few stories that undermined this strategy.

When the accuser’s mother left her husband, her boyfriend, Jay Jackson, then became her tool for doing the fundraising dirty work. It was Jay Jackson, Masada recalled, who filled in for the father. And it was Jay Jackson who let it drop to Masada that the kids needed karate lessons, but they were “expensive.”

“I said, how much will take it make this happen?” Masada recalled.

He wrote a check immediately, not realizing he’d been suckered. Perhaps he still doesn’t realize it because on the stand he said he never asked Jay Jackson how much his income was. The answer: $80,000 a year. In trading a husband for a boyfriend, the accuser’s mother had moved up financially without informing her steadfast benefactor.

The picture of the accuser’s mother that’s come in clear over the last few days shows that she was simultaneously accepting welfare, alimony, the JC Penney settlement and charity from a variety of sources — all the time keeping everyone involved in the dark.

There’s more that will come out about the dark side of the accuser’s family. I told you in February 2004 that the mother spent time in a Los Angeles mental hospital in 1988. This was revealed in court papers from her ongoing bitter custody battle with her ex-husband, who filed an affidavit with Los Angeles Superior Court on Jan. 28, 2004.

The father claims that his wife spent time at the Kaiser Permanente Mental Health facility in downtown L.A. in 1998. He does not specify how much time she spent there.

H. Russell Halpern, the father’s lawyer in his custody case, reiterated yesterday that the statement is true and that insurance records will back it up. Halpern said he didn’t know how much time the accuser’s mother spent in the facility.

George Lopez, his wife and Jamie Masada all testified this week that the mother was not a presence when the accuser was being treated for cancer. The father was constantly on hand, even if according to testimony he was also looking for a handout.

“David slept in a chair at his son’s bedside,” Halpern observed. “When [the mother] came to the hospital, she engaged her husband in shouting matches.”

In his affidavit, the father — who was accused by his ex-wife of domestic abuse during their divorce — paints a picture of an unstable woman who’s convinced her children to make up stories in other situations that might benefit them.

The father also claims in his affidavit that his ex-wife coached their kids to lie in her case against JC Penney.

“She would write questions and answers for the kids,” he writes, “to study and practice with her.”

According to court papers, the mother went back into Family Court on March 11, 2003 to have her child support payments increased to $1,499 a month — almost double what she’d been receiving. At the time, the mother was also the beneficiary of $769 a month in public assistance.

The date of the mother’s demand for more money from her ex-husband is interesting in that she filed for emergency help on March 3, 2003.

Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon’s charges against Jackson are seven counts of child molestation between Feb. 6 and March 10. The sudden need for more money seems to coincide with the family’s ouster from Neverland after a year and a half of living off Michael’s largesse. 

Source: MJFC / Fox News; Roger Friedman used with special permission.

March 30, 2005

Former Employee Fully Supports Michael Jackson

Rob Henry, a man from New Zealand who worked as Michael Jackson’s assistant on the 1987 Bad World Tour, is fully supporting his former boss. Being responsible for Michael Jackson, his security, management, solicitors and camera crew during the Bad Tour Henry had daily contact with the entertainer. He describes him as “down to earth and nice”. Now he has spoken out from his home in Whangarei to the New Zealand Herald as he is sick of the media twisting Michael Jackson’s image.

“I can’t speak highly enough of the man. I would leave my 3 1/2-year-old with him tomorrow.”

Henry describes the accusations as “ludicrous”. He saw Michael Jackson with children, and saw nothing untoward in his behaviour.

Henry also claims to have first-hand knowledge of how the press painted a picture of “wacko” Jackson. He rubbished stories about Jackson’s penchant for bathing in Evian water – a tale made up by the press after seeing bottles of Evian for a crew of 290 people delivered to the hotel. Disguises Jackson wore to avoid being recognised were made out to be a fascination with dress-ups. In his opinion, Michael Jackson’s one fault was that he was too naive.

Rob Henry believes Jackson will walk free, and will fight back with “an album bigger than Thriller”. He had contacted Jackson’s current assistant, and he said the message to fans in New Zealand was to keep supporting him through his music.

“He’s found a lot of strength, and I think he will stand up to them this time. I think he’s learned a very big lesson.”

Source: MJFC / The New Zealand Herald

March 31,  2005

Friedman – (Jackson) Prosecution Witness May Have Flipped

From Roger Friedman’s column on March 31, 2005:

The conspiracy part of the Michael Jackson case may be over before it starts. It’s become apparent to trial watchers that prosecutors are backing off from a big piece of their original indictment — the one that included five unnamed co-conspirators who they said held Jackson’s accuser’s family hostage and planned to take them to Brazil.

Tyson and Amen were said to have held the family for a week in a hotel in Calabasas, Calif. But this column reported exclusively that the family went on wild shopping sprees, to the movies and to many local restaurants. The mother even had a full body wax and a manicure. None of this is considered standard fare during a kidnapping. The family also made dozens of phone calls, to friends and family, never mentioning once that they were in any peril.

The family’s attorney, William Dickerman, dealt the conspiracy part of the trial a fatal blow when he was cross-examined by defense attorney Thomas Mesereau yesterday. He admitted to writing several letters to Michael Jackson’s then attorney Mark Geragos after the family left Neverland for good on March 11, 2003.

The letters, which concerned the return of the family’s meager possessions from a storage vault, were called a ‘series’ by Dickerman. But the lawyer never mentioned in any of them that the family had been “held hostage” or made to do anything they didn’t want to do. At the same time, Dickerman indicated that during his many meetings with the family, none of them mentioned their “kidnapping” either.

In fact, Dickerman revealed that his first two meetings with the family were on Feb. 21 and 25, 2003. Amen drove the mother to the meeting on the latter date. On the same day, he and Tyson took the family on their seven-day shopping trip in Calabasas.

At no time during the meetings with Dickerman did the mother or her three kids indicate there was any trouble at all. They were simply there, Dickerman recalled, to see if they had any rights for appearing in the Martin Bashir documentary “Living with Michael Jackson.” They did not.

Source: MJFC / Fox News; Roger Friedman used with special permission.


The above 15 chapters are covering the 2005 trial prior to introducing the 1993 allegations into it.

It was at this stage of the chronicle that I realized that the information was really too much for only one post. The basket of the prosecution absurdities is already full, while Tom Sneddon is still to torture Michael Jackson for another month and a half and there will be many more prosecution stunts to come.

However we need an assessment of what we have just read. To this end I suggest a brilliant summary by Matt Taibbi  published by Rolling Stone on April 7th, 2005 (or in a week from the moment we are currently in).

Here are some excerpts from Matt Taibbi’s article. The full of it is found in the author’s collection of articles called Smells Like Dead Elephants: Dispatches from a Rotting Empire . You can also read it in the following David Edwards’ post:

He laughs best who laughs last:

April 7, 2005

Jacko on Trial

Inside the strangest show on Earth

… For all of Jackson’s fabled eccentricity, he is, astonishingly, not the dominant personality at the trial. That honor belongs to District Attorney Sneddon, whose convoluted indictment is a Frankenstein’s monster of incongruous parts every bit as luridly fascinating as the defendant’s surgically altered face.

The prosecution’s case, seldom satisfactorily explained in the mainstream media, goes as follows. On February 6, 2003, the Bashir documentary, in which Jackson is seen admitting that he sleeps in his bedroom with young boys, is shown on British TV. Among the children who appear in the video is his accuser in this case, a thirteen-year-old cancer survivor who had been introduced to Jackson during his chemotherapy treatments several years before.

According to the prosecution, Jackson had not molested the boy at the time the Bashir documentary aired, but he was sufficiently concerned that the boy might make such allegations that he and a band of Neverland courtiers entered into an elaborate conspiracy to “falsely imprison” the boy and his family for nearly five weeks (in luxury hotels, at Neverland ranch, and other places), during which time they coerced the family into denying, on camera, that anything untoward had ever happened between Jackson and the boy.

…At any rate, it was only after the filming of this so-called rebuttal video—which, incidentally, Jackson then sold to the Fox Network for $3 million—and after authorities had begun an investigation into Jackson’s relationship with the boy, that Jackson allegedly molested the child, in early March.

The prosecution’s case therefore boils down to this: in a panic over negative publicity, Jackson conspires to kidnap a boy and force him to deny acts of molestation that in fact never happened, and then he gets over his panic just long enough to actually molest the child at the very moment when the whole world is watching.

It is a fantastic argument, a bilious exercise in circular prosecutorial logic: conspiracy to commit conspiracy, false imprisonment for the sake of it, followed by a sudden act of utter self-destructive madness. And none of it makes sense, until you actually watch Sneddon operate in court.

Day six of the trial Sneddon, a splotchy-faced doughy man whose body could only look good on an autopsy table, is conducting his direct examination of the alleged victim’s younger brother. It is a crucial moment in the trial, with Sneddon drawing out the only eyewitness to the alleged molestation. The pudgy-cheeked boy claims to have twice entered Jackson’s bedroom late at night and seen the aging star fondling his brother and masturbating.

In a trial full of roundly unsympathetic characters, it is hard not to feel for this kid. A raspy-voiced fourteen-year-old with the sad eyes of a habitually ignored younger brother, this witness looks like every fat kid who’s ever had his milk money stolen or his underwear pulled over his head.  Whatever he’s doing here, it’s sad.

It is hard not to escape the impression that Sneddon hates Jackson. He clearly has not forgotten the debacle of 1993, when Jackson and the family of thirteen-year-old Jordan Chandler reached a $15.3 million settlement before Sneddon could bring Jackson to trial on molestation charges.

His key witnesses, meanwhile—the accuser and his family, whom we’ll call the Riveras—are an astounding bunch. Any sane prosecutor would drown himself before building a case around witnesses like these, but they were all Sneddon had. A single mom and her three kids, an older daughter and two boys.

The mother—well call her Agnes Rivera—seems to be the key figure in the accuser’s camp. At this writing, she has only appeared in the trial via the rebuttal video, which Mesereau introduced as evidence during cross-examination.

During the period of “false imprisonment” in which this film was shot, Agnes was put up in the Calabasas Country Inn, where at Jackson’s expense she managed to fit in a full body wax and a shopping spree at, among other places, the Topanga Canyon Mall; she spent $454 on Jockey underwear at one stop, $415 at Banana Republic and another $450 at the leans Outlet. The family also got in a showing of Old School at a Calabasas movie theater and a $175 dinner at the Black Angus restaurant in Woodland Hills. Agnes also managed to avoid calling the police for the five hours she spent waiting in an orthodontist’s office in Solvang while Freddy’s braces were removed on Jackson’s tab.

If Agnes seemed to handle her false imprisonment with aplomb, it might be because she had plenty of experience with it. Twice in the past she filed lawsuits claiming false imprisonment: once against her ex-husband (whom she also accused of murdering the family’s pet ferret) and once against a pair of security guards at a JC Penney, who stopped her after finding Freddy in the store parking tot with unpaid merchandise. In the latter case, Agnes claimed that the guards not only falsely imprisoned her but brazenly fondled her breasts in front of the children; she won $150,000 in damages.

In any event, it is Sneddon’s contention that after her latest false imprisonment at the hands of Jackson in Calabasas, Agnes and the children voluntarily returned to Neverland for a two-week stay that would turn into yet another false imprisonment in which Agnes believed she and her children were being held against their will. Even though she supposedly spent this time trying to escape, for some reason she did not even ask where her children were sleeping at night.

Thus she was unaware that Freddy was spending his nights in Michael’s bedroom, engaging in mutual masturbation with the pop star not once but on two different occasions, both times in front of Freddy’s pudgy little brother—who happened to creep to the bedroom and open the locked door just long enough to witness the hideous act through the darkness without being detected by either Michael or his brother.

No longer a frail cancer victim, Jackson’s accuser is now a strapping fifteen-year-old with a thick neck and a military-style buzz cut. But in his direct examination, he mumbles and hangs his head quite a lot and seems to grow smaller and more childlike on the stand as he is led through the tale of his terrible ordeal at Neverland.

It is a horrifying story, a tale of long nights of Jesus juice— Jackson’s name for the red wine he fed the boy—porn, and late-night groping in the dark room full of mannequins.

… Through all this, Sneddon can’t resist a little of his trademark crotch-sniffing. The prosecutor seems disappointed both legally and libidinously when Freddy fails, after being prompted, to remember seeing Jackson walk into the bedroom with an erection while he and his brother were watching television. A visibly frustrated Sneddon ends up pulling out a transcript of the boy’s own grand-jury testimony and showing him the reference to Jackson’s erection, effectively shoving Jackson’s erection in the boy’s face.

When the kid refuses to comply Sneddon frowns, clearly pissed, and moves on.

Still, by the time Sneddon is finished with this witness, Jackson looks fucked. Reporters scramble outside to do “Prosecution Roars Back” stand-ups, and even the most skeptical members of the press corps concede that Sneddon might not have to lift a finger for the rest of the trial.

During this testimony, Jackson scarcely moves, Mesereau, for his part, simply bides his time and waits in a seething posture for his cross examination. His demolition of Sneddon’s star witness would prove to be one of the more merciless legal fraggings you’ll ever see in an American courtroom. He gets Freddy to admit that something he had testified Michael Jackson told him—that “if a man doesn’t masturbate, he can get to the point where he might rape a girl”—had actually been told to him by his grandmother.

He gets the boy to admit that he told the dean of his middle school, a Mr. Alpert, that “nothing had ever happened sexually with Mr. Jackson.”

Mesereau asks about the alleged period of false imprisonment at Calabasas and Neverland. Sneddon sinks in his chair when Freddy answers, “I never wanted to leave. I was having too much fun.”

Then there is the timeline of the actual abuseMesereau gets the boy to admit that he initially told investigators that the abuse had happened before the alleged false imprisonment and the rebuttal video, then later changed his story. “To this day,” Freddy says, “I don’t remember exactly when everything happened.”

Mesereau then does a cunning thing. He leads the boy through a history of all his disciplinary problems in middle school. Freddy, it appears, was a pain in the ass to almost every teacher in his junior high: talking back and being disruptive and generally disrespecting authority.

Every disagreement he had ever had with a teacher, Freddy contends, was the teacher’s fault. Mr. Geralt ran his class like a drill sergeant, which was why the boy had stood up in class and said that Mr. Geralt “had his balls in his mouth,” He brags about arguing in Mrs. Slaughter’s class (“A lot of the times, I would stand up to the teachers, and the kids would, like, congratulate me”).

“Did you have problems in Mr. Finklestein’s class?” Mesereau asks.

“Everyone had problems in Mr. Finklestetn’s class,” Freddy snaps.

“Did you have problems in Mr. Finklestein’s class?” Mesereau coldly repeats,

“If everyone had a problem,” the boy sneers, “then I’d be one of them, right?”

Later, Mesereau plays the entire rebuttal video for Freddy, stopping every few moments. Since it is the prosecution’s case that the family was told to lie in the videoMesereau decides to get the boy to explain to the jury exactly where everyone was lying and where everyone was telling the truths—the obvious point being that it was very difficult to tell.

It’s a savage courtroom scene, and the boy withers visibly as it wears on. When the jury sees Freddy claiming on the video that “he used to pray that he would meet Michael Jackson, Mesereau stops the DVD and asks. “Were you lying here?”

“I didn’t actually pray to meet Michael Jackson,” the boy mutters.

It goes on like this for another forty minutes. Freddy’s performance is so atrocious that even Judge Melville wakes up. Until this point, Melville seldom looked anything but pained, apparently mourning the lost dignity of the legal profession. But during Freddy’s cross examination, Melville’s impatience with the prosecution is suddenly palpable. Usually, he takes ten quiet seconds before ruling on any objection, but after a few hours of this witness, his trigger finger gets very itchy, instantly blasting even the more reasonable of Sneddon’s occasional objections. At one point, Mesereau asks the boy about his history teacher; “She complained that you were defiant on a regular basis and disrespectful, is that correct?”

Even I expect an objection to this; Mesereau is asking and answering.

Your Honor, objection,” Sneddon says, “Asked and answ—” “Overruled,” Melville snaps, glaring at the boy, “You may answer.”

By the end of the day, Sneddon is slumped so far in his seat that his shoulders are almost below the armrests.

His humiliation is total when Mesereau asks the boy if it is true that he once wanted to be an actor, “Yes,” he says, “But now that I’ve seen other careers, I want to be in law enforcement.”

(to be continued)


Here are the email addresses of 5 Supervisors to shower them with our messages in support of William Wagener’s Affidavit. Choose one of the messages please.

From: …….



Subject: Re: Support of Affidavit Concerning Criminal Conduct of Ton Sneddon – 2005 Michael Jackson trial

1st message:

Date:  ……  2012

This letter serves to express our concern and belief that former District Attorney Thomas Sneddon committed at least three felonies against Mr. Michael Jackson during the 2005 trial of Mr. Jackson for child molestation.

On August 14, 2012, Mr. William Wagener will present to the County Supervisors of Santa Barbara an affidavit of criminal conduct committed by Mr. Thomas Sneddon during the 2005 trial of Mr. Michael Jackson. We support the effort to have a full investigation into the matter carried out by an independent special prosecutor; someone outside of Santa Barbara County.

We are outraged at the egregious misuse of power during the 2005 trial of Mr. Jackson. It is frightening to think that, in someone’s zeal to get a conviction, felonies can be committed by those sworn to uphold the law and seek truth. Due to the on-going Fraud by the District Attorneys office to cover up the Crimes seen on the Record of the 2005 Jackson trial, the statute of Limitations has NOT expired, and it IS your reponsibility to see that Fraud on the Court, does NOT win.

We are concerned about the message this sends to future prosecutors who may be tempted to go beyond the boundaries of the law in order to fulfill their personal agendas. Our court system is not a weapon to be used to satisfy a personal vendetta or to gain personal notoriety, social status, or political power.

We ask that there be a full independent investigation into the claims made in Mr. Wagener’s affidavit of criminal conduct. Please hold those in power responsible for their crimes, and let full justice be extended to Michael Jackson, as well as others who have been or may in the future be victims of over zealous prosecutors.

Sign your name

Your City/State or Country

2nd message:

Date …… 2012

Board of Supervisors of Santa Barbara County:

I give my whole hearted support and endorsement to the Affidavit of Criminal Conduct by Tom Sneddon, the former District Attorney of Santa Barbara County, which will be presented by William Wagener at your August 14, 2012 meeting in Santa Maria. I strongly urge you to appoint an independent special prosecutor outside of Santa BarbaraCounty to investigate three felony crimes that were committed by Tom Sneddon and the other three prosecutors during the 2004 investigation and the 2005 trial of Michael Jackson. These three indictable felonies include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Manufacturing false finger prints

2. Manufacturing false phone conspiracy evidence

3. Conspiracy amongst the prosecutors to do the first two felonies listed above

No man is above the law, and I realize the Statute of Limitations will begin to click away as soon as the Affidavit is submitted to the Board of Supervisors, hence, it is of utmost importance that you act, not only responsibly, but also expeditiously, to bring justice to a situation that is long overdue.

Your Name


115 Comments leave one →
  1. Irina permalink
    June 24, 2015 7:14 pm

    Tom Sheldon deserved what he got- died from cancer. What he did to MJ is unspeakable crime. Karma is a bitch- May this man Tom Sheldon burn in hell


  2. September 29, 2012 5:46 am

    “To return to Jordan´s psychology.The sc suicide picture is glaring by it´s absent from the report.A spontaneous picture by a child is worth gold.”

    @ kaarin22:
    I believe Jordan drawing abilities were a lot better than that “suicide” and genital drawings. I do not why I believe both were done by someone else who created pictures meant to look like what they believe a child would do. It is not just a knee jerk defense of Michael where none is really needed. It is as if I’ve seen or read something which says he was more talented his skill more developed.

    Using the KISS was rule not a consideration for some. Just like V.G. adding a photo of what suppose to be Michael’s face; that toy gun; a bayonet sheave claimed to be a knife sheave and a bullet proof vest 3 sizes too big for Jordon to wear.

    Ray Chandler is interviewed by Dimond on national TV. He plays what he tells us is one of Jordan’s sessions. If he had that why not flash the report since the entire program was about destroying Michael anyway? Dimond would have found a way to get it posted on SG. None except the true 2005 victim was concerned about Judicial reprisals.


  3. September 14, 2012 12:17 am

    “Lately that leak of a supposed interview has come back to my mind. And leaked for whose benefit?And by whom?.Finally it was useless.Everyone who read it noticed the words and expressions unlikely for a boy that age as well as his obvious lies once the same questions were asked at different points in time.And no summary. Even more conspicious was the abscence of any assessment of the childs affect and emotions- both highly important issues in a psych eval..”

    Kaarin, you are evidently talking of psychiatrist Richard Gardner’s interview with Jordan Chandler? Yes, the absence of the doctor’s evaluation of it is very noticeable in this case. Recently I came across an article which said that the Santa Barbara authorities said in their press-release that they could not guarantee the authenticity of that tape and that it was edited:

    September 14, 2004
    FYI: Ray Chandler Hawks His Book
    Raymond Chandler is a Santa Barbara lawyer and the uncle of Jordy Chandler, the first boy who accused Michael Jackson of molestation in 1993. Ray Chandler is currently making the rounds of talk and tabloid shows, attempting to sell his book regarding the 1993 case, “All That Glitters: The Crime and the Cover Up,” to anyone and everyone who will give him airtime. (It makes you wonder what took him so long to cash in.) He tells us that it’s not about the money. The Bashir interview made him do it.

    Chandler claims to have transcripts of interviews between Jordy and his psychiatrist as well as recordings of interviews with his father dating from that time. The Santa Barbara News-Press stated that they had no way of confirming the authenticity of the transcript documents – posted on the internet. The October 1993 interview with the psychiatrist has also been edited and names changed.

    Details from the past investigation have surfaced in other ways during the current case. The Chandler’s lawyer and a psychiatrist testified before the grand jury last spring. Recently, Michael’s defense team asked for access to photographs taken during the search a decade ago.
    Prosecutors never charged Michael in the 1993 case. Jordy refused to cooperate after receiving a settlement. Part of that settlement included a confidentiality agreement that prohibits the family from discussing the case. Ray Chandler is not bound by this agreement.

    Raymond Chandler has also said that he has not spoken to either his brother or nephew for several years. He also claims not to know anything about the current case. As to the question “why wait so long?” Chandler claims that his brother urged him not to write the book earlier.
    The alleged transcripts between Dr. Gardner, a psychiatrist, and Jordy reflect a relationship that grew increasingly more intimate. Garder allegedly asks “Do you see the wrong in it now?” “Of course,” the 13-year-old boy is quoted as saying. “He’s a grown-up, and he’s using his experience of his age in manipulating and coercing younger people who don’t have as much experience as him, and don’t have the ability to say no to someone powerful like that. He’s using his power, his experience, his age – his overwhelmingness – to get what he wants.”
    Source: Santa Barbara News Press / MJFC


  4. kaarin22 permalink
    September 13, 2012 10:26 am

    To return to Jordan´s psychology.The sc suicide picture is glaring by it´s absent from the report.A spontaneous picture by a child is worth gold.
    Now i am sure it depicted suicidal ideation and not intent. In no way was Joran feeling so bad over his expieriences with Michael,but he did once he understood that his relationship with Michael was broken for good by his father.Evan was a jealous father and also angry at his failure to extract 20 mln from MJ. He immediately snatched the picture once he noticed it and added his own opinion on it. He knew it was wrong and withheld it from Dr. Gardener.Some have doubted it being genuine.In my opinion it is.These kind of pictures by children or young adolescents ,depicting high emotional turmoil are drawn hastily and without the regard of being a good picture,like in art class for example.Thats why it looks as if a younger child had drawn it.It is not easy for a grown up to fake such.
    If you don´t believe it do this:Do not look up the picture, I am sure you remember it. Try to draw it from memory and quickly.Then compare your own drawing with Jordans.


  5. kaarin22 permalink
    September 13, 2012 12:28 am

    Protect us from protectors,said by a wellknown playwright.Applies to Sneddon who appears to be high while prosecuting Michael. Not from drugs,but overconfidence that clouds his thinking.and judgement..In the EC &JC case a report was mysteriously leaked.It is not even certain it was genuine. Lately that leak of a supposed interview has come back to my mind.
    And leaked for whose benefit?And by whom?.Finally it was useless.Everyone who read it noticed the words and expressions unlikely for a boy that age as well as his obvious lies once the same questions were asked at different points in time.And no summary. Even more conspicious was the abscence of any assessment of the childs affect and emotions- both highly important issues in a psych eval..


  6. Alison permalink
    August 16, 2012 12:55 am

    @ Tatum
    Ok! Lol! Thanks, I’ve never heard that before.


  7. August 15, 2012 11:17 pm

    Lol. That’s just an expression for no response or silence. You would say – cricket…cricket.


  8. Alison permalink
    August 15, 2012 10:41 am

    @Tatum – cricket? sorry for being thick but what do you mean?


  9. August 15, 2012 8:54 am

    The true children of tabloid media – I like that phrase. It’s so sad how the fans have defragmented after Michael’s death. The fan did claim that they signed the petition link I sent them but when I asked on what grounds should the estate be investigated – cricket.

    @Another Topic
    If there would have been evidence that Michael molested Jordan or a story that corroborated with the boy, the prosecution could’ve move forward without the (I use this term loosely) victim. That’s part of the real reason why the case didn’t go to trial, and the fact that Evan fought for a civil trial from the beginning- despite media reports.


  10. August 14, 2012 11:52 pm

    “Transference, but I like your phrase better! – “Everyone thinks within the scope of his own rottenness”!

    Alison, transference is probably the right word – it conveys the idea very well. And the idea itself is not a mere idea but a scientific fact in psychology.

    As regards the saying you liked this is the best translation I could manage from my language, but the original sounds better. If anyone knows Russian they could probably suggest a better variant or a similar saying in English. I would be grateful if someone provided a full English equivalent for it.

    In my language it is as follows: “Каждый думает в меру своей испорченности”. Its literal translation is something like “Each person thinks within the limits of his own decay”


  11. Truth Prevail permalink
    August 14, 2012 11:37 pm

    “All I can say is that all people live following a “self-identification mechanism” (not proper term, but this is how it translates from my language). It means that everyone is able to think only within the scope of what he/she is able to imagine as possible in the behavior of other people.”

    Very well put Helena i agree thankfully someone on the ladies blog pointed out to her that all the misconceptions she has of Michael are NOT based on FACTS in which she replied she also thinks Jackson was a homosexual note the word thinks its all opinions which do NOT equal FACT.

    And i respect Quincy Jones somewhat but he is being a hypocrite judging someone if they are proud of their race based on the colour of their kids skin especially himself who has NEVER had kids with a black women and i don’t think he’s ever married a black women either so does that make Quincy less black i would like to ask him.


  12. August 14, 2012 11:08 pm

    “I did get an invitation from a fan to sign another petition to investigate the estate… I’m like are you crazy?! You should be trying to get people to sign the petition to investigate Sneddon!!” – Tatum

    In the best case these “fans” are the true children of the tabloid media. Brainwashed, disoriented, rushing in every direction in which they are sent, unable to think on their own and tell right from wrong.

    In the worst case they are the ones who do all these things to others.


  13. August 14, 2012 10:16 pm

    “the only way to see it is exactly this: How can we win, if we never try? And here is a man who was a witness and who takes it on his shoulders to do it. To not support him may be one of the biggest sins the fanbase can commit.
    Paris Jackson tweeted today: “It is the quality of one’s convictions that determines success, not the number of followers” (as a quote from Prof. Remus Lupin from “Harry Potter”). Let’s see it that way! Justice was always reached through minorities, and people always wake up too late. But even if we won’t be successful, we at least tried.”

    Susanne, exactly! Not supporting is indeed one of the biggest sins the fanbase can commit against Jackson. And not trying is inexcusable. Sneddon was the worst Michael’s enemy and missing a chance to hold him accountable for his deeds is like betraying Michael in the most fundamental point. I do not understand how anyone can stay away from it, and the matter of success or no success is even not the point for a discussion. It is simply a MUST and that’s it.

    We do our part and all the rest is in the hands of the Almighty.


  14. Alison permalink
    August 14, 2012 10:10 pm

    Helena, you are so right. I think its called Transference, but I like your phrase better! – “Everyone thinks within the scope of his own rottenness”!. I will remember that one.

    Sounds like Paris knows about all this, from that tweet. I’m happy she knows people are fighting for her Dad, and that there are true supporters all over the world.

    Now I’m going to try and find out how it went, though i think California time is about 8 hours later than UK.


  15. Rodrigo permalink
    August 14, 2012 10:07 pm

    Those people are trolls, pure and simple. Like D. they do it just to get reactions from the fans, anything to feed their ego and desire for attention.

    And I’ll say what I always say about haters, YOUR OPINIONS AND THEORIES DON’T SERVE AS THE TRUTH. If you refuse to see the truth, and need to think of whatever you can to deny it and prefer to listen to well known liars, and like to annoy those who think different, then just go hang.

    And speaking of fakers. Why is it when I was investigating that VMJJ blog, I was lead to only ONE place where that stuff was first mentioned and the ONLY place to be mentioned other than the blog…Topix?


  16. August 14, 2012 9:41 pm

    “She claims Michael Invited kids into his bed and that his guilt killed him and that he was a drug addict and that’s why he died and that he wanted to “snuff himself out”

    Truth Prevail, you know, I am sick and tired of all this primitive black-and-white thinking. No proof is good enough for these people’s brick-wall mentality. If they think that “he invited children into his bed” nobody’s testimony about him giving bed to others or falling asleep on one bed while watching TV (in the worst case), will change their cemented thinking.

    If they think that “he was a drug-addict” (though there was no Demerol found in his blood and he did manage to beat his addiction to narcotics according to his friends) no information about it will break the concrete wall of what these people want to think about Jackson.

    All I can say is that all people live following a “self-identification mechanism” (not proper term, but this is how it translates from my language). It means that everyone is able to think only within the scope of what he/she is able to imagine as possible in the behavior of other people.

    For example, a selfish person will not be able to understand a selfless one simply because he does not know what selflessness is. The egotist will think that a selfless person 1) does good to others for his own benefit 2) that there are some secret advantages in another person’s selfless actions, only he does not disclose this secret to others 3) that all his good deeds are sheer pretense, etc. He will never understand how someone can help another person without seeking benefit as he never does it himself and simply doesn’t know what it’s like.

    This mechanism of identification is a very peculiar thing. It betrays the true personality of a person as everyone attributes to another person only those motives which he himself has. When presented with an alternative,for example, that 1) MJ took drugs due to the media harassment or 2) he took drugs because of his guilt towards children, they will select the second one because it is closer to their way of thinking even though it defies the truth.

    We have a saying: “Everyone thinks within the scope of his own rottenness”. The saying is scientifically proven by the identification mechanism I’ve just described. Apply it to the woman who left her comments there and you will know what she is like.

    By the way the link mentioned Quincy Jones. If you test him by this mechanism you will find quite a rotten personality behind the facade. Not offence meant to Quincy – he may be a great professional but as a human being he leaves much to be desired, alas… Cynical and unfeeling in the utmost degree.


  17. Truth Prevail permalink
    August 14, 2012 8:37 pm

    Hi check out comments made by a lisa waller rogers in the comment section who runs the following blog.

    She claims Michael Invited kids into his bed and that his guilt killed him and that he was a drug addict and that’s why he died and that he wanted to “snuff himself out” i would leave a comment but she has closed the comments section for that post but it would be good if someone could get in contact with her and put her straight.


  18. August 14, 2012 7:47 pm

    “I am happy they have now exposed themselves. Those who want justice take careful note of who they are and their web sites and just block them from your life. God will deal with them in due time, and MJ will say to them on the day of Judgement…. “you called out in my name, but I never knew you” -W.Wagener

    Rodrigo, I agree with Wagener. The fans who don’t want to hold Sneddon accountable did expose themselves. I cannot even imagine anyone not wanting Sneddon to answer for the malicious prosecution he subjected Michael Jackson to. Well, Michael even wrote a song about Sneddon. You only need to listen to it to see how deep Michael’s anger is:

    D. S.

    They wanna get my ass
    Dead or alive
    You know he really tried to take me
    Down by surprise
    I bet he missioned with the CIA
    He don’t do half what he say

    He out shock in every single way
    He’ll stop at nothing just to get his political say
    He think he hot cause he’s BSTA
    I bet he never had a social life anyway

    You think he brother with the KKK?
    I bet his mother never taught him
    right anyway
    He want your vote just to remain D.A.
    He don’t do half what he say

    Does he send letters to the FBI?
    Did he say to either do it or die?

    Tom Sneddon is a cold man
    Tom Sneddon is a cold man
    Tom Sneddon is a cold man
    Tom Sneddon is a cold man………..

    Lyrics by Michael Jackson


  19. Rodrigo permalink
    August 14, 2012 5:21 pm

    Thanks, Susan 🙂

    I just found this on Wagener’s FB page. He posted it a while go, mind.

    Some negative people have been working continually to pretend they are Michael Jackson “fans” and in fact work for the opposite of “healing the world” which was what M.J. himself said was our “real job”. To start that healing, one needs to stop the haters and hold Tom Sneddon to account for his own 3 felonies committed against Michael Jackson in 2005. I want the un-indicted Criminals of the Santa Barbara County District Attorneys office INDICTED. The crimes are on the Court record. They are in fact FRAUD ON THE COURT, and what I laid out in my Affidavit I will present tomorrow. 14 of August, 2012.

    I have not asked, nor would I ask Thomas Mesreau to come demand INDICTMENT of a fellow member of the California BAR association. Like it or not, the BAR has rules and they are forbidden to do things that desparage other members, unless directed by a judge of competent jurisdiction to seek
    dis-BARment of another Attorney which very rarely happens. The rule is basically fight your case in court, by “see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil” in public against a fellow member of the BAR.

    There is no conflict here. I never asked T.Mez to come join us, because it would be a direct violation and could lead to problems from Thomas “hurricane” Mesereau who blew away all the crap and fabricated false evidence.

    Those Nay sayers are really Fake fans who have dogged every effort to bring justice for the late, murdered Michael Jackson. I think it is obvious to any thinking human, they do NOT want Sneddon to be held accountable and yet want to claim they are MJ “fans”. Now they have exposed themselves plainly for all to see. Mr. T. Mesereau statement does not negate me, it simply states he is NOT part of an effort, which would be in violation of the BAR Rules. I suggest the Robin fly back to its true nest with Sneddon snakes and stop wasting TMes time, my time and true MJ fans that want to get on with EXPOSING the media bias in 2005 and the crimes of the prosecutors.

    I am happy they have now exposed themselves. Those who want justice take careful note of who they are and their web sites and just block them from your life. God will deal with them in due time, and MJ will say to them on the day of Judgement…. “you called out in my name, but I never knew you”.

    Enough. Lets get on with the work. Thanks to all you real fans numbering over 2500 who signed on. See you at 8 am.

    Shocking stuff there. But it’s something that we’ve witnessed ourselves and was to be expected.


  20. August 14, 2012 5:07 pm

    Unfortunately it now looks like we have a lot of fake signatures in the petition, especially from Turkey. There seems to be an effort from someone to destroy the credibility of the petition.


  21. August 14, 2012 1:48 pm

    Guys, I want to wish William Wagener good luck for his presentation today and hope we will receive some news about it via blogtalkradio (Mary Brookins told they will try to report about it from 10:30 a.m. local time).
    @Rodrigo: You’re a great supporter of the project. Thank you very much.
    It’s really disappointing to see so many fans in opposition to this initiative. I think part of it is just misinformation, also laziness to read everything about it, some perhaps don’t want to be associated with a “notorious protester”, some don’t believe in a success, whatever…
    But the only way to see it is exactly this: How can we win, if we never try? And here is a man who was a witness and who takes it on his shoulders to do it. To not support him may be one of the biggest sins the fanbase can commit.
    Paris Jackson tweeted today: “It is the quality of one’s convictions that determines success, not the number of followers” (as a quote from Prof. Remus Lupin from “Harry Potter”). Let’s see it that way! Justice was always reached through minorities, and people always wake up too late. But even if we won’t be successful, we at least tried.

    I repeat Helena’s words: “It is not in our power to know what will be the outcome of our actions. All we need to do is do what justice and God expect us to do and leave the rest to the Almighty.” AMEN!


  22. August 14, 2012 12:54 pm

    “I just checked the petition site and even today they still haven’t even got 3000 signatures! nearly 400 short. out of how many millions of “fans”? when i signed it last week i thought by now they would have well over 3000. Unbelievable!” – Alison

    It is a total disgrace for Michael Jackson’s “fans”. They will gather in millions to boycott Michael’s new album (produced by Sony), and do it to the detriment of Michael’s estate too, but will not lift their little finger to hold accountable the person who was central to harassing Michael. And who was the ultimate reason for Michael’s slow dying.

    What a disgrace that Sneddon is not a priority for them. This is a result of all this petty squabbling over petty issues that has taken over the MJ community lately. The people stopped seeing major goals in respect of Michael Jackson and are overwhelmed by hollow issues. A crazy thing like boycotting a MJ’s T-shirt if it is produced by Sony is more important to them than seeking justice for Michael.

    What a disgrace.

    Here is the petition to reach the goal of 3000 now:

    And the few thousand who are able to see the truth please be there to support William Wagener!


  23. Alison permalink
    August 14, 2012 11:44 am

    I agree, i just checked the petition site and even today they still haven’t even got 3000 signatures! nearly 400 short. out of how many millions of “fans”? when i signed it last week i thought by now they would have well over 3000.
    people have got about 8 hours left before the meeting.
    how lovely of Larry Nimmer to write that!


  24. August 14, 2012 10:36 am

    Guys, first of all I apologize for being silent for a couple of days. As it often happens in life things terribly piled up for me at the moment which was least suitable for it. I also wanted to write a new post about Sneddon by the date of William Wagener’s affidavit but due to some circumstances had no chance to do it on time.

    As to the odd reaction from hardcore fans and the “risk” they see in William Wagener’s move – first of all there is no risk as nothing can be worse than silence around Sneddon’s crimes. Even if the campaign does not reach its primary goal the very least it will do is spread information about Sneddon’s misconduct and make more people aware of it, which is a great outcome in and of itself.

    Second, the earlier Sneddon is called to answer the better it is as time is being wasted while no action is taken. Sneddon is not getting younger and who knows what tomorrow will bring – he may simply not live to see the retribution done (long live Tom Sneddon!).

    Third, if Michael’s fans cannot raise themselves to support the real chance to bring Sneddon to answer now, I doubt very much that they will ever raise themselves to do it. At the moment we still have people like William Wagener who saw Sneddon’s misconduct with their own eyes, and many other people who lived through those events together with Michael, and were outraged by what Sneddon did to him. And if they do not take action, I do not know who will… Wagener is not getting younger either (long live William Wagener!).

    Well, I hope you get the idea that Michael’s supporters should strike when the iron is hot. Or at least warm as it is now, and not a couple of decades later when all chances for success are lost and there is no memory of Sneddon’s behavior left.

    And SRJ hit the nail on the head by saying: “How can we win if we never try?”

    It is always worth trying! Even if we do not hope for anything!

    It is not in our power to know what will be the outcome of our actions. All we need to do is do what justice and God expect us to do and leave the rest to the Almighty.

    Everyone should do his own part and do what needs to be done – not to regret later about the chances missed.


  25. August 14, 2012 12:56 am

    That’s an odd reaction from hardcore fans…but I’ll have to admit that I’ve been getting the same sort of thing from a couple of people…I think after the zoo that occurred the last years of MJ’s life, some fans feel like it’s a hopeless cause to pursue justice if the media had already conspired and dented public opinion. A lot of times people don’t look at little victories, and expect things to either turn around in an instant, or not happen at all. I don’t think a lot of them consider how integral Sneddon and his cronies were to forming and feeding that zoo, and how long it will take to set things right (maybe more than a decade). To put Sneddon into jail would be, really, a very public and well deserved victory and act of justice. Maybe fans think that if this doesn’t succeed, society will NEVER give truth a chance, and they’re ashamed to take part in what they consider a “risk”. That’s what I’m getting from some hesitant people, at least. But it’s odd that they won’t even give an anonymous signature on a petition, even if they don’t want to send out letters. What’re they afraid of? Onslaught? How can you win if you don’t even try?


  26. August 13, 2012 11:59 pm

    Does anyone have any connection to a person that will be attending in Santa Maria ?


  27. Rodrigo permalink
    August 13, 2012 11:48 pm

    Just posted on his FB page

    There will be a public comment protest against Thomas Sneddon at tomorrow’s Santa Barbara County Supervisor’s meeting in Santa Maria at 9am. I’m under the weather with Bronchitis, so, I’ve asked that the following letter from me be read at the meeting.

    “I, Larry Nimmer, worked for Michael Jackson during his 2005 trial here in Santa Maria. After learning from insiders about how Michael had been relentlessly persecuted by Tom Sneddon, I have come to believe that a great injustice was done to him. Michael Jackson was one of history’s greatest supporters of children’s rights and showed them unparalleled respect and understanding. It broke his spirit to be unjustly accused of the opposite.

    Maybe initially, Tom Sneddon good intentions. However, he was confused by the unorthodox and unprecedented nature of one of history’s biggest philanthropic superstars. Due to a type of cultural and social bias, Mr. Sneddon could not believe that there could be such a well intentioned adult, but “childlike”, superstar. Instead, he wanted to believe the words of people who were proven scammers and who were intent to make money off of Michael, like people before them and, after them. Sneddon lost sight of the law and the ability to believe in goodness and viciously pursued Michael Jackson, resembling the evil police inspector “Javert”…. in Victor Hugo’s “Les Miserables”.

    I believe, like many others, that this unjust persecution of Michael Jackson lead to his medical problems and finally, to his death. Santa Barbara County should do something to right this wrong.

    Sincerely yours,
    Larry Nimmer
    Film Producer “The Untold Story of Neverland”.


  28. Rodrigo permalink
    August 13, 2012 6:01 pm

    I know. I’ve spent days looking for fans who I could spread the petition to. Then a hardcore MJ fan said to me, whats the point? Then another agreed with him. He thought it was just a dream and nothing would come of it, and like Dee, said it will turn on Michael in some way.

    And the others, I got no reply or feedback from it. Fear, shame, lack of faith, laziness, I don’t know. But if those are MJ fans and supporters as they claim, then they shouldn’t bother at all, because tthey aren’t proving it that well.


  29. August 13, 2012 8:28 am

    It’s one thing to believe it wouldn’t help but it’s another thing to not get involved based on that reason. I think that’s really pathetic. I did get an invitation from a fan to sign another petition to investigate the estate… I’m like are you crazy?! You should be trying to get people to sign the petition to investigate Sneddon!!


  30. Rodrigo permalink
    August 13, 2012 7:16 am

    It’s true, Tatum, from what I’ve seen.

    Some think it’s hopeless at this point to expect anything to happen with Sneddon, and what’s happened in the years with the law being bias, fans just aren’t convinced that justice will ever happen for Michael. It’s why they don’t bother to get involved. Some, not all.


  31. TatumMarie permalink
    August 13, 2012 6:29 am

    Im writing on my phone. Stupid word auto correct i meant to write I am sure that etc.


  32. TatumMarie permalink
    August 13, 2012 6:27 am

    Rodigro, are you serious? I didn’t know that there were fans that felt that way because everyone I came across was really excited about the argument to indict Sneddon. Important sure most of them would agree that illegal acts were committed, and if that is the case, why not expose it on legal grounds ?


  33. Rodrigo permalink
    August 13, 2012 5:09 am

    Spellings fine, Helena 🙂

    BTW, I managed to convince the owner of a FB page about Michael to put up the petition about Sneddon. A real nice lady, named Dee. The page has over Fifteen thousand fans, so fingers crossed. She was a bit hesitant at first and it really dawned on me how lacking in faith Michael’s fans are about Sneddon getting investigated. They don’t believe in it and that’s a real shame. She said if it fails, then it will drag up Michael’s old wounds. But I explained it was worth it, because it will shed light on all those who inflicted the wounds on Michael…and with Wagener possibly making the documentary, it’s going to be worth it.

    And she said that she might start coming here to post facts on the FB page, helping the fans understand the truth.


  34. August 11, 2012 11:06 am

    Guys, must be running now and will be back much later today. But a have a HUGE request to you – if you see some mistakes in the posts please alert me immediately to them.

    Today I’ve noticed that I wrote “excusable” in the opening sentence of the Sneddon/Wagener post while all the time I meant to say “INexcusable” of course! It would be inexcusable if we lost the chance to make Sneddon answer for his crimes – this is what I meant!

    Due to my fatigue and too little sleep I’ve become very absent-minded and began making terrible slips like that, so please tell me as soon as you notice them.

    PLEASE DO! I’ll be only grateful to you!


  35. August 11, 2012 3:19 am

    take a look at Wikileaks. Type,Wikileaks:Heavens Task Force :TAMOIL,(and ToM Barrack who owned it).Scroll down a bit and you will see that Tom Barrack was seemingly linked to MJ´last few years on earth.T-T worked for Tom Barrack, he also mentions Jermaine Jackson embracing T-T-.There id big money at work here.No wonder Sneddon worked so hard,


  36. Rodrigo permalink
    August 11, 2012 1:40 am

    Well, I was taught pretty well by the previous generation, Helena 🙂

    I was raised by my grandmother, as well as my mother.

    My granadmother taught me about those values, to know right from wrong, to stand up and not be afraid to speak my mind. She taught me about lessons and morals from the Bible herself, and I loved that. I listened intently about the tales of Jesus, what he did and what he stood for.I took those lessons to heart and firmly believed those things myself. That’s why when I listen to Michael, I know he was the same, and I believe every word he said about what he took from Jesus and God.

    That’s why I was probably the only kid at school that a friend would come up to me and say
    “I wish more people were like you”. I never forgot that, and my family was very pleased when I told them that.

    What I learned from the previous generation, Helena. That’s something I want to teach to my children someday.


  37. August 11, 2012 12:55 am

    “That means a lot to me.”

    Rodrigo, that means a lot to me too. I belong to a previous generation and am happy that the future is in good hands.


  38. Rodrigo permalink
    August 11, 2012 12:39 am

    Thank you, Helena. That means a lot to me.


  39. August 10, 2012 11:37 pm

    Great words, Rodrigo. Great words. And what I like most about them is that you are only 21 years old.

    No, your values are not outdated in today’s society – they are the beginning of a new future.


  40. Rodrigo permalink
    August 10, 2012 9:11 pm

    I agree with all that, Helena.

    All of us here are not afraid to speak up for Michael. Not only to defend him from the accusations, but to speak up and defend who he really was and what he believed in. I defend him not because I’m just a fan, I do it because I believe in what he believed in, which shaped him into a man who tried to change the world for the best. I’m a fan of Michael’s character, how he thought only of others, how he wanted the best for us all. Big, small, black, white, etc, he cared about the world.

    I simply refuse to stand by and watch people out there ridicule him for taking his beliefs to heart – “I will never stop helping and loving people the way Jesus said to” That’s what Michael said, and I admire that. Should we condemn a man who thought that?

    I get asked, “why do you care so much?” – Because I do. It’s who I am. And I’m not going to stop just because people are ignorant and cynical. Call me fag, call me weird, call me f’loon, I couldn’t give a ****. I grew up in this world believing in the good of others, I grew wanting to help, I grew up believing in truth and justice. My values may be outdated in today’s society, but I fight for what I believe in. Michael fought for what he believed in and people didn’t understand it, and what did he basically recommend to them? Try reading the Bible and hopefully then you’ll understand me.

    Brett Ratner summed it up perfectly
    “He was a pure innocent in a world that wasn’t so innocent anymore”


  41. August 10, 2012 8:46 pm


    If we take a look back into 93 and everything that transpired up to 2005, there has to be more than 3 felonies here. Not saying that is not enough, but the suggestion still stands.


  42. August 10, 2012 7:25 pm

    “They’re too scared to admit to the world that they support Michael, out of fear of what people might think about them. It basically feels like Peter denying that he’s a disciple of Jesus out of fear of what might happen to him. This attitude is no good, and fans NEED to change.”

    Rodrigo, YES, this needs to change. There should be no fear or shame. We have nothing to be ashamed of – we defend an innocent person and want justice for him because he was slandered beyond any possible measure.

    Besides everything else people should realize that it is also a grave sin – to be guilty of harassing a person who didn’t deserve a fraction of what he had to endure. And we are not asking for much – just make people understand that it was wrong to mistreat him in such an inhuman manner. Animals are treated better than Michael Jackson. And he was a human being and also a very good one at that. And also a genius.

    Instead of being ashamed Michael’s supporters should be PROUD of standing by him. They were the first to see his clean heart and soul, and it takes a certain measure of one’s own cleanliness to see these qualities in another person. The like are attracted by the like. The very least that is happening to us now is drifting in the direction of his sincerity, his honesty, his love, his cleanliness of spirit -all of which is enveloping us like light.

    This is why once we get into Michael’s orbit we are unable and unwilling to leave it. There is so much darkness everywhere else that we want to stay by him as if by the sun, learning from him how to love and be together.


  43. August 10, 2012 6:49 pm

    “There was a number of reasons Sneddon went after Michael. Clearly, knowing what we know, justice wasn’t one of them,” – Rodrigo

    Oh, this we can be sure of. Justice had NOTHING to do with what Sneddon did to Michael and why he went after him.


  44. August 10, 2012 4:18 pm

    “The real deal is that excuses are being used NOT to support this initiative and many have lead people astray because they don’t want to see Mr. Wagener at the helm. If it was someone they LIKED or FAVORED it would be quite a different story. I don’t say this to hurt Mr. Wagener but I speak what is the truth” – Cadeflaw

    If these people allow themselves to be led by some minor considerations it means that they are not on the side of the truth and don’t know what it is. Truth often comes in unexpected forms, and History is often done by people who are least expected to do it.

    The Apostle Paul, for example, didn’t look like the best candidate for spreading Jesus’s teaching, as firstly, he was one of his worst detractors at the beginning, secondly, he was the only apostle who wasn’t with Christ when he was still alive, and thirdly, he didn’t look exactly like a charismatic star as people said he was short, plain and had a hooked nose. So what? It was him who was chosen to take Christ’s teaching to the gentiles and his dedication to the cause and faith in Christ made up for all his ‘deficiencies’ perfectly well.

    I don’t see any reasons for anyone to disagree with what William Wagener is doing. William Wagener is a very professional and vocal journalist. He proved himself to be a staunch Michael Jackson’s supporter and was the first to say that Michael would be acquitted, even before the verdict. There was no time when Wagener wouldn’t be talking of Michael’s innocence. Ever since the 2005 trial William Wagener has been supporting Michael like no one among journalists and even fans.

    And now William Wagener is going to say the whole truth about Tom Sneddon.

    If someone is still hesitating whether he should (or shouldn’t) support Wagener, STOP hesitating and take his side NOW.

    Your hesitation is INEXCUSABLE.

    There are times when history is leaping forward through individual people it selects and THIS IS THE MOMENT!


  45. August 10, 2012 3:01 pm



  46. August 10, 2012 2:53 pm

    “Helena, I posted a part your comment below (of 12:27; from “I think that there is not a single…”) on the FB page of the WW support group. Now the Germans who dont’ know enough English want me to translate it. Is that ok for you?”

    Susanne, of course! You needn’t even ask!


  47. August 10, 2012 1:58 pm

    Helena, I posted a part your comment below (of 12:27; from “I think that there is not a single…”) on the FB page of the WW support group. Now the Germans who dont’ know enough English want me to translate it. Is that ok for you?


  48. Rodrigo permalink
    August 10, 2012 9:30 am

    I wish fans were more like Wagener. At least he has the balls to stand up for Michael. A lot of other fans don’t. I think it’s out of fear myself.

    I’ve just found these 2 guys on a site I hang out on saying things about Michael…yet there are hardcore fans there too that see this…and they did nothing about it. A couple tried actually, but they got the info all wrong. I refuted what the haters said and gave them the link to this blog for education.

    It’s like some of Michael’s fans are either too scared or ashamed to defend him. They could go to places like this and get the info required to defend Michael’s name, but no. They’re too scared to admit to the world that they support Michael, out of fear of what people might think about them. They are fans and they acknowledge that to others, but they won’t do anything when somebody comes along and badmouths Michael for his actions in life.

    It basically feels like Peter denying that he’s a disciple of Jesus out of fear of what might happen to him.

    This attitude is no good, and fans NEED to change. And they do need to get their facts straight as anything. Cause if you defend Michael with the mindframe of an adoring fan and are misinformed about just 1 little thing, that’s it, game over.

    Like Wagener, I’m definitely going to be more outspoken. Whatever I don’t know that well, I’ll just point them here 🙂


  49. Rodrigo permalink
    August 10, 2012 6:54 am

    My brother in law once thought Michael was guilty, until I showed him this blog.

    And he gave me an interesting view on the situation. He thinks when the accusations first hit, people out there HAD to paint him guilty. Because Michael was a highly influential and controversial celebrity, people like Dimond and Sneddon, who’s values were too prim to accept Michael’s behaviour, delibrately set out to say he was guilty while knowing he was innocent. My brother in law said Michael could simply not be allowed to get away with those accusations, because of the already condemnation of his relationship with children.

    If he got away with it, it would look like he was corrupting how society should behave.

    In their eyes, Michael Jackson should not be allowed to continue doing what he does if he got of with it. Even if he was innocent, which they knew at some point or another.
    And it does make sense given how quick Sneddon leapt into action when he heard Michael say “Children” “Bed”.


  50. Rodrigo permalink
    August 10, 2012 5:01 am

    There was a number of reasons Sneddon went after Michael. Clearly, knowing what we know, justice wasn’t one of them.


  51. August 10, 2012 4:10 am

    Over time I have come to believe it was Michaels wealth and fame that was the reason for Sneddon´s persecution.Maybe racism too.And child molestation turned out to be such a good cover.All since Guitirrez fertilized many a mind.It turned out to be profitable for an army of sc journalists and talkshow hosts.
    Many a genius does not live acc. to the generally accepted social norms and are eccentric too.It just staggers my mind how many people lived off Michael,some basing their very career on salacious lies.


  52. August 10, 2012 3:04 am

    To put it simply, if WW has a personal vendetta against Sneddon, let it be – he is not in an official position of a prosecutor and has the right to have personal feelings. For Sneddon a vendetta was out of the question, as people in a position of authority cannot use their post for persecuting other people, especially in a fraudulent manner, and if Sneddon’s ways are disclosed to the public through a private citizen seeking justice for himself, we should only applaud him for doing it. Are there any other pretexts not to support William Wagener’s initiative? If I don’t know something I need to know please tell me. However if there are no solid reasons for it I personally will consider all those who are against this historical initiative to make Sneddon answer for his crimes Michael’s ENEMIES, and not friends.

    Helena: There is so much TRUTH AND POWER in your posts. There is NOTHING else to know. The real deal is that excuses are being used NOT to support this initiative and many have lead people astray because they don’t want to see Mr. Wagener at the helm. If it was someone they LIKED or FAVORED it would be quite a different story. I don’t say this to hurt Mr. Wagener but I speak what is the truth. It is not the TRUTH which set a person free, but it is the TRUTH THAT ONE KNOWS. I know this is the TRUTH. What does it matter if WW has a vendetta against TS. I would think that would give WW the more courage to stand up to the supervisors and ask that the wrongs done to Michael be made right. I thought we all came together to vindicate, advocate, protect and preserve Michael’s legacy. I guess I was wrong.


  53. August 10, 2012 1:13 am

    “Human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable… Every step toward the goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals” – Martin Luther King

    SRJ, thank you for the quote. Truly great words. And so much applicable here.


  54. August 10, 2012 12:27 am

    Guys, I am sorry for not having an opportunity to answer some comments. I am now reviewing some of them.

    SemiRefinedJunkie said:

    “…vindication starts in the heart, first. I was a shaky supporter before, wanting to support, but fearing the worst at the same time, until I read something that changed me forever and vindicated MJ completely in my heart. I’m not sure if every fan has reached a level where they are impervious to tabloids. They’re everywhere, people, “high-level” journalists, who talk about war, fights against terrorism, are repeating those lies. It becomes hypnotic. But it’s so deranged when you manage to tear yourself away from it all.”

    Oh, I recognize that “shaky” feeling very much too. At first I handled each lie about Jackson with the same fear – and what if it turns out to be true? Can I be mistaken in thinking Michael innocent? Since I wanted to find out the truth for myself in the first place the research was twice as thorough. But each time the lie turned out to be a lie, and eventually the fear was replaced by the opposite feeling – confidence that even if we cannot find an explanation of some lie now, it will come later and we just need to wait for some documents or new circumstances to be disclosed.

    “And the fight is long and grueling, and a lot of fans are trying hard not to give up. Why they don’t find this petition a booster, is beyond me. This is senseless, sad, disgraceful and, really, hypocritical behavior from “MJ lovers”.

    My opinion is that Michael’s supporters are regarded as such a powerful force that there are people among them now who are working against them under the disguise of MJ’s “fans”. Real agents-provocateurs are relatively few (in my opinion) however there are many who get easily misguided by them and swallow their provocative ideas hook, line and sinker. These people form “fight-groups” to promote these provocations without thinking twice and attack other MJ’s fans who do not support their views, bringing in a lot of discord into the fanbase and distracting MJ’s fans from real issues at hand – like making Sneddon answer for his crimes, for example.

    The result is division, discord and a lot of frustration among fans.

    Two thousand years ago we were warned that we would know the tree by its fruit. So why haven’t people learned yet how to tell a good fruit from a rotten one?

    I think that there is NOT A SINGLE Michael Jackson’s supporter who would be happy with Tom Sneddon. William Wagener has taken it upon himself to do something which all of us have been dreaming to happen. And when we finally find the man willing to do this hard job for us some suddenly start hesitating? Noooooo, guys – this won’t do.

    What reasons for hesitation can any of us have? No reason at all.

    In this particular case there may be NO EXCUSE for not supporting William Wagener.

    None of us even have a pretext of fearing for our money and even a theoretical possibility of it being “embezzled”, because the affidavit WW is going to make does not involve the money issue at all.

    The pretext that William Wagener may have a grudge against Sneddon (as I hear) is actually working for Wagener, instead of against him. If he has a personal interest, so much the better, because it will give him added strength to take the case to a conclusive end. To put it simply, if WW has a personal vendetta against Sneddon, let it be – he is not in an official position of a prosecutor and has the right to have personal feelings. For Sneddon a vendetta was out of the question, as people in a position of authority cannot use their post for persecuting other people, especially in a fraudulent manner, and if Sneddon’s ways are disclosed to the public through a private citizen seeking justice for Jackson (and himself), we should only applaud him for doing it.

    And what William Wagener is going to say about Sneddon is TRUTH and we of all people know it better than anyone else – Sneddon broke the law on numerous occasions, tried to falsify the evidence against Jackson and even his own experts had to admit that they mishandled the fingerprints!

    Are there any other pretexts not to support William Wagener’s initiative? If I don’t know something I need to know please tell me.

    However if there are no solid reasons for it I personally will consider all those who are against this historical initiative to make Sneddon answer for his crimes Michael’s ENEMIES, and not friends.


  55. Rodrigo permalink
    August 8, 2012 6:38 am

    It’s really shocking.

    I think they reason things by saying Michael bought his own tombstone, dug his own grave and they just put him in it and buried him.

    I find it intersting when celebrities are guilty of things and the press are quick to remind people of that when writing. But they NEVER say Michael was guilty, they remind you of his ‘eccentricities’ and the accusations, but they always get away with things by reminding us he was found innocent…They know full well he wasn’t guilty, but it’s like they plant suggestions to us. I feel this is their attempt to justify the way they treat him, by reminding the public of his ‘crazy’ lifestyle, leading some us to think the worst of him, for whatever reason.

    It’s like they WANT and NEED the public to be on their side.

    But I have noticed in the past 3 years they have toned down reminders of the accusations. Fear or guilt perhaps? But they’ll always remain disrespctful by printing more unsavoury stories about him.

    But they NEED the public to forever think Michael was no good in some way. Obscure opinions.

    A story comes out about Michael having a fling with Whitney Houston. A few days later they get Scott Thorson to talk about his time with MJ, which we all know was fake, as they paid him to say lies back in 2005 when they were certain he was going down.

    Maybe it’s no longer about saying Michael was this and that, now it does seem to be about leaving him in mystery and obscurity. They want the public to make up their own minds…why would they do that?


  56. August 8, 2012 1:35 am

    Completely agree, I hate when they say those things. Somehow, they always find a way to make the traumatic events of Michael’s life his own fault. I don’t understand it. Michael was killed and a victim of extortion- but who gets the blame? He does.


  57. Rodrigo permalink
    August 8, 2012 12:23 am

    My mother just the other day reading about the Jackson’s said to me –
    “Look at that. Saying he died of an overdose. That’s to make you think he was a druggie. He was murdered”

    And I said they keep calling him Jacko as well to make us think of ‘wacko’.

    And we both said “SCUMBAGS”


  58. August 7, 2012 11:32 pm

    “People were TRAINED by the Media, Legal Pundits, afternoon/late night hosts, Ministers of the Church, jealous Rockers and everyone in between to BELIEVE. That does not happen by accident”- Dialdancer

    Oh no, absolutely no accident! Earlier I promised not to beat about the bush and say everything directly – so here it is. My most unpleasant discovery in studying Michael Jackson’s situation was the realization of the fact that the worst propaganda methods which are used by our mass media were (and are) used by your media against Jackson.

    To name only a few:

    – when they talk about someone who is anti-Michael they use neutral or positive vocabulary while Michael’s name is always accompanied by a couple of derogatory words (Murray – a respected doctor, Michael – drug-addict)

    – they quote only the worst parts which portray Michael negatively, but never quote the best that could clear him of suspicion (for example, they quoted Michael’s slurred speech in Murray’s tape a thousand times, but never said that he spoke about God there and how painful it was for him to see ill children. The full tape was never played on TV)

    – they misrepresent facts or misplace the focus (they say that Michael died of propofol and not because of Murray’s extreme neglect for his patient. Reality is the opposite – propofol is a safe drug and no one dies of it, and Michael died because Murray left him for an indefinite time and failed to monitor him)

    – they make out Michael as a guilty party in every type of a situation (Michael took propofol instead of Murray giving it to him, he “died of an over-dose” while in reality he died in the hands of a doctor who over-dosed him, etc.). He was said to be guilty of “lavish spending” even if it was the fault of his assistants who charged him ten times as much as the real price of something – for example, a helicopter. And Israili guard said that it cost $10,000 but the people in Michael’s “team” said that “for Michael Jackson it would be $100,000”)

    – they program people’s minds by constant repetition of certain words about MJ, out of which “bizarre” and “weird” are the mildest ones. Most often it is “freak”, “wacko” and “ped-le” which even in negation do absolutely the same damage due to the mere repetition of these words.

    Diane Dimond, for example, intentionally uses (and stresses by intonation) the word “ped-le” often saying it in negation or as if in question: “I never said he is a p.”, “I don’t know if he is a p’., “p-les behave in this and that way” . No matter how she uses it the effect is the same and she knows it. The idea is to create a firm link of associations between MJ and this word. (This is why we should never use this word in connection with Michael and form a new stable link – Michael = innocent)

    I’ve found a journal which teaches the media how to influence the readership It is a big science with started with how to stealthily advertise products. By now this skill has reached the hights we cannot even imagine. From the short pieces available for free viewing in this magazine I gathered that journalists are taught how to brainwash the public into believing their stories.

    WIKI has a lot more on propaganda techniques. Almost all of it directly applies to what they did to Michael Jackson:

    Below are a number of techniques for generating propaganda:
    Ad hominem
    A Latin phrase that has come to mean attacking one’s opponent, as opposed to attacking their arguments.

    Ad nauseam
    This argument approach uses tireless repetition of an idea. An idea, especially a simple slogan, that is repeated enough times, may begin to be taken as the truth. This approach works best when media sources are limited or controlled by the propagator.

    Appeal to prejudice
    Using loaded or emotive terms to attach value or moral goodness to believing the proposition. Used in biased or misleading ways.

    Bandwagon and “inevitable-victory” appeals attempt to persuade the target audience to join in and take the course of action that “everyone else is taking”.

    Inevitable victory
    Invites those not already on the bandwagon to join those already on the road to certain victory. Those already or at least partially on the bandwagon are reassured that staying aboard is their best course of action.

    Join the crowd
    This technique reinforces people’s natural desire to be on the winning side. This technique is used to convince the audience that a program is an expression of an irresistible mass movement and that it is in their best interest to join.

    Big Lie
    The repeated articulation of a complex of events that justify subsequent action. The descriptions of these events have elements of truth, and the “big lie” generalizations merge and eventually supplant the public’s accurate perception of the underlying events.

    Card Stacking
    Propagandist uses this technique to make the best case possible for his side and the worst for the opposing viewpoint by carefully using only those facts that support his or her side of the argument while attempting to lead the audience into accepting the facts as a conclusion. In other words, the propagandist stacks the cards against the truth.
    Card stacking is the most difficult technique to detect because it does not provide all of the information necessary for the audience to make an informed decision. The audience must decide what is missing.

    Cognitive dissonance
    People desire to be consistent. Suppose a pollster finds that a certain group of people hates his candidate for senator but love actor A. They use actor A’s endorsement of their candidate to change people’s minds because people cannot tolerate inconsistency. They are forced to either to dislike the actor or like the candidate.

    Common man
    The “plain folks” or “common man” approach attempts to convince the audience that the propagandist’s positions reflect the common sense of the people. It is designed to win the confidence of the audience by communicating in the common manner and style of the target audience. Propagandists use ordinary language and mannerisms (and clothe their message in face-to-face and audiovisual communications) in attempting to identify their point of view with that of the average person.

    The creation or deletion of information from public records, in the purpose of making a false record of an event or the actions of a person or organization, including outright forgery of photographs, motion pictures, broadcasts, and sound recordings as well as printed documents.

    Glittering generalities
    Glittering generalities are emotionally appealing words that are applied to a product or idea, but present no concrete argument or analysis. This technique has also been referred to as the PT Barnum effect.

    A half-truth is a deceptive statement, which may come in several forms and includes some element of truth. The statement might be partly true, the statement may be totally true but only part of the whole truth, or it may utilize some deceptive element, such as improper punctuation, or double meaning, especially if the intent is to deceive, evade, blame or misrepresent the truth.

    Lying and deception
    Lying and deception can be the basis of many propaganda techniques including Ad Homimen arguments, Big-Lie, Defamation, Door-in-the-Face, Half-truth, Name-calling or any other technique that is based on dishonesty or deception. For example, many politicians have been found to frequently stretch or break the truth.

    Managing the news
    According to Adolf Hitler “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly – it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”This idea is consistent with the principle of classical conditioning as well as the idea of “Staying on Message.”

    Name-calling [Wacko Jacko]
    Propagandists use the name-calling technique to incite fears and arouse prejudices in their hearers in the intent that the bad names will cause hearers to construct a negative opinion about a group or set of beliefs or ideas that the propagandist wants hearers to denounce. The method is intended to provoke conclusions about a matter apart from impartial examinations of facts. Name-calling is thus a substitute for rational, fact-based arguments against the an idea or belief on its own merits.

    Obfuscation, intentional vagueness, confusion
    Generalities are deliberately vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations. The intention is to move the audience by use of undefined phrases, without analyzing their validity or attempting to determine their reasonableness or application. The intent is to cause people to draw their own interpretations rather than simply being presented with an explicit idea. In trying to “figure out” the propaganda, the audience forgoes judgment of the ideas presented. Their validity, reasonableness and application may still be considered.

    Favorable generalities are used to provide simple answers to complex problems.
    [For example, “the baby-dangling” incident, which was never a “dangling” incident at all, is turned into a reason to take Michael’s children away from him]

    Quotes out of context
    Selectively editing quotes to change meanings—political documentaries designed to discredit an opponent or an opposing political viewpoint often make use of this technique.

    Red herring
    Presenting data or issues that, while compelling, are irrelevant to the argument at hand, and then claiming that it validates the argument.
    [For example, Michael Jackson’s plastic surgery makes him weird, so “therefore he is a ped-le”. Or seventy police officers raided his ranch – and since there were so many of them, “he must surely be guilty of something” – though in both cases one idea is disconnected from the other]

    This is the repeating of a certain symbol or slogan so that the audience remembers it. This could be in the form of a jingle or an image placed on nearly everything in the picture/scene.

    This technique attempts to arouse prejudices in an audience by labeling the object of the propaganda campaign as something the target audience fears, hates, loathes, or finds undesirable.

    Straw man
    A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

    [For example, when interviewers asked Michael about slumber parties and he said something like ‘what’s so bad about them?’ this was always presented as “He invites small boys into his bed” and all further discussion centers around the idea of “invitation”. However he never invited anyone into his bed – boys or girls alike – he just couldn’t say no to any of them. After the 1993 case he never stayed alone with children and slept either on the floor or a separate couch]

    Testimonials are quotations, in or out of context, especially cited to support or reject a given policy, action, program, or personality. The reputation or the role (expert, respected public figure, etc.) of the individual giving the statement is exploited. The testimonial places the official sanction of a respected person or authority on a propaganda message. This is done in an effort to cause the target audience to identify itself with the authority or to accept the authority’s opinions and beliefs as its own.

    Third party technique
    Works on the principle that people are more willing to accept an argument from a seemingly independent source of information than from someone with a stake in the outcome.

    Also known as association, this is a technique that involves projecting the positive or negative qualities of one person, entity, object, or value onto another to make the second more acceptable or to discredit it. It evokes an emotional response, which stimulates the target to identify with recognized authorities. Often highly visual, this technique often utilizes symbols (e.g. swastikas) superimposed over other visual images (e.g. logos). These symbols may be used in place of words.
    [For example, when discussing Michael Jackson’s 1993 case haters often tie it to Simpson’s murder case via the lawyer both of them had – which is usually never done as one client has nothing to do with another client of the same lawyer. However in Michael’s case it is constantly repeated to make the negative image of Simpson cast a shade over Jackson]

    Selective truth
    Richard Crossman, the British Deputy Director of Psychological Warfare Division (PWD) for the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF) during the Second World War said “In propaganda truth pays… It is a complete delusion to think of the brilliant propagandist as being a professional liar. The brilliant propagandist is the man who tells the truth, or that selection of the truth which is requisite for his purpose, and tells it in such a way that the recipient does not think he is receiving any propaganda… […] The art of propaganda is not telling lies, bur rather selecting the truth you require and giving it mixed up with some truths the audience wants to hear.”

    Unstated assumption
    This technique is used when the idea the propagandist wants to plant would seem less credible if explicitly stated. The concept is instead repeatedly assumed or implied”.

    [Do you remember Perretti’s film, and him and Bob Jones discussing that Michael stayed with a boy alone in a room at night….. a statement followed by a long and meaningful pause from both of them? This is it – imagination can do more than any words. If they had said that they played video games or watched TV the effect would have been less dramatic]

    More about propaganda techniques:

    Each of us can find our own explanations for this intentional muddying of Michael’s name, but what is clear is that the media coverage of Michael Jackson and his life has nothing to do with the objectivity they proclaim.


  59. August 7, 2012 9:15 am

    “One intelligent thing came out of it, though: everyone’s still hyped about the 1993 case, and the way it was settled. That’s one of their attacks on any positive thing someone says of MJ.”

    Just another reason why Ms. Hughes movie must come out and be reinforced by Mr. Wagener’s. Many a civil attorney has side stepped this or made it sound like their client was willing to fight tooth and nail whereas MJ wasn’t. I do not make excuse for why the decision was made anymore all I know is Michael was in one hell of a bind with the type of allegation, time afforded him by the judge to resolve this, law enforcement seemed inclined to look at him only as a culprit and the fact I believe he was not properly represented nor counseled by his final set of attorneys.

    As for understanding the ignorance that is simple. It is just that ignorance of the facts. When you step back, go to any online site which has a blog or old articles look for Michael. Jay Leno started it and made it popular to mock him the slightly porn type joke which became acceptable even an unconscious thing to do. People were TRAINED by the Media, Legal Pundits, afternoon/late night hosts, Ministers of the Church, jealous Rockers and everyone in between to BELIEVE. Teaching something only requires repetition and the lies got plenty of that. Neither Hitler or Satan the master of all depravity has half as much bad press alive and well as Michael Jackson. That does not happen by accident.


  60. August 7, 2012 8:45 am

    @ lynande51 permalink

    There is more than just the ones listed above that I can list.

    Yes there are more: Ok I need to refresh my memory.

    CONSPIRACY: A criminal conspiracy exists when two or more people agree to commit almost any unlawful act, then take some action toward its completion. The action taken need not itself be a crime, but it must indicate that those involved in the conspiracy knew of the plan and intended to break the law. (

    A) Conspire to withhold exculpatory evidence from the courts and defense attorney. Children DNA test result received months before the Grand Jury. Result by traffic experts disproving Star’s statement about the stairs PRIOR to the Grand Jury.

    B) Conspire to make the court an accessory to committing a crime. Requesting and receiving a 2nd warrant for search of PI Miller’s office having known and being informed by Miller he worked for MJ’s attorney. (they did not inform the judge)

    C) Conspire to defraud the Govt’. Sneddon gave Janet Arvizo a form to received “victim compensation” both knowing she did not qualify.

    D) Conspire to falsely imprison.

    PERJURY: Perjury statutes in many states make it a crime to knowingly lie after taking an oath to tell the truth, such as when testifying in court or communicating through certain legal documents. The falsehood must usually be material to the matter at issue, though perjury can also be committed by simply signing a document with the knowledge that it contains false assertions. (

    A) Sneddon in court yesterday (Aug 16 2004) that he knew Miller worked for Geragos as far back as December 2003……(STOP…. Sneddon knew in Dec 2003 before there was that 1st call to DCFS????) The defense attorney then presented a motion filed by Sneddon after December 2003 in which he then claimed not to know Miller worked for the defense team. So either Sneddon was lying in legal documents filed in court, or he’’s lying now on the witness stand. (MJEOL Bullet 178)

    B) (Aug 5 2005 approx 90 days AFTER the Grand Jury)
    “Defense attorneys say prosecutors are handing over non-certified copies of some 69 (or as many as 74) search warrants; some with blanks and some that are mysteriously missing pages. Prosecutors are duty-bound, for obvious reasons, to hand over true and correct copies of all of their information—such as copies of search warrants and other info— to the defense so that they can adequately prepare for trial.” “”We also have testimony that there may be an additional telephonic search warrant issued at Neverland Ranch.”

    Click to access 080504statusrpt.pdf

    C) Sneddon’s Perjury on the above and at least 4 other incidents.
    It is interesting Sneddon remarks on the Linden Affidavit which has never been made public, is not found in any public document concerning Michael Jackson. (p. 21)

    Click to access 080904pltoppdftmotaffwarevid.pdf

    D) Sneddon either perjured himself in writing with the above document or on the witness stand during his enforced testimony concerning his action.


  61. August 7, 2012 6:21 am

    Dial: You’re welcome 😀 Those comments were hell to go through…I tried my hand at some defense, and got smacked down by those who really had no knowledge of anything. One intelligent thing came out of it, though: everyone’s still hyped about the 1993 case, and the way it was settled. That’s one of their attacks on any positive thing someone says of MJ. That, and they throw some Sandusky crap into the mix and try to relate the two. Some non-supporters but non-haters understand that the problem with this is that no one is letting this whole thing go. Makes sense. We’re trying to portray a positive legacy and get the facts straight. “They” think we’re blind to the truth and refuse to see any wrongdoing because we “worship” MJ.

    *slaps forehead in disbelief* Hell, there were some bad, really bad mistakes I will freely admit that MJ made in his life. But they were nowhere near what people say he did. This ignorance and pure stupidity from the public is something I will never understand.


  62. August 7, 2012 6:11 am


    I love that photo and thank those swimmer for that sweet moment. I hated some of the comments and thank their posters, because it only makes me more determine


  63. stacy permalink
    August 7, 2012 5:44 am

    Why was Sneddon so obsessed with Michael Jackson? I read somewhere that he had the statue of limitations expanded on the 1993 allegations. Is that true?


  64. August 7, 2012 1:35 am

    On a rather unrelated note:–oly.html

    The timing couldn’t have been more perfect!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  65. August 6, 2012 11:55 pm

    Here is a press release about the future documentary by William Wagener about the 2005 trial. This is our long-term program which should also be realized after WW’s August 14th affidavit, hopefully to followed by an investigaiton of Sneddon’s felonies.

    I cannot believe that anyone can still be thinking MJ to be guilty and the Arvizo case real, but if there are some crazy people who think that way then the documentary is a must!

    PRESS RELEASE – FOR RELEASE: July 12, 2012

    CONTACT: William Wagener…..805-928-1100 cell (202) 270-2421

    Documentary on the 2005 Michael Jackson Trial. A new documentary about the 2005 child molestation trial of The King of Pop, Michael Jackson, is slated to begin production sometime before the end of this year.

    Producer William Wagener announces that award-winning documentary filmmaker Bill Still, has been selected to direct the upcoming documentary film about the 2005 trial of legendary entertainer, Michael Jackson, & letter of intent signed July 12, 2012 by both.

    Jackson was acquitted of all 14 charges of pedophilia against him in June of 2005. Wagener says that the documentary will depict “word-for-word actual courtroom testimony” to finally clear Jackson’s name because the public perception persists that Jackson was actually guilty. The film will show that significant “evidence” produced by the prosecution in that trial was fabricated. The film will also show how the mainstream media spun away from truth and produced instead a sordid web of distortion to purposely make the beloved entertainer look guilty in the court of public opinion.

    Bill Still and William Wagener predict that the film will be a blockbuster when it is released sometime in 2013 fueled by massive international Jackson fan-club interest.

    The trial was the climax of a darkened period for the pop icon, as unsubstantiated pedophiliac rumors circled around Jackson for nearly a decade. In 1993, a 13-year-old boy, accused Jackson of molesting him, even though the claim turned out to be nothing more than a mere extortion plot, orchestrated by the boy’s then father, Evan Chandler and his attorney Barry Rothman. Although Jackson wanted to fight the accusations tooth and nail, he was unwisely advised by those around him to settle the case out of court. The Chandler Family and their attorney were paid a $22 million dollar settlement, by Jackson’s insurance company and not by Jackson himself, although many people still falsely believe the contrary.

    Ten years later, more accusations surfaced in 2003, when another 13-year-old boy falsely accused, Jackson of molesting him while the youngster was convalescing from terminal cancer at the singer’s famed Neverland Ranch. More rumors spread after the boy appeared (looking healthy) with the star on the show “Living With Michael Jackson”, a two-hour interview by famed British journalist Martin Bashir. Thanks to embarrassing statements that the boy had made about sleeping in the superstar’s bedroom more rumors sparked. As a result the boy’s mother, Janet Arviso, just like Evan Chandler before her, orchestrated her own attempted payoff, under the guise of molestation accusations, this time with backing of then Santa Barbara County’s District Attorney Tom Sneddon behind her. (Arviso would later be found guilty at her own trial for welfare fraud.)

    Instead of settling for a second time, Jackson demanded his day in court. The trial lasted for five months, from February to June of 2003. Since it was a trial involving a charge of child sexual abuse, the judge presiding over the case Judge Rodney Melville declared a “media blackout”, by not allowing recording equipment of any kind in the courtroom. Reporters had to either relay their information via the Internet or by phone, which basically allowed them to omit and edit the truth wherever they saw fit.

    Wagener sat in on the trial as a member of the press core for his show “On Second Thought”. The veteran reporter who never missed a day in court, was amazed at how the local and national news organizations only reported bits and pieces of one-sided information of the trial mainly from the prosecution, while little to no information was ever reported from the defense. It is through the documentary that both Wagener and Still hope to rectify this.

    Jackson’s brilliant defense attorney, Tom Mesereau destroyed all the prosecution witnesses’ lewd testimony on cross examination and nearly exposed the fact that the physical evidence was basically all fabricated — possibly by Sneddon himself and his legal team. Despite the media’s unfairness, Wagener was the only reporter to say publicly on his show that Jackson was going to be acquitted on all 14 charges and that he would leave the courtroom a free man. The reporter was proven right on June 13, 2005.

    Bill Still is the director, narrator, and producer of the documentaries The Money Masters and The Secret of Oz, which are critiques of the United States’ monetary system. The Secret of Oz won the Best Documentary Award at the 2010 Beloit International Film Festival. Still was featured in a segment which aired in Feb. 2012 on the History Channel’s America’s Book of Secrets discussing the Fort Knox Gold Scandal. He also sought the Libertarian Party’s nomination during the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election, but was defeated by Gary Johnson at the Libertarian National Convention.

    Although he triumphed victoriously after the trial, Jackson’s life and career were never the same. An exceptional entertainer, he nearly gave up performing all together, and lived a nomadic existence with his three small children at the time Prince Michael, Paris Katherine, and Prince Michael II a.k.a. “Blanket”. The foursome lived in a variety of places around the globe including Las Vegas, Ireland, and even Bahrain.

    In March of 2009, Jackson announced that he was going to perform for the final time in the UK. Called “This Is It”, the 50 show residency at London’s O2 Arena were supposed to be his “final curtain call” before retiring, completing an astounding almost 50 year entertaining career. However, it was not meant to be. Mounting pressures from the show, as well as the post-traumatic stress brought on from the trial, forced Jackson to seek out extreme measures to get the required sleep that he so needed in order to perform. Jackson began using the powerful anesthetic Propofal to help him sleep with the aid of a west coast based cardiologist by the name of Dr. Conrad Murray. An accident ensued with the drug and the legendary pop singer died on June 25, 2009, 12 days after the fourth year anniversary of his acquittal. He would’ve turned 51 two months later on August 29th. It was the tragic end, to the extraordinary life of one of the most fascinating, controversial and above all most beloved entertainers of all time.

    Wagener and Still hope that both Michael Jackson’s fans as well as anyone who is a fan of the truth will be supportive of the project and will help donate a minimum of $3 million to produce the documentary debt free so it can earn enough money to help the children of the world via the MJJ Innocent Forever Foundation as well as various other children’s charities that were close to Jackson’s heart, including the proposed children’s hospital in his name which was said by his fans to be his “last wish” which came out during Dr. Murray’s 2011 trial. (Dr. Murray was convicted and sentence to four years in prison for administering the fatal drug that took Jackson’s life.)

    Casting for the production is slated for a later date. All questions, comments, or concerns about the project can be forwarded to (805) 928-1100.


  66. August 6, 2012 11:02 am

    @ aldebaranredstar: This Facebook group is trying to do that:
    You can also find form letters there that should be sent to the Santa Barbara Supervisors.


  67. aldebaranredstar permalink
    August 6, 2012 8:29 am

    Have all MJ fan sites been notified of this important action? I hope so! If not, they need to be told. I just found out about this. I think fans are precoccupied with the recent family fights about the will, etc. Please someone who has a complete list of MJ sites, let them all know about this.


  68. August 6, 2012 5:59 am

    @dial: I can’t stand it anymore, either. Fans, advocates, supporters. The point is for them to unite to support one cause. But vindication starts in the heart, first. I was a shaky supporter before, wanting to support, but fearing the worst at the same time, until I read something that changed me forever and vindicated MJ completely in my heart. I’m not sure if every fan has reached a level where they are impervious to tabloids. They’re everywhere, people, “high-level” journalists, who talk about war, fights against terrorism, are repeating those lies. It becomes hypnotic. But it’s so deranged when you manage to tear yourself away from it all. And the fight is long and grueling, and a lot of fans are trying hard not to give up. Why they don’t find this petition a booster, is beyond me. This is senseless, sad, disgraceful and, really, hypocritical behavior from “MJ lovers”.

    @ vindicatemj:

    You’re very much welcome. I am going to advocate the Californian cause, too. I think it’s working, as the art groups are visited frequently and on a regular basis, by many people. One little problem I am starting to see is a lot of the, well, not-too-well-read or “text skimmers” mistake the petition as something to RENEW THE INVESTIGATION, or change the verdict of the trial (heaven knows how they come up with that!). Perhaps they don’t know what vindicate means? I saw a lot of “hidden by owner” comments beneath mine on DA, and I take it that they realized what it meant once they clicked on the link. *SIGH*

    On a lighter note, I want to share this quote from Martin Luther King jr. that really touched me and motivated me to believe that this cause is not hopeless:

    “Human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable… Every step toward the goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals.” Hey, he won. Why can’t we? Did you see the sea of people there at the courthouse during the trial? They’ll surely come back if we make them aware of this! 😀



    Make videos, record a press conference with other MJ fans, and send them all to Wagener just to let the board of supervisors know that we are educated peoples, not just “rabid fans” and see that injustice has been done not only to MJ, but many others. Be intelligent and use facts to prove your point. Facts, not overt emotion, will win this.

    L.O.V.E. and Victory.


  69. August 6, 2012 3:26 am

    “I’ve alerted some of MJ’s American fans that I know to Wagener’s cause who are close to California, and I’m going spread the petition to my friends and subscribers (Nearly 100) who are MJ fans on Youtube”

    Rodrigo, thanks very much! Please urge those who can to come to support William Wagener!


  70. August 6, 2012 3:19 am

    “For the number of civil suits judged against him how is it Sneddon retired without one black mark on his Bar Association records?”

    Dial, what a great point you are making here! Sneddon must be having powerful friends who are covering up for all his misdeeds. Interesting whether your legal system will be able to stand up to the mark and prove its worth now. It would be a disgrace and terrible disappointment if it didn’t.


  71. August 6, 2012 3:13 am

    “The fact he has no personal history with Sneddon.”

    Frankly, even if William Wagener had a personal history with Sneddon it wouldn’t be bad at all. It would only add to his determination to square with this ugly human being.

    The difference between Mr. Wagener and Mr. Sneddon is that Mr. Sneddon cannot go for vendettas as he was in an official position of a prosecutor who cannot afford to have personal emotions towards those whose activities he investigates, while Mr. Wagener (if he were Mr. Sneddon’s victim) is not bound by such limits. If he suffered in the hands of Mr. Sneddon it would be perfectly all right for him to seek justice for himself now. Every normal person would and his personal grudge (if he had it) would only make him more dedicated in reaching his goal.

    All this would be only an advantage rather than a drawback of Mr. Wagener in the cause he is pursuing now.


  72. August 6, 2012 2:48 am

    “Have gotten in touch with the fellow DeviantArt community…thousands of MJ fans, and artists to boot! So this petition is going to spread like wild-fire there.” – SemiRefinedJunkie

    Great! Could you also please ask those of them who can, to be with William Wagener on August 14 to create a sea of people whom those supervisors will not be able to ignore? If I could I would also come, but it is too far to travel.


  73. August 6, 2012 2:43 am

    “I am flat out of patience. Impatient with a Fanbase where some are beginning to take on the attributes of Dimond, Behar, Grace and even H. Levin.”

    Dial, I very well recognize your feelings. Either the fans have really acquired the attributes of the worst Michael’s haters and fell a victim to Hate (which is inexcusable) or they have never really appreciated Michael Jackson because Michael was not a single tiny little fraction like that.

    Even earlier I heard some people say that it was due to Michael being too much “soft” that the media treated him in so horrible a way and if he had attacked back or sued every media source out of the million that slandered him, they would have treated him as a human being.

    Bullsh*t. They would have never treated him as a human being even if he had had the money and strength to attack back and sue them all. If he had sued them they would have drained him of all his strength (as you cannot sue the whole world) and if Michael had relied on the brutal force which always considers itself right he would have never attracted so many supporters as he does now. By advocating these ideas some fans justify their own bullying tactics which they tooooo often turn on their own kind.

    Michael was a new type of a human being. He does not belong to the past where all this bullying and lying (even to oneself) were a common feature. Michael belongs to the future where each of us should follow if we want to survive at all. Unfortunately many of his followers are simply not catching up with him.

    “A Fanbase which is sending any piece of gossip around the world at the speed of light, but showing little active support to Geraldine Hughes for her upcoming movie based on her book about the Chandler 93 extortion. (why not?)”

    Dial, I don’t gossip but still partially belong to this kind. It is not because I do not support Geraldine Hughes (I do and very much so!) but because I was simply caught up in too much work and huge technical problems which hindered my communication even with this blog. But I support Geraldine very much and hope her venture will be a success.

    This is a great chance to tell the public about the Chandlers family, their scheming, their dysfunction, their inspiration in Victor Gutierrez’s lies and the horrible way the media first slandered Michael and then tried to conceal the traces of their lies. Since I spent quite a time by looking into the Chandlers’ fiction story if Geraldine needs my help I am ready to provide her with all the facts which are available to me.


  74. August 5, 2012 9:24 pm

    @ SemiRefinedJunkie

    “How much publicity is the petition/form getting?”

    Little in the US Community. The International Community is stepping up to the plate as usual. Most is by word of mouth as you have done using one on one contact.

    I am not sure whether there was a Press Release and will check on that, but there are any number of mainstream, online and tabloid persons who routinely monitor MJ sites, Twitter and FB postings so the likelihood this is unknown is zero.

    While discussing his intent to make a documentary on MJ’s 2005 trial Wagener has given chapter and verse his background to include the reason how he ended up with a Felony. The fact he has no personal history with Sneddon.

    (any suspected activity which would have made him any less an undesirable then any of us is available to the public and could be researched at any time through public records.) He has repeatedly answered question concerning his reasons for doing this and the documentary on the 05 trial explaining six ways to Sunday.

    I am flat out of patience. Impatient with a Fanbase where some are beginning to take on the attributes of Dimond, Behar, Grace and even H. Levin. A Fanbase which “previously” claimed they wish to see justice done for Michael by having Sneddon answer for the crime of attempting to imprison falsely an innocent man. Justice for using the Media and multiple Government Agencies to create a case where none exist. For creating a situation where the health, happiness and livelihood of America’s Ambassador for peace is left with none of the above. Imprisoned in a misrepresentation as the rich frail Pedo who got away due to jury sympathy.

    A Fanbase which is sending any piece of gossip around the world at the speed of light, but showing little active support to Geraldine Hughes for her upcoming movie based on her book about the Chandler 93 extortion. (why not?)

    I remain hopeful this will result in an investigation into the 3 plus felonies committed by the former SB DA’s office. If nothing else it will make available information previously denied to the public. We all have the right to chose what each supports. However, should it not be successful not one person who calls themselves, Fan, Supporter or Advocate who did not lend their voice with their hundreds or thousands of followers/members get to say NOT ONE WORD of criticism.


  75. August 5, 2012 1:47 pm

    Have gotten in touch with the fellow DeviantArt community…thousands of MJ fans, and artists to boot! So this petition is going to spread like wild-fire there. 🙂


  76. August 5, 2012 1:12 am


    That’s a good thing to hope…I think there’s a good chance for some of the complaints to resurface, as MJ’s trial was one of the biggest flops of series of monumental flops on Sneddon’s record…It’s horrific that the bar association did not consider or take action, though. Perhaps Wagener will make a point of it in his reading of the affidavit, or the expected supporters there with him will point it out in their speeches. It’s shocking, to say the least. I know that the Bar Association is strict in attorney discipline…wow.


  77. August 4, 2012 11:35 pm

    For the number of civil suits judged against him how is it Sneddon retired without one black mark on his Bar Association records?

    There were several legal news reports from and on lawyers, professors of law and judges who were said to have filed complaints to various bodies which oversee Prosecutorial conduct concerning Sneddon during the investigation and trial. It would be nice if they would hear of this Affidavit and forward their original complaints or statements to the SB Supervisors.

    I hope this time those in authority takes action the kind of action several criminal complaints against you and me would bring about.


  78. Rodrigo permalink
    August 4, 2012 1:05 am

    I’ve sent the petition and Williiam Wagener’s FB details to 94 MJ fans on Youtube and told them to spread the word to their friends…and sent the link to this blog as well lol


  79. Rodrigo permalink
    August 3, 2012 9:35 pm

    I’ve signed the petition. I’ve alerted some of MJ’s American fans that I know to Wagener’s cause who are close to California, and I’m going spread the petition to my friends and subscribers (Nearly 100) who are MJ fans on Youtube 😀


  80. August 3, 2012 9:03 am

    “This is so important, a once in a lifetime opportunity to bring justice, AND GOD to MJ’s life and legacy. I made a point to personally sign the letter, scan it, and send it in that matter. I think the more handwriting they receive, the more impactful the messages will be. ALL OF YOU WHO CAN ATTEND, PLEASE DO IT!” – semiRefinedJunkie

    SRJ, yes, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity! And we should make the most of it! And letters in real handwriting can also be more effective!

    The petition has got more votes than was expected, so now a new goal of 2000 votes has been set. At the moment the number of votes is 1362. I hope it gets to five times as much:

    And those who can – please BE THERE on August 14!


  81. August 3, 2012 8:43 am

    “There is now a trick to searching the site because it is archived.” – Lynette

    It is no good that turning those documents into an archive made the search more difficult. But out of all evils this is the least one. When I learned that something was missing from the Superior court official site this really frightened me, because it would mean that your system is also protecting itself – just like ours.

    Ours is protecting itself from truth, and that is why some people here turn into amateur investigators like me – to get to the truth one constantly has to analyze and connect the dots. However now it is not even difficult to learn it. Things are turning so blatant that the truth is simply glaring into your face. Look at the three girls they can jail for 7 years for singing a (hooligan) song in a church – the government and the court are coming full blast against these three girls as if they have nothing else to do. Hooligans they are of course but the most I would punish them with would be mopping the floor in the church, probably even for a month, and that’s it. The clerics would also have gained more credit and more supporters this way, but instead they are turning into a fanatics’ and prosecutors’ club.

    This is why it is a must that William Wagener should succeed in his efforts – you should make your system work the right way to clean itself of people like Sneddon who freely interpret the law in an arbitrary way. If it is not done and Sneddon gets away with his frauds it will open the road to eventual full lawlessness.


  82. lynande51 permalink
    August 2, 2012 3:51 pm

    There is now a trick to searching the site because it is archived.When you go to SB Access first go to the court calender and chose a title then copy and past it into your search. Not all of the documents were released on the same day so when you have one set of results chose another so you can find others because they were released in lots without a pattern to the release ( meaning not alpha or numeric order). One other thing to remeber when you search is to ignore the motions to seal on the motions that you are looking for because there is one from the defense, the prosecution and the media access proponents so there are three times as many of those as there are motions and they are useless.All they were there for was to seal all documents due to the gag order that was in place.


  83. August 2, 2012 7:57 am

    I ALREADY SENT IT! I can’t believe that I can’t be there to make it to the meeting! IF I COULD STEAL THE CAR, I WOULD! But I made a point to personally sign the letter, scan it, and send it in that matter. I think the more handwriting they receive, the more impactful the messages will be. This is so important, a once in a lifetime opportunity to bring justice, AND GOD to MJ’s life and legacy. I pray for him and his family and friends everyday. SO ALL OF YOU WHO CAN ATTEND, PLEASE DO IT! How much publicity is the petition/form getting?


  84. August 1, 2012 6:51 am

    I agree with you guys, there was way more to Sneddon and his lies- I remember Wagner telling Pearl Jr about Sneddons’ own private investigator telling him there was no wrong-doing on Michael’s part. Maybe their should be a summary of everything Sneddon knowingly did bad, because I feel Wagner is missing a lot in the declaration.

    On a secular note,
    Thanks for the link to the Hughes interview Sanemj. One portion of me is ecstatic that a movie will be made based on Geraldine Hughes book, Redemption. However, the artistic side is a bit concerned with how it will be produced and casted. I’ve done the JacksonTruth youtube page for Geraldine Hughes because I feel like everything associated with Michael should just be professional. Despite the message being positive, the movie can still flop if it’s not produced professionally.


  85. August 1, 2012 5:50 am


    We and others have been down this road. Remember the volume of articles and video which began to disappear in mid 2010? Material that was lying around from as far back as 1990? All links to site like Hard Copy stopped working. Revealing conversations gone. The 2004 Grand Jury transcript remained available for sale through a secondary site until approx Nov 2009. Most of the information found on Veritas no longer is available. The sheer volume of what the Media crank out insure there has to be elves working 24/7 to get it all. As we learn from them they are learning from their mistakes.

    Although I lost a copy of all I collected which was stored online I have a backup. This will not help the person you encounter who wishes to do independent study. There is still the Month/Year function, but at this point there is no way of knowing if all gathered previously is available to everyone else now. The thought of downloading that again attempting to match file for file is…….. The necessity of placing ways, means and what on public Forums for others find is what make us vulnerable.


  86. August 1, 2012 12:41 am

    Dial, I got a list of documents after typing ‘Michael Jackson’. But the general impression is that the list is shorter than before. You are frightening me. It seems we need to copy everything that is left.


  87. July 31, 2012 11:53 pm

    To Vindication Advocates:

    I have been away for a while not caught with reading so perhaps this is old news to everyone else.

    Most of us have copies of the SB Superior Court documents, however, we still provide the general link with instructions to type in the case no# 1133603, Michael Jackson/Michael Joe Jackson or a number of assorted legal terms for others to locate specific information.

    I am currently on the site. I typed in the case number so the person I am sending the info to could get an overview of what is available.

    What I got was this: Your search yielded 0 results.

    I began downloading these documents in May-June 2010 completing Sept 2010 so I know there should have been HUNDREDS of document results using the case number.

    I typed in Michael Joe Jackson, the results are less than 1/2 of what there should be according to the 2010 search.

    I had three persons in different cities with different PC’s, different browsers and browser configuration to try and all got the same results.

    Anyone know what has happened to gaining access the documents for people not familiar with maneuvering through this database? When this began?


  88. July 31, 2012 9:00 pm

    “I think William should also use the fact that MJ had an alibi for all the dates on the prosecution’s timeline to prove that he was in fact innocent.”

    But Stacy, Michael has been proven innocent! And it is Sneddon who should be held accountable for the expensive circus show he and his department arranged for the city’s millions!


  89. stacy permalink
    July 31, 2012 8:12 pm

    I think William should also use the fact that MJ had an alibi for all the dates on the prosecution’s timeline to prove that he was in fact innocent. You can’t commit a crime if your not even at the crime scene. The Arvizos should also be investigated for making false claims and costing the city millions.


  90. July 31, 2012 4:53 pm

    Dial, thank you for the Michael Jackson anthem. The lyrics are very impressive and these fans’ determination is just what we need now.

    I’ve been sent a sample message to the five Supervisors to whom William Wagener’s affidavit will be handed and will repost it here for everyone to support it:

    Here are the email addresses together with the address of Ute Wilhelm to whom a copy is to be sent:

    From: …….



    Subject: Re: Support of Affidavit Concerning Criminal Conduct of Tom Sneddon – 2005 Michael Jackson trial

    Board of Supervisors of Santa Barbara County:

    I give my whole hearted support and endorsement to the Affidavit of Criminal Conduct by Tom Sneddon, the former District Attorney of Santa Barbara County, which will be presented by William Wagener at your August 14, 2012 meeting in Santa Maria. I strongly urge you to appoint an independent special prosecutor outside of Santa Barbara County to investigate three felony crimes that were committed by Tom Sneddon and the other three prosecutors during the 2004 investigation and the 2005 trial of Michael Jackson. These three indictable felonies include, but are not limited to, the following:

    1. Manufacturing false finger prints
    2. Manufacturing false phone conspiracy evidence
    3. Conspiracy amongst the prosecutors to do the first two felonies listed above

    No man is above the law, and I realize the Statute of Limitations will begin to click away as soon as the Affidavit is submitted to the Board of Supervisors, hence, it is of utmost importance that you act, not only responsibly, but also expeditiously, to bring justice to a situation that is long overdue.

    Your Name


  91. July 31, 2012 2:20 pm

    Thank you for the petition drive. Signed,and hope we will get real time info on Aug.!4:th ,
    just like during the Murray trial.


  92. July 31, 2012 10:19 am

    “L.O.V.E., Fight!!! We’ll be strong!!!”

    Mjjyo, Love to you too! Yes, we need to be strong and work miracles. Even if we are only human beings.


  93. TatumMarie permalink
    July 31, 2012 10:11 am

    This is crazy, I’m in LA forever, and now I have to head back to NY in August 8th. Please someone atleast tape the gathering. How long do you guys think it would take the court to reach a decision?


  94. TatumMarie permalink
    July 31, 2012 10:07 am



  95. July 31, 2012 10:00 am

    While searching the internet looking for Fans who inhabit smaller sites, Fans who can help make up for the lack of interest shown by American Fans I came around something very interesting.

    I wonder if Michael knew of this. The respect Michael was able to arose continues to please and surprise me. The video is as apropos at this very moment as it was when made.

    Tom Sneddon had his shot at Michael in a court of law. I wonder if Michael will have a chance to do the same with Sneddon. Who knows who and what else may shake out of this particular tree.


  96. July 30, 2012 7:22 pm

    Vindicatemj (Helena) – L.O.V.E., Fight!!! We’ll be strong!!!


  97. July 30, 2012 3:59 pm

    William Wagener has posted this on Facebook today:

    William J. Wagener 1:34pm Jul 30

    Thank YOU all. 888 signed now in a few days. 16 days to Aug. 14, We will meet at 8:00 am at Panera Bread. I shall answer any questions. It is a short 1 minute walk to the County building Panera address is 540 E. Betteravia. Thanks to all of you. William Wagener.

    Here is a reminder where to sign the petition for indicting Sneddon:

    Please share the link!


  98. July 30, 2012 3:55 pm

    Another great comment on Sneddon – this time from Rose Millovich – which I am reposting here too:

    ROSE MILLOVICH: “Michael Jackson was found “not guilty” because he simply was “not guilty”!!! A jury of 12 people, sat through 5 months of testimony and were shown an incredible amount of evidence and they came to this conclusion and acquitted him. He did have a good lawyer, but he did not have a “DREAM TEAM”!!!

    Tom Sneddon, the DA, put on a ridiculously expensive and outrageously senseless and obtuse prosecution, that only showed that he had it in for Michael. He did not care if Michael was guilty or not, his whole purpose of bringing him to trial, was to get revenge! Sneddon probably broke so many laws in his unquenchable thirst to chastise Michael, he should have been investigated and indicted way back then. He was an officer of the court, and to abuse the system, and use his power as a district attorney to go after someone in the way he went after Michael, has definitely got to be against the law.

    I don’t know about the statute of limitations in cases like this, but he should have and if possible still should, stand trial himself for breaking the law. Although he is no longer the DA, and is retired, should have no bearing on this case. How the people of Santa Barbara County could elect him, is beyond me. From all that I have ever read about him, he was not very well liked by his peers in the DA’s office. He was accused by many of letting his power “go to his head,” which is very believable.

    After Michael was acquitted, Sneddon should have been indicted and prosecuted in a criminal trial and Michael should have sued both Sneddon and the DA’s office in a civil trial, for violations of his civil rights such as racism, conspiracy, tampering with evidence and many other violations. Just because you are the DA or a police officer or some other kind of judicial officer does not mean you are beyond being a criminal yourself. That has shown to be true over and over again in our society.

    Well, Tom Sneddon is probably a bigger criminal than most of the people he put in jail!!! He took an oath to serve the people of the county of Santa Barbara with honesty and integrity and he made a mockery of that oath!

    Anyway, I applaud Mr. Wagener for taking his stand against Tom Sneddon and telling the truth. It just goes to show that our government, be it Federal, State, County or Local, have a very good way of covering things up. Through history, they have had a lot of practice.

    Even if Tom Sneddon never did pay for his crimes, he will pay one day for his transgressions. He is a racist, a liar, and a pathetic excuse for a human being.”


  99. July 30, 2012 3:22 pm

    Here is a great comment made by Linda in my other blog. I want to repeat it here because it is a uniquely precise assessment of the situation with Sneddon:


    “I’m so glad William Wagener has chosen to take a platform and do what many of us would like to do. I wouldn’t have know how to do this. I gladly signed it, hopefully everyone who is concerned about integrity in our justice system will.

    Michael, thankfully won his case, but it wasn’t due to a fair trial. That was the worst mockery of a trial I have ever heard of. Chuck Berry was another. His biggest crime was being black, some famous wrestler, I think, from long ago who was also black, and a few other more recent ones all involving Snedden, who was ruthless.

    You know, it’s weird, I am so angry about Sneddens actions and I do feel he needs to be made accountable, but on the other hand, lol, he was so bad, so underhanded and dishonest (a total shame to his profession) but with all that, he probably did more, in the end to prove Michael’s innocence than his guilt. Sort of a twist, but I almost appreciate him.

    Of course that’s a very big almost. Most people didn’t and still don’t look beyond the surface of the trial, so they still believe money and fame bought MJ’S freedom. We know the truth, only because we had the time and the desire to search for it. Most won’t go through the trouble. We’ve reached some, but if Snedden would go to trial for gross misconduct, and if the media would do their job reporting it, that would go a long way with vindicating Michael. It will be very interesting to see how far this goes. I’m hopeful.”

    I fully agree that though Sneddon was an awfully destructive tool that ultimately ruined Michael’s life, his tenacity, meticulousness and even his dirty tricks at falsifying evidence are a blessing in disguise for the cause of Michael’s vindication.

    If Sneddon had been less zealous it would have left Michael’s haters a chance to say that he overlooked something, but the way he was it is impossible even to imagine it. Sneddon and his team worked against Michael not once, not twice, but on a continuous basis and for more than a decade too.

    Where there was something to find Sneddon found it all, where there was nothing to find, he made up for its absence by falsifying it. Sneddon dissected Michael piece by piece and his very zeal is the best argument in Michael’s vindication. It is a total shame that the general public does not know how “good” Sneddon was at his work.

    If his activity is investigated there is a chance people will learn not only of Sneddon’s misconduct but about Michael’s innocence too.

    I very much hope for it!


  100. July 30, 2012 2:28 pm

    “He also gave a false statement to the police in 2003 after meeting with Mark Geragos in Los Angeles. His statement prompted the police to call the Arvizos and helped them to change their story so it included the appropriate timeline. He also misled the court and the defense when he finally discovered the witness list to the defense because they state that they do not know yet if Jordan Chandler would be testifying or not. They sent the witness list to the court and the defense on 12/20/04, 3 months after talking to Jordan in New York where he told them he would fight the subpoena that they sent him. That wasted valuable defense resources trying to prepare for a witness that they knew was not coming.”

    Lynette, it seems that there was no rule which Sneddon did not break in order to get Michael convicted. We can also add to the list the strange case of contaminating Michael underwear (found in some closet among books) with cocaine. I am talking of possible deliberate contamination.

    The prosecution and defense heavily disputed whether that piece of underwear should be admitted as evidence (of molestation??), until the lab analysis made by the defense showed that the cocaine was ON the blood spot but not IN the blood itself (where it is found in the form of a metabolyte). Consequently the blood spot was something totally separate from the cocaine found on it.

    The chances that the cocaine would find its way to the tiny surface of a blood spot “on its own” are so minimal that they verge on the impossible.
    The Defense said that the Prosecution “did not provide any forensic report to support their theory” and such a result was “scientifically impossible”. “Scientifically impossible” seems to me a kind of a diplomatic language meaning “impossible in a natural way”:

    Item 14.Underwear and Cocaine.

    This is a child molestation and conspiracy case*. [*The prosecution apparently plans to argue the contradictory theories that Mr. Jackson is a drug addict, who is unable to control his behavior due to drug use, while at the same time, is a criminal mastermind who was micro-managing a conspiracy to falsely imprison, extort and abduct the Doe family].

    The evidence seized by the prosecution is irrelevant to either of those charges. However, the prosecution is seeking to introduce evidence of drug use for the purpose of prejudicing the jury against Mr. Jackson. The blood evidence seized in November of 2003, eight months after the alleged events in question, is irrelevant. Whether or not Mr. Jackson was using prescribed Demerol at any point in his life has nothing to do with the allegations in February or March of 2003.

    ….The prosecution’s forensic evidence does not support the argument they wish to present to the jury. The prosecution claims that “the most likely reason the cocaine was detected on both samples is that defendant excreted it in both his blood and his urine”. This explanation, however, is scientifically impossible.

    The evidence, according to the prosecution’s forensic reports, is that actual cocaine was found on the fabric of the underwear and on the blood on the underwear, not that evidence of cocaine use (i.e. metabolites) were found on Mr. Jackson’s blood. This evidence does not demonstrate the use of cocaine by Mr. Jackson and is irrelevant even under the prosecution’s absurd theory.

    It should be noted that the prosecution does not support their theory with a declaration or any legitimate scientific information. In fact, it would be impossible to lay the foundation that they boldly assert. We have not been provided with any forensic reports that support their theory.”

    Moreover the Defense reacted to the Prosecution’s introduction of this and other dubious “evidence” in an uncharactertistically angry way. It even had an effect on their grammar, which I read as follows:

    “…The prosecution wants the Court, and anyone else who will listen, to believe that. [The position of] Mr. Jackson’s defense is that the District Attorney knows for a fact that he is innocent, yet is still prosecuting him for vindictive reasons. This is a straw man argument.
    In reality, Mr. Sneddon and his deputies are myopic in their zeal to convict Mr. Jackson. Whatever the cause of this, ordinary prosecutorial review of evidence and prosecutorial discretion is absent from this case”.

    The full story is here:

    If Tom Sneddon’s misdeeds are investigated following William Wagener’s affidavit Thomas Mesereau could be testifying and could tell more on this occurrence.


  101. Sylvie permalink
    July 30, 2012 11:14 am

    I’m French and I support William Wagener since the beginning.
    Join us on “Support to William Wagener on FB”
    informations, letters, contacts …
    site :
    It’s for Michael !


  102. lynande51 permalink
    July 30, 2012 9:50 am

    Oh and I forgot to mention that in the telephone warrants the list included Brian Oxman before he was involved in the case.Al and nancy Malniks phone and even the phone ofDr, Farshchians wife.Yes he was exceeding the scope with those.


  103. lynande51 permalink
    July 30, 2012 9:42 am

    Oh that is called false testimony. He also gave a false statement to the police in 2003 after meeting with Mark Geragos in Los Angeles.He met with him as what he called a courtesy meeting and afte Mark Geragos presented him with the evidence that he had on the Arvizo family he went back and gave a statement to the police.
    His statement prompted the police to call the Arvizos and helped them to change their story so it included the appropriate timeline. Mark Geragos has presented him with the fact that Michael was not there.That was also when he conspired to delay the preliminary hearing and instead took it before the Grand Jury where the defense is not allowed to present evidence and in order to supress the exculpatory evidence that Mark Geragos had they had him listed as an unnamed unindicted coconspirator. The list of unnamed unindicted co conspirators was Mark Geragos, Brad Miller,Johnny Majetek, and Asaf Vilichik. All private investigators working for Mark Geragos.That was really why Mark had to withdraw from the case so he could be a witness for the defense.That deprived Michael of the right to the counsel of his choosing in a violation of his 4th, 5th and 6th ammendment rights.
    It worked so well for him that he tried it three more times throughout the trial. Steve Cochran had to recuse himself because when they spoke to the Neverland Five about their testimony they implicated him in that case saying that he had harassed them. He did it again when they searched Evvy Tavasci’s home and office when the police took with them a folder clearly marked Messereau. And again just before Abdool testimony when they tried to eliminate Bob Sanger by saying that he was in the room when Steve Cochran was deposing them for the 1993 case.
    He also misled the court and the defense when he finally discovered the witness list to the defense because they state that they do not know yet if Jordan Chandler would be testifying or not.They sent the witness list to the court and the defense on 12/20/04, 3 months after talking to Jordan in New York where he told them he would fight the subpoena that they sent him.That wasted valuable defense resources trying to prepare for a witness that they knew was not coming.
    There are several prosecution motions that they wanted to have people testify to things that were irrelevant like calling Jesus Salas back to prove that Michael was not a good parent in response to Christina Robinsons testimony.They had Rudy Provencio recording Frank and Marc Shaffel up to two weeks before his testimony as a confidential informant.
    I could go on and on with the list that is just to name a few. David and I have purchased the Grand Jury testimony of Gavin and Star because what was leaked was selective and prosecution friendly so once we have it I will look for the testimony where he identifies the magazines and then complete a piece that might help William Wagener if he still needs it for more examples.
    Oh then there is the excessive bail amount.The 3 million dollar bail that Michael had to pay was approximately 10 times the bail if someone else had been charged with the same crimes.


  104. lynande51 permalink
    July 30, 2012 9:05 am

    There is more than just the ones listed above that I can list.As you know in 1993 Tom Sneddon flew to Australia to again talk to Brett Barnes.He and the others that went with him went in June after Russ Birchim talked to Kassim Abdool and Ralph Chacon. Chacon gave a sworn statement to the police on May 10th of 1993 that he witnessed Michael molesting Brett.They flew to Australia with this “new information” to interrogate Brett and the rest of the Barnes family.The court documents for thes specifically say that they told Bretts parents about it and they and Brett still denied that it happened.Brett and the rest of the Barnes family were questions in the August of 1993 search of Neverland and gave their statements then.It was based solely on Chacon’s statement that they flew to Australia to again question them.
    Then in 2005 2 weeks prior to his testimony he met with the prosecution and he was encouraged to change his statement to Jordan due to Brett’s denial that anything happened.You know this is what happened from Sneddon himself when he wrote in a Public Relations letter that the reason they could not press charges in 1993 was because their was no adult independent witness to the abuse of Jordan,He even states that it would not be legal or right to do that because then anyone off the street could come in and say they witnessed it.Still that was just exactly what they did with his testimony in 2005.
    In other words in 1993 if he had said that it was Jordan it would have gone to trial but he allowed and encouraged him to change it to Jordan from Brett.


  105. July 30, 2012 2:24 am

    Thanks, Helena. Glad to see you back.


  106. July 30, 2012 1:23 am

    Here are the addresses for sending emails in support of William Wagener’s affidavit on Sneddon’s criminal conduct and demand to investigate Sneddon’s activities for those three felonies (please correct me if I messed someting up):

    1st District Salud Carbajal, Supervisor
    105 E. Anapamu Street
    Santa Barbara, CA 93101
    Phone: (805) 568-2186
    Fax: (805) 568-2534
    Website: Salud Carbajal

    2nd District Janet Wolf, Supervisor
    105 East Anapamu Street
    Santa Barbara, CA 93101
    Phone: (805) 568-2191
    Fax: (805) 568-2283
    Website: Janet Wolf

    3rd District Doreen Farr, Supervisor
    Phone: (805) 568-2192
    Fax: (805) 568-2883
    Website: Doreen Farr

    3rd District Doreen Farr, Supervisor
    Santa Ynez Valley Field Office
    1745 Mission Drive
    Solvang, CA 93463
    Phone: (805) 686-5095
    Fax: (805) 683-8133

    4th District Joni Gray, Supervisor
    100 East Locust Avenue, Suite 101
    Lompoc, CA 93436
    Phone: (805) 737-7700
    Fax: (805) 737-7703
    Website: Joni Gray

    Santa Maria 4th District Office (Joni Gray)
    511 East Lakeside Parkway, Suite 47
    (Betteravia Government Center)
    Santa Maria, CA 93455
    Phone: (805) 346-8407
    Fax: (805) 346-8498

    5th District Steve Lavagnino, Supervisor
    511 East Lakeside Parkway, Suite 141
    Santa Maria, CA 93455-1341
    Phone: (805) 346-8400
    Fax: (805) 346-8404
    Website: Steve Lavagnino

    And here is a sample letter:

    To: 1st District Supervisor, Salud Carbajal
    2nd District Supervisor, Janet Wolf
    3rd District Supervisor, Doreen Farr
    4th District Supervisor, Joni Gray
    5th District Supervisor, Steve Lavagnino

    Date: …………

    Board of Supervisors of Santa Barbara County:

    I give my whole hearted support and endorsement to the Affidavit of Criminal Conduct by Tom Sneddon, the former District Attorney of Santa Barbara County, which will be presented by William Wagener at your August 14, 2012 meeting in Santa Maria. I strongly urge you to appoint an independent special prosecutor outside of Santa Barbara County to investigate three felony crimes that were committed by Tom Sneddon and the other three prosecutors during the 2004 investigation and the 2005 trial of Michael Jackson. These three indictable felonies include, but are not limited to, the following:

    1. Manufacturing false finger prints
    2. Manufacturing false phone conspiracy evidence
    3. Conspiracy amongst the prosecutors to do the first two felonies listed above

    No man is above the law, and I realize the Statute of Limitations will begin to click away as soon as the Affidavit is submitted to the Board of Supervisors, hence, it is of utmost importance that you act, not only responsibly, but also expeditiously, to bring justice to a situation that is long overdue.

    Your Name


  107. July 30, 2012 1:13 am

    “Thank you so much for posting this information and for supporting what Mr. Wagener is trying to do”.

    Guys, I am even embarrassed by your words. William Wagener is doing what all of us have been hoping for and I cannot imagine anyone not wanting to support him. It is simply out of the question.

    Moreover I call even on non-Michael’s fans to support William Wagener in his initiative if they are indeed interested in protecting their own rights and want to see their legal system free from any bias or undue pressure.

    I hope that when they read the information provided in this post they will get at least an overall impression of how much effort was put into pressing false charges against Jackson at the time when real criminals were allowed to walk free. The case of Corey Feldman who couldn’t remember any molestaion on the part of Michael Jackson but very well remembered his real molester (but no one paid attention to his words!) is a good example of the above.

    I call on all honest people to give their full support to William Wagener’s initiative and pray that what was impossible yesterday will become possible today. It is a make-or-break event in vindication of Michael Jackson.

    Whatever the future of it is, it is still worth trying and I am very happy that we found a man who is dedicated enough to take it to the end.

    Let us make a present to Michael on his coming birthday by being united at least over this issue!


  108. July 29, 2012 11:57 pm

    Helena: Thank you so much for posting this information and for supporting what Mr. Wagener is trying to do. This has to be a scary thing for him to do and he need as much support possible. Thank you for giving me credit for the above information concerning the statue of limitations on fraud but I rec’d that information from another person on one of the MJ amazon threads, lol. I thought it would be good to post it. I was quite surprised and wanted to pass the information on. I am glad to know that there are no statue of limitation on FRAUD committed by officers of the court. It is shameful. Glad you are back posting.


  109. Roni permalink
    July 29, 2012 10:25 pm

    We MUST MUST MUST bring this court. We cannot let COPS be criminals at the same time.

    ITS TIME not only Michael jackson TO GET justice BUT HIS CHILDREN AS WELL!


  110. Susanne permalink
    July 29, 2012 9:49 pm

    Helena, thank you so much for this great post. It’s so good to have your support. I posted the link to the post in the FB group mentioned by sandiland.


  111. July 29, 2012 9:36 pm

    go to SUPPORT TO WILLIAM WAGENER ON FACEBOOK and there you will find information on how to send support letters and sign a petition



  1. Did Michael Jackson Pay Families Off? | It's In Our Nature
  2. It’s All Just A Little Bit Of HIStory Repeating- Anything For Money | mjjjusticeproject
  3. Anonymous
  4. Communiqué de presse de William Wagener, Interview de Tom Mesereau « "Mon reflet dans le miroir… c’est toi" (Rûmi)- Blog de Carma

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: