Skip to content

Still hesitating? And What If a Sneddon Comes After You?

August 14, 2012

Regarding William Wagener’s today’s affidavit about Sneddon’s criminal misconduct reader SMJ has left the following comment which was quite an eye-opener to me:

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?

So some people are hesitating? And do not take action in support of William Wagener because they are afraid that the society will not give the truth a chance? And they even speak of some “risk”?

And who is the society I wonder? Aren’t these very people who are hesitating now part and parcel of the society and isn’t it their opinion which forms public opinion in the long run?  Why do they think that their opinion does not matter? And where is the sense of responsibility of these people?

And what risk are they talking of? Do they risk their lives, health and freedom like some of our people do when they protest against the unlawful acts of our authorities? Do they risk to be detained for weeks or months for a mere showing up at a protest rally or be fined for thousands of dollars for a word of truth told in public which our authorities call “slander” for some reason?

If Americans doubt the effectiveness of protesting against one Sneddon what chances do we, Russians have in protesting thousands of our Sneddons then? Does your hesitation mean to convey to us that if you cannot cope with one Sneddon we have zero chances in fighting ours? What a disheartening example you are giving us!

Why are you beaten even before you try?

Oh, you are not supportive of William Wagener’s move because you are still not sure that Sneddon committed any unlawful acts? Then please read the analysis of a Findlaw columnist who – a year before the trial started – already saw that Sneddon’s behavior was an affront to the legislation system and an insult to human sense and dignity.

The article is headlined Evidence of Prosecution Bias in the Kobe Bryant and Michael Jackson Cases. Why It’s Troubling, and What Role It May Play at Trial, but for the sake of brevity I will omit the Kobe Bryant part and shorten it:

Evidence of Prosecution Bias in the Kobe Bryant and Michael Jackson Cases
Why It’s Troubling, and What Role It May Play at Trial

By JULIE HILDEN
julhil@aol.com

Friday, Jan. 02, 2004

Under legal ethics rules, defense lawyers have an ethical duty to “zealously” represent their clients. Many interpret that duty — properly, I think — to require them to go to the very limits of the law, though not beyond them, in their clients’ defense. But prosecutors have a very different duty: To ensure that justice is done. That means not only making sure there is strong evidence against the defendant before indicting him, but also making sure that he receives a fair trial.

Defense lawyers often get a hard time for pushing limits. They file motions that only have a slim chance of winning, and they raise defenses that may seem improbable at best. [ ] But when prosecutors are the ones who push limits in order to win their cases, it’s far more disturbing.

Recently, two prosecutors’ offices — in the Kobe Bryant, and Michael Jackson cases, respectively– flouted their duty to justice by exhibiting bias against the defendants they are prosecuting. Proof of this bias should be admitted during Bryant’s and Jackson’s trials, so the juries hearing their cases are aware that those with control of crucial evidence in the cases may not have been fair-minded toward the defendants.

… The duty of everyone in a prosecutor’s office is to seek justice through a fair trial — not to blindly seek the conviction of the defendant.

The Evidence of Prosecutorial Bias in the Jackson Case

Meanwhile, the evidence of prosecutorial bias in the Michael Jackson case is far more blatant and longstanding [than in Kobe Bryant’s case]. Indeed, it’s plain by now that Santa Barbara D.A. Tom Sneddon is so grossly biased against Jackson that he should no longer be on the case. And if Sneddon does remain on the case, it’s likely much of Jackson’s trial will be occupied with a mini-trial on the issue of Sneddon’s own longstanding bias toward Jackson.

In 1993, Sneddon handled the investigation of an earlier child abuse claim against Jackson. The claim ended in what was reportedly a multi-million dollar civil settlement; charged were never filed. Sneddon has admitted he was frustrated by this outcome.

In recent interviews, Sneddon has repeatedly implied that Jackson was guilty of the earlier 1993 child abuse charges. He has done so despite the fact that it was his own office that declined to ultimately file charges.

Sneddon has also claimed that it would be possible to somehow drag these charges into the current Jackson abuse case, supposedly on the ground that they evidence prior criminal behavior. But without a conviction, the charges, alone, ought to be ruled inadmissible. Evidence of prior criminal behavior that does not result in a conviction is a classic example of prejudicial evidence. A defendant who testifies in his own defense opens the door to the admission of prior convictions, not prior charges. And there is no prior conviction here. Whether or not this evidence is technically admissible, the judge should exclude it due to its prejudicial nature. Once the jury has heard Jackson has faced two claims of abuse, it will assume he is guilty.

The risk that the prosecutor’s office’s actions and comments will taint the jury pool — by convincing potential jurors of the defendant’s guilt even before they walk into the courtroom for jury selection — is plain.

Prosecutors are not supposed to personally vouch for a defendant’s guilt even at trial, let alone outside it; it’s the evidence, not the prosecutor’s opinion, to which the jury must look. And personally vouchingas Sneddon has done — for a defendant’s guilt with respect to a prior offense for which he was never criminally charged, is arguably an even lower blow.

Yet Sneddon’s inappropriate behavior does not end there. He has joked at a press conference that the Jackson case will at least inject money into California’s failing economy. And he has referred to Jackson on Court TV as “a guy everybody calls ‘Jacko Wacko.‘” (Sneddon did subsequently apologize for this comment — but only after his wife pointed out to him how inappropriate it was!)

Sneddon has also vouched for the credibility of the family whose child Jackson allegedly abused. He commented, I think it would be really unfair to be talking about these people as if they want to get even with Michael Jackson or something like that.”

In making this comment, of course, Sneddon implicitly tried to discredit Jackson’s likely defense — that the alleged victim’s family seeks money — long before trial has even begun. The prosecution will have plenty of time to try to discredit the defense at trial; it need not get a head start with the potential jury pool before trial.

Why Prosecutorial Bias Can Matter: Prosecutors’ Control of Evidence in Criminal Cases

After reading the analysis above, readers may object, So what if the prosecutors are biased against the defendants? The defendants, in each case, will have terrific defense lawyers. They are wealthy, and they and their lawyers ought to be media-savvy by now. Surely that evens the playing field, doesn’t it?

The answer is: Not necessarily.

It’s well known that the Fifth Amendment’s “right to remain silent” and the Fourth Amendment’s right against unreasonable searches and seizures limit the prosecution’s ability to get evidence from the defendant. …  But what is less well-known is how limited criminal defendants’ ability to get evidence from the prosecution is, given current rules of criminal procedure.

Suppose the prosecution has in its possession a piece of evidence that may help the defendant’s case. The defense, meanwhile, has no idea that this evidence exists. If the evidence is exculpatory — that is, if it tends to prove the defendant’s innocence — then the Supreme Court has ruled, in Brady v. Maryland, that according to constitutional due process, it must be turned over.

But who decides whether or not the evidence is indeed exculpatory? You guessed it: The prosecution. (And since the prosecution, by definition, believes the defendant is guilty — that’s why it indicted him, after all — it’s not going to be easily inclined to see even evidence that is quite favorable to the defendant as “exculpatory” under Brady.) That’s why it matters so much whether a prosecutor is biased, or fair-minded toward the defendant.

A fair-minded prosecutor is more likely to be evenhanded in dealing with evidence –– and will consider defense theories, even though he or she is not convinced by them, in deciding what evidence to hand over to the defense. A biased prosecutor will be stingy in giving over evidence.

Suppose the prosecution, indeed, fails to turn over exculpatory evidence. And suppose the defense suspects there exists a particular kind of record that is probably exculpatory, though it hasn’t yet received that record. The defense can then file a motion to try to convince the court to order the prosecution to produce any such exculpatory evidence. And if the defense is persuasive, it may get a court order urging the prosecution to comply with Brady.

But again, who decides what evidence, exactly, will be produced in response to the court order? You guessed it: The prosecution. The judge isn’t going to ransack the prosecutor’s file drawers and hand over to the defense copies of all the evidence the judge thinks is exculpatory. Instead, the judge will issue the order, and assume the prosecutor will comply. Thus, if the prosecutor isn’t conscientious in complying with the court order, the prosecutor’s failure to properly do so may never be discovered. In the end, only the prosecutor knows what lies within his own office’s files.

Now consider this: If you were Kobe Bryant or Michael Jackson, would you trust the D.A. in your case — given events that have occurred so far — to turn over all of the evidence in his files that might result in your being acquitted? My view is that for either defendant to trust his D.A. to be fair-minded, at this point, would be naive.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hilden/20040102.html

Let me repeat – a defense attorney is very much expected to be zealous in defending his client. However a prosecutor’s job is not to seek conviction by all means – his job is to ensure that justice is done. This is the fundamental principle for prosecutors’ work which is emphasized by all legal sources:

“When engaged as a prosecutor,

  • a lawyer’s prime duty is not to seek to convict, but to see that justice is done through a fair trial on the merits; 
  • a lawyer must act fairly and dispassionately; 
  • a lawyer must not do anything that might prevent an accused from being represented by or communicating with counsel; 
  • a lawyer must make timely disclosure to the accused or defense counsel (or to the court if the accused is not represented) of all known facts and witnesses, whether tending towards guilt or innocence”. 

The prosecutor does not  have a duty to convict after evaluating all the evidence collected by the police. In case there is insufficient evidence the case should be dropped at the pre-trial stage and the person will still be regarded innoncent as another old legal principle, the presumption of innocence,  says that everyone is innocent until found guilty:

  • The Prosecutors duty and mandate is, TO SEEK JUSTICE. Occasionally this negates his duty to prosecute when he comes to the conclusion that insufficient evidence/information exists to prosecute an individual. This usually results in the prosecution entering a Nolle Prosequi,’ and requesting that the case be dropped for “lack of prosecutorial merit.”

The need to drop the case “for lack of prosecutorial merit” in case of no incriminating evidence found reminded me of the Chandler 1993 case.

Ridiculous as the 2005 Arvizo case was, it nevertheless went to a trial, and this makes you wonder – how much weaker was the 1993 case if the District Attorneys of two counties were unable to bring charges even after a year long investigation? And two Grand juries found nothing to indict Jackson for after looking at all the ‘evidence’ collected and listening to 400 witnesses?

To see that the first case was weaker than the second, though it is presented by Sneddon and the media as something formidable, it would be enough to listen to Sneddon’s own words. And he expressed his disappointment with the jurors’ not-guilty verdict in 2005 by saying: “We thought we had a good case this time”.

The first thing we realize from this statement is that he thought the Arvizo case was good despite all its madness and absurdity. However the second point is even more mind-boggling than the first – the fact that he thought it was good this time brings home to us that Sneddon thought  that the previous case, involving Jordan Chandler, was not that good or was weak even in comparison with the Arvizos!

Wow, but Sneddon practically exonerated Michael Jackson himself by his own words!

In the year 1994 the prosecutors  had two Grand juries looking into the Chandler’s case but none of them found anything to indict Jackson for and this is why the case went nowhere as a result.

  • ‘In felony cases the prosecutor may be required under law to obtain permission from a grand jury before she or he can prosecute the defendant. A grand jury is a panel of individuals that can reject a criminal prosecution for lack of evidence. If the grand jury returns a no bill, the defendant is not indicted and the case against the defendant must be dropped. If the grand jury returns a true bill, the defendant is indicted and the prosecution may proceed.”  http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/prosecutor

However no indictment and no charges didn’t stop Sneddon from spreading lies about Jackson though it was his own department, as the Findlaw analyst notes, which declined to ultimately file charges.

  • “In recent interviews, Sneddon has repeatedly implied that Jackson was guilty of the earlier 1993 child abuse charges. He has done so despite the fact that it was his own office that declined to ultimately file charges” – Julie Hilden   http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hilden/20040102.html

Even despite no indictment and no charges brought against Jackson Sneddon never stopped spreading “ideas” in the media, particularly via his special media friends – Diane Dimond and Maureen Orth. And this, among many other instances of the District Attorney’s misconduct was one of the gravest breaches of a prosecutor’s responsibilities.

Julie Hilden makes a crucial conclusion regarding this point which should be carved in stone and placed on the front entrance of every District Attorney’s office:

  • Prosecutors are not supposed to personally vouch for a defendant’s guilt even at trial, let alone outside it;it’s the evidence, not the prosecutor’s opinion, to which the jury must look.  
  • And personally vouching — as Sneddon has done — for a defendant’s guilt with respect to a prior offense for which he was never criminally charged, is arguably an even lower blow.

Every legal source says it again and again that the Prosecutor’s job is not to convict but to seek the truth in the case, though some admit that this is what it’s like “in theory”:

  • In theory, a prosecutor’s job is not to convict and send to prison as many persons as possible. The basic function of a prosecutor is to seek the truth about criminal actions. Thus, if a prosecutor discovers evidence that puts the defendant’s guilt in doubt or relieves the defendant of criminal liability, the prosecutor must turn that evidence over to the defendant. If a prosecutor lacks evidence of a defendant’s guilt, he or she must drop the charges or decline to press charges. In practice, prosecutors find that they are judged in the court of public opinion on the number of convictions that they obtain”.

In theory – yes, Sneddon was to seek the truth and turn over the evidence exonerating the accuser to his defense attorney. However in practice Sneddon failed to make the evidence of Jackson’s innocence available to the prosecution and stubbornly kept it to himself .

I am talking of the photos which showed that there was no match between Jordan Chandler’s description and MJ’s private parts in the 1993 case. Sneddon should have turned them over in 1994 (but never did) when Reuters and USA today reported that there was no match.

If he turns them over now it will serve as proof that he breached his obligations as a prosecutor by withholding the key evidence exonerating the defendant. This is probably why Sneddon is so tenacious about those photos and does not give them back – he doesn’t want anyone to know that he breached the law and withheld so crucial an evidence of Michael’s innocence.

However Sneddon went even to a greater length than a mere withholding of the truth – he fell as low as forging the evidence against Jackson. One of the instances known to us is his stunt at the Grand Jury hearings when he tried to obtain fingerprints of the Arvizo accuser by allowing him to handle the adult magazine belonging to Jackson. Since the magazines had been sealed after their seizure Sneddon used the opportunity of showing the magazines to the Grand Jury to get the boy’s fingerprints on one of them and later claim that Michael Jackson had looked at it together with the boy.

This Sneddon’s project turned out to be a flop as firstly, one of the members of the Grand Jury noticed that the boy was not wearing gloves when leafing through the magazine, and secondly, it was found out that the magazine was dated several months after the Arvizos had left Neverland and even in theory the boy could never see it together with MJ.

However you will agree that Sneddon’s idea to obtain the boy’s fingerprints in full view of the jury was a bold and impressive one, and suggestive that it wasn’t the first time Sneddon was practising it?

These false fingerprints is exactly what William Wagener will be giving his affidavit about to the Santa Barbara Supervisors.

Oh,  you are still hesitating whether to support him?

And what if a similar kind of Sneddon comes after you? And forges your fingerprints to put you into jail?

*  *  *

Here is the petition which can still be signed in the few hours left before the affidavit:

This petition 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 charges 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.

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 personal agendas. Our court system is not a weapon to be used to satisfy personal vendettas 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.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/662/053/218/support-of-affidavit-concerning-criminal-conduct-of-tom-sneddon-2005-michael-jackson-trial/

Still hesitating whether to support?

Then listen to your conscience and do what it tells you to do.

AFFIDAVIT Of William J. Wagener

I hereby state, under penalty of Perjury, that it is my opinion, that I carefully observed in the actual courtroom significant fabricated false evidence that Prosecutors fabricated false evidence against an innocent man, and the most famous resident of Santa Barbara County, Michael Joseph Jackson. I have attended Law School, and over 400 court cases & Hearings. I also attended every day of Michael Joseph Jackson 2005 public Trial, except for 3 days of testimony & Verdict day June 13,2005. I said, in the Jury Pool, in 2005 during a break, shouldn’t Thomas Sneddon be indicted for faking fingerprint evidence. It is my firm opinion, prosecutors, Thomas Sneddon , Ron Zonen, Gordon Auchincloss, & Mag Nicola individually or in combination did with Malicious Malice of forethought, contrive, and fabricate false Fingerprint evidence on a Barely Legal Magazine that did not exist until more than 5 months after Gavin Arvizo admitted he was last at Neverland. Prosecutor then encouraged Gavin Arvizo to testify against Michael Joseph Jackson and to state on the record, that Michael Jackson gave him that specific magazine, which is impossible because it had not been printed until many months later. And that Thomas Sneddon, gave that specific magazine to Gavin Arvizo at the secret Grand Jury indictment hearing without any gloves on and afterward sent it out for Fingerprint Analysis, and if not for the court reporter capturing the comment of a grand juror about the lack of gloves on Gavin Arvizo at the Grand Jury, it might have lead to A conviction on fabricated evidence. Further, that a Prosecutor of more than 25 years experience does not make this mistake by accident. It is my firm opinion, that a objective jury trying Tom Sneddon for this felony, would find Tom Sneddon guilty as charged. Furthermore this was and continues to be FRAUD ON THE COURT, because the Prosecutors have pretended that nothing felonious was done by them, and no one from the pool of the Santa Barbara County District Attorneys office, will indict one of their own. What a surprise.

Second, Mag Nicala fabricated false evidence on dates of phone calls to make it appear That Michael may have made phone calls, but their own Prosecutor’s witness took the witness stand and stated that the Prosecutors had it all wrong, as seen on the over head projection, after it had been admitted as evidence. Prosecutors tried to remove it from Jury consideration, and Defense objected, and the Jury saw the blatant lie for what it was, just another of a long list of fabricated false evidence. It is my firm opinion that if and when Mr. Nicola is indicted by a jury of 12, they would find Mag Nicola guilty of felony fabrication of false phone contact evidence and FRAUD ON THE COURT.

Thirdly, It is my considered and firm opinion that the cooperation between the prosecutors to present fabricated evidence, to the court, and to the jury is FELONY Conspiracy, by The Prosecutors against a man the Jury found completely NOT GUILTY of all 10 original Charges plus that last minute 4 misdemeanors. This Conspiracy and the silence of a corrupt Santa Barbara District Attorneys office for 7 years and continuing is an On going felony and stops the Statute of Limitations from running, in my opinion. One can not escape Justice by continuing the fraud on the court, on the public.

Lastly, there appears to be many other felonies committed in the 2005 trial, that a good and honest prosecutor could find. But I am limiting this affidavit to these three, and it is Your duty under your oath of office to see that these four do not escape true justice. It is valuable to the community to know that justice is applied equally and that none are above the law, not even prosecutors, who commit willfully and maliciously FRAUD UPON THE COURT, and felonious Fabrication of Evidence against a man, who even the F.B.I. found faultless. In my opinion, and can never be, a statute of limitation for FRAUD ON THE COURT, and wilful Fabrication of Felonies in due process of rightful law, While the evidence is on the Court record, which it certainly is, and is NOT in dispute.

As a long time resident of this City and this County, I demand that this Board of Directors of Santa Barbara County, appoint a Special Prosecutor to review this Affidavit of my opinion, and the court record of 2005 trial of Michael Joseph Jackson, that Criminal Conduct of fabrication of Evidence of fingerprints and phone call conspiracy and the conspiracy by two or more of the four prosecutors to commit such crimes against a man the Jury found completely innocent member of the County, Michael Joseph Jackson. I suggest this board ask Atty. Susan YU to recomment an unbiased special prosecutor. I am convinced that if indicted, the 2005 Court record will be sufficient to support a conviction of Thomas Sneddon, now retired, and some or all of his three assistants who daily blodgened Michael Jackson with lies. Katherine Jackson and many others who sat through this trial of fabricated falsehoods, also suffered, and at the very least, there should be an Official appology to the Jackson family for the fabrication of false evidence and wilful malicious prosecution executed by the four prosecutors with malice afore thought.

There Can be NO IMMUNITY for prosecutors who willfully, and maliciously fabricate false evidence against a man even the FBI found no fault with. To do so, is to claim a Honor and /or Title of Nobility, making some citizens in Government service above the citizens they supposedly server, and is prohibited by the U.S. Constitution.

Delivered this day, 14 of August, 2012, in person to the Board of Directors of Santa Barbara County, California, and public meeting in Santa Maria, California, and now that the FRAUD is made known, the Statute of Limitations does start to run, and if this board of Directors fails to appoint a special Prosecutor to conduct a thorough and fair examination of the 2005 Court Record of Michael Joseph Jackson, then this board will be In effect an accessory AFTER the Fact, because Today, you have this statement as evidence a criminal act by Santa Barbara County elected and employed officials was Exposed and made known to you.

I, William J. Wagener, am over the age of 60 years and mentally competent and do state that the above statement is my firm opinion of criminal acts: Committed by members of the Santa Barbara County District Attorneys Office, Mssr. Sneddon, Zonen, Mag Nicola & Auchincloss. And I state under penalty of Perjury that this is my firm opinion, and that in my opinion based a true law, natural law, common law, and Gods Law, that there is NO immunity for prosecutors who wilfully, maliciously, fabricate false evidence, nor can the Statute of Limitations begin to run until the FRAUD on the COURT is exposed, which I am doing this day, by giving you this affidavit that the above named prosecutors did at least these three felonies in combination and illegal criminal cooperation with one another. Therefore you have a duty, now that you have this statement to appoint a special prosecutor and get on with the indictment and any others that helped them fabricate false evidence to maliciously and with wilful malice aforethought bring false charges against this innocent man, Michael Joseph Jackson, formerly the owner and resident of Neverland in this County of Santa Barbara, in Republic of California.

http://www.facebook.com/notes/love-u-sev/affidavit-of-william-j-wagener-traduction-francaise-par-martine-vaudon/10151122494496737#!/notes/love-u-sev/affidavit-of-william-j-wagener-traduction-francaise-par-martine-vaudon/10151122494496737

Statement by Larry Nimmer, Film Producer of “The Untold Story of Neverland”

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”

Sneddon Accused of 2005 Crimes, 3 felonies

Sneddon Accused of Crimes, in Michael Jackson, 2005 Trial, part 2

The speech of Dan Petry impressed me so much that I transcribed the parts I could understand. He said:

“I honestly  feel that Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon made a career of prosecuting victims of some criminal or incompetent police officers.  Michael Jackson was one of these victims. The affidavit presented by William Wagener is sufficient reason to appoint an outside special investigator to evaluate Tom Sneddon’s fabricated fingerprint evidence in 2004. Mr. Sneddon must be put on trial.

…The fingerprint evidence was put on the magazine at the Grand Jury deposition. The Prosecution team handed the boy a magazine. The Jury said: “Shouldn’t the boy have gloves?”

SHOULDN’T — THE — BOY — HAVE — GLOVES?

That was the way the fingerprint evidence was presented!

Tom Sneddon knowingly presented this evidence to a jury to try and convict one of the most famous people in the world. That is disgusting. That is knowingly committing a felony. So that’s the one thing I have to say.

The other thing – is that welcoming Michael Jackson to Santa Barbara county? [Think of] all the good he could have done to the community. He could have raised money for every school, he could have went to every school and talked to every child.

But no. Tom Sneddon spent (allegedly) $20 mln. to find him innocent on all charges. That money could have went to the homeless (shelters are closing down), could have went to the schools who are suffering.  I am a retired school district […], I know this. They cut the schools, cut the schools, cut the schools and that money could have helped that.

Thank you for listening to me. And do the right thing. Thank you”.

Bravo to all these people. They are at least trying

Bravo Dan Petry. I applaud you and all the others who are at least trying to hold Tom Sneddon accountable for his misdeeds to Michael Jackson, other victims of malicious prosecution, and the damage Sneddon did to the system of justice as a whole.

All of you are doing the right thing.  It is through the efforts of people like you that History is being made.

SANTA-BARBARA NEWS-PRESS:

Former Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon, left, is accused by William Wagener, center, and others of planting evidence in the 2005 molestation trial of Michael Jackson, right.

Fans claim false evidence in 2005 Jackson trial : Group asks supervisors to hire special prosecutor to investigate

46 Comments leave one →
  1. November 9, 2013 11:42 pm

    I thought this story from the Innocence Project would be appropriate here. It is about another corrupt District Attorney. Read how our Justice System deals with him.

    “BREAKING from Texas: Ken Anderson, the former Williamson County District Attorney, has entered a plea to criminal contempt for deliberately withholding exculpatory evidence pointing to the innocence of Michael Morton, who was exonerated by DNA evidence in 2011 after serving 25 years for his wife’s murder. Anderson will receive 10 days in Williamson County Jail, a $500 fine, 500 hours of community service, and will surrender his license to practice law.

    This marks an extremely rare (and perhaps even the first) instance that a prosecutor has been criminally punished for failing to turn over evidence.”

    http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Former_Williamson_County_Prosecutor_Ken_Anderson_Enters_Plea_to_Contempt_for_Misconduct_in_Michael_Mortons_Wrongful_Murder_Conviction.php#

    10 days in jail, a fine and community service and loss of license for robbing a man of 25 years of his life and allowing a murderer to go free. (if he jailed the wrong man then the wrong person went free)

    No wonder the SB Supervisors found it so easy to ignore our request. Although, getting an investigation on Tom Sneddon could have led to investigations on other wrongful convictions and other felonies. More than likely the SB Supervisors focused in on a man not convicted and told themselves we had nothing to complain about.

    Is it any wonder some do not believe in our legal system? There are no other known cases where a prosecutor has been criminally punished for failing to turn over exculpatory evidence. Do you think the punishment fit the crime?

    Like

  2. stacy permalink
    August 18, 2012 5:44 pm

    I agree..The amount of money that was wasted on that joke of a trial could have went to a better cause. These people were too obsessed with Michael Jackson. They wanted to take down the biggest star in the world and make a name for themselves only to be humiliated beyond belief. They should be forced to pay back every single penny that was wasted

    Like

  3. August 18, 2012 2:47 pm

    “But no. Tom Sneddon spent (allegedly) $20 mln. to find him innocent on all charges.”

    This is the first time I have read where the cost of this trial came closer to the truth. After seeing the FBI Webpage boast of 90 Agents involved in this case; when reading in Michael’s file of Zonen’s repeat visits to Quantico to request more assistance in Michael’s file;I knew there was no way the cost was the measly 4.4 mil the Media reported. Heck I suspect the bill for DNA testing supplies alone was huge.

    Like

  4. August 17, 2012 9:57 am

    “It was pleasent surprise for me to learn that this wonderful blog I am reading long ago is running by russian fans hello from ukrainian fan”

    Natalia, hello to you too. This blog was indeed started by one Russian supporter of Michael Jackson but was later joined by people from the US and other countries, who also write (or at least wrote) for the blog. We went through huge trouble and tribulations of our own that led to closing the blog, and it was only the consistent support of some Michael’s fans and the shock of Katherine reported missing and Michael’s siblings demanding the Estate to resign that raised me from the dead. Now it is only me who is running the blog, however I still want to keep it as a kind of a journal open to all who want to write for Michael’s vindication, including my former co-authors.

    As regards the latest issue of William Wagener’s initiative my colleagues have not expressed their opinion here and I don’t even know what they think about it. My guess is that they are not very supportive or are probably even against it as they are keeping complete silence. David has made some comments lately but not on this subject.

    Like

  5. August 17, 2012 9:36 am

    Ludmila, thank you for the link. I noticed it immediately after making the post and though it refuted what I had just written I was very happy to hear about it.

    Now all the links have been taken away from the post. Since these people realized their mistake and corrected it so quickly and so readily I am the first who doesn’t want to rub it in their wounds. They have learned their lesson very well themselves.

    The post will stay as general information only.

    Like

  6. Tatum Marie permalink
    August 17, 2012 7:27 am

    @Dialdancer

    Hello,
    The link pasted below isn’t working.

    Like

  7. August 17, 2012 4:18 am

    I found the video of the court scene very interesting and I am one of the signers of Mr. Wagener’s Affidavit. We fans must remain relentless and bring Tom Sneddon and his gang to justice. They MUST be exposed. He, indeed, commited a crime when he falsified information concerning molestation allegations. Because of that, Michael was put on trial and this took a tremendous toll on him, knowing that he was innocent of the charges brought against him. He was put on trial because of falsified information presented by Prosecutor Sneddon. How would you like it if someone like Sneddon came after you– and it could very well happen. In the end, Michael was found NOT guilty of all charges by a jury of 12 men and women, but, to this day, there are those “haters” who still believe he is guilty. What information do they have to prove that he was guilty???? Are they taking the word of a demented woman who wanted nothing more than to extort money from Michael. Check into the background of Mrs. Arviso. Are they taking the word of a corrupt prosecutor (Tom Sneddon) and a very biased and unethical media (some of whom are very good friends of Sneddon. Mr. Sneddon has been “out to get” Michael for quite some time, (for reasons unknown to the fans) and we believe that he cohersed the Arvisos into making these allegations. “There is a definite connection between the Arviso family and Tom Sneddon.

    Like

  8. Людмила permalink
    August 17, 2012 2:31 am

    Елена, большое спасибо вам. Только что на Твиттере прочла это.
    http://www.twitlonger.com/show/isl6bt
    Прямо елей на сердце. Обидно, что люди от отсутствия информации впадают в заблуждения, хотя странно было мне обнаружить вчерашнее обращение именно у них. Мое сердце спокойно теперь по этому поводу.
    Смотрела видео и думала- где то там на листочках и мое имя. Несколько буковок – такая маленькая вещь, которою я могу сделать для Майкла, но может быть она даст большой результат.Так этого хочется…..

    Loose translation from VMJ:
    Elena, thank you so much. I’ve just read the following on Twitter http://www.twitlonger.com/show/isl6bt
    The news is so sweet to my heart. It’s a shame that due to lack of information someone gets misdirected, though it was strange to see such a statement from these very people. Now a huge load is off my heart.
    I was watching the video and thought that the papers they handed over had my name too. Those few words written by me are such a small thing I can do for Michael, however it might result in something big. I want it so much…

    Like

  9. August 16, 2012 11:48 pm

    It was pleasent surprise for me to learn that this wonderful blog I am reading long ago is running by russian fans 🙂 hello from ukrainian fan

    Like

  10. August 16, 2012 8:09 pm

    I support William Wagener’s action. No matter what the outcome, just by presenting his case within the justice system, he and Michael Jackson’s friends and supporters are setting the record straight. I can’t help but think how much more powerful it would have been if the fan base had signed the petition en masse and written supportive letters en masse. One of the things that impressed me the most about the 2005 trial is that people came from all over the world to stand with Michael. Their gesture made the rest of us take notice, made those who were inclined to believe that “where there’s smoke there is fire” to take a second look at the precedings and the media bias and start thinking for themselves. Since then, much good has come from the fan community. But every one of their accomplishments happened after they became focused and united in their cause. One of my criteria of positive action would be “how is this action harming or helping the legacy of Michael Jackson?” Lately, I have begun to unfollow fans who write nit-picking garbage and misinformation about other fans, the estate, and Michael’s children. It is our job to do our own research and then carefully weigh what we choose to believe and what we say. That means going to as many trusted and informed sources as we can. This site is one of the best. It offers credible links, values diverse opinions, and never loses sight of their goal–the complete vindication of Michael Jackson.

    Like

  11. August 16, 2012 12:08 pm

    Oh good Lord, it’s unbelievable how “fans” are attacking the good intentions of MJ advocates who stand up and speak up for Michael and to try to get justice. I saw on FB how they even ridiculed these speakers with their comments, I saw so much misinformation and rumours, I can’t believe it.
    The problem is that meanwhile EVERYBODY who wants to do something positive for Michael is torn down by fans. NOBODY has a chance to fight for justice and be successful because fans always criticize immediately and see the worst behind it. I wonder how Michael can get true justice and be freed from this wrong perception of him, when every measure and every action to try to restore his image and to set the record straight is attacked, because fans see sinister and selfish motives behind it (without checking it really out). Why can’t they just be silent when they don’t agree with something and let the others do their part?
    Thank you everybody for your comments here, they are very intelligent and reasonable. I really don’t get it how an attempt to hold Sneddon accountable for his deeds can be opposed by fans. It’s not about supporting the persons, BUT THE CAUSE! Even if it is not successful this attempt will be in the archives of the Santa Barbara County supervisory authority, which will give a different insight for future generations and perhaps one day someone will start a new investigation, and if only for historical reasons. I’m sure it’s not in vain.
    These “fans” obviously never had to fight for anything in their life, never lived in a country where you need to stand up against injustice, never learned what it means to fight corruption and abuse of power and how you have to do it. They are used to their working democracy, their freedom, that everybody can say what he/she wants, they even got so used to the methods of their media that they take them over and use them themselves. They don’t have any protest experience and so cannot imagine what really can be reached. And they don’t consider that even a failure is acceptable when we try to do something that we owe to someone.
    It’s true what was said by Cadeflaw on blogtalkradio: The huge fanbase was Michael’s greatest legacy, and the fans are destroying this legacy themselves by bickering and quarreling and fighting about everything.
    Thank you everybody here on this blog for your great input.

    Like

  12. August 16, 2012 11:15 am

    I am reading over posts and have answers for questions which you have not already taken care of.

    “Why doesn’t Wagener tell how much has been collected?

    The answer for the question of exactly how much has been raised was answered by Mr. Wagener on the first and maybe second CadeFlaw BlogTalkRadio show he was on.

    “Why did Mr Wagener NOT do all this when Michael was here with us fighting for his life; character and reputation in the courts in 2005, I would also ask?! I would just want to know MORE answers to MORE questions I have! If that makes me a “fake fan” by William Wagener’s reckoning just for daring to disagree/challenge him and his followers; so be it; I really don’t care!”

    You addressed the “why now” so I won’t. What I will address is what is a standard trick used by Tabloid Press now adopted by MJ Fans. Misleading statements. Mr. Wagener has not called anyone who did not wish to donate to the 2005 Documentary a “fake fan” He has not used this phrase on anyone not even those who are actively attempting to stop the Affidavit effort. Other MJ fans are the ones who have and are saying that.

    “if not I would ask where all your hard earned money has actually gone to; it’s a sad but plausible possibility straight in Mr Wagener’s pocket! :-/

    Considering the number of times all these questions were asked and answered I must surmise there are faulty memories or poor record keeping among some Advocates. This community boasts some very good researchers who by now should have checked out MJJIF’s 501 c 3 status and finances before saying what surely borders on slander.

    As for the Wagener “follower” comment I am not going to be touchy about it as I know it was not directed at me, because I do not “follow” any human.

    Like

  13. aldebaranredstar permalink
    August 16, 2012 9:34 am

    I don’t get the arguments presented in favor of not supporting the affidavit. The verdict of not guilty will not be overturned or reversed–how could it be? Everyone who has broken free of being brainwashed by the media knows Michael was innocent. Those who are brainwashed will probably continue to be brainwashed, as they would in any case even if no affidavit were brought and no investigation brought. In fact, if it were shown by an investigation that there WAS fraud of the court, it might persuade some who are now brainwashed to know the truth–that the charges were fraudulent.

    Then, the claim that if Sneddon were found guilty of fraud that NOTHING would happen to him. Well, he might keep his pension but he would lose a great deal in terms of his reputation–and this is where he damaged Michael–by throwing dirt on his reputation and trying to break him down, break his heart and his spirit, destroy him mentally and physically. If Sneddon were found guilty it would hit him hard in his pride, his arrogance. This man needs to be publicly humiliated–not by lies, as he did to Michael, but by the truth. People need to know what Tom Sneddon did. They have no idea b/c of the inane media that never bothered to get the facts straight (Diane Dimond, Nancy Grace, Oprah, Abrams, Bill O’Reilly, Bashir–so many in the media who did not tell the truth to the public and who in fact lied to the public and destroyed a man together with the power of the state in the hands of an unethical man like Sneddon). In fact, if Sneddon were found guilty of fraud, he might be subject to further investigations–we can hope.

    The arguments against supporting the affidavit carry no weight. Wagener was right to start this process. History will record the wrongs done to Michael.But someone had to start trying to make the powers that be in Santa Barbara wake up and see what they allowed to happen!!

    Thanks for posting the video and other links. I was very moved by the video but it was sad how the speakers were cut off and could not even finish their sentence–why the big rush?

    Like

  14. August 16, 2012 8:29 am

    Oh, and one more thing to and about the doubting fans (I’ll call their doubt “Mr. Hyde”): It isn’t really the fans who will pass this affidavit and take the sledgehammer to Sneddon’s head. This is up to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara to investigate the “dirty 4”. I mean, even with the six people and Mr. Wagener being there on the 14th, there was just as much impact as there would’ve been if there was a sea of fans, advocates, activists, etc. My point, really, is that regardless of how many people’s Mr. Hyde’s come out, and try to take over their thoughts and instill worry, there’s no need for US level-headed Dr. Jekyll’s to freak out. For those of us who are still dedicated, it’s important to be patient. I won’t discredit those “Mr. Hyde’s” because, who knows, they might just be stubbornly, and grossly misinformed (which they are). It took a little while, but those few people I talked to earlier were eventually won over to our side, which is of reason, logic, toughness, and upholding the law! 😀

    I wish everyone could think about how the fanbase looks like to those supervisors, all of us warring and fighting. Better to have a few level heads go into this professionally, with a select, level-headed amount of support than try to get EVERY fan to take action, right? After all, MJ’s battle was won in the courtroom, by truth. This will be won in the same fashion, even if some Mr. Hyde’s don’t want it to happen.

    🙂 FIGHT YOUR MR. HYDE! DON’T LET YOUR FEAR REPLACE FACT WITH IGNORANCE!

    (the story of Dr, Jekyll and Mr. Hyde: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Hyde)

    L.O.V.E.

    Like

  15. August 16, 2012 8:26 am

    http://youtu.be/lVak-gVDgvE Sneddon Accused of 2005 Crimes, 3 felonies

    http://youtu.be/0ZBlP1K4aWk Sneddon Accused of Crimes, in Michael Jackson, 2005 Trial, part 2

    Like

  16. August 16, 2012 7:44 am

    @cadeflaw: thank you for clearing that up! @everyone else: Double-jeopardy is one of the staples of the justice system, put in the constitution for very logical, smart, and fool-proof reasons. But for those people who are still a little nervous, I want you to think about MJ’s case this way: first, the evidence that was provided (and not supposedly fabricated) in itself, was not even remotely enough to cause suspicion in the jury. Two, if the prosecutions attempts at placing false evidence into the mix didn’t even get ONE guilty verdict, then how can the “not-guilty” verdict change if that evidence is taken out? Third, I don’t think anyone would re-try a deceased defendant. Taxpayers would kill the prosecutors. Fourth, the evidence fabricated was supposed to be DAMNING to the defense, and was supposed to get a unanimous guilty verdict…if this failed epically anyway, then what’re we all worried about?

    🙂 Rest easy…while the justice system can be manipulated, that doesn’t mean that it has never worked, either! Perhaps the worst we can possibly get from this is hater backlash, which is, naturally, no skin off our backs!

    Like

  17. August 16, 2012 7:35 am

    Blogtalkradio interview with Wagener and several person who attended the meeting. Get their impression of what went on and the reactions to the Affidavit. Thurs 8/16/12 12 PST, 2 PM CST, 3 PM EST, 9 PM CEST
    http://www.blogtalkr…ng-stone-part-2

    Like

  18. August 16, 2012 5:56 am

    Someone ask the question: please can someone explain me if there is any chance this could affect Michael’s non guilty verdict?

    THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY QUESTION AND ANSWER

    Question posed to two different attorneys. One attorney was happy to answer free of charge. Second attorney charged a fee we were happy to pay.

    Scenario: officer(s) of the court are found to be guilty of “Fraud Upon the Court” after a case has been tried.

    The defendant was found NOT GUILTY

    QUESTION: If the officers of the court are found to have committed “Fraud Upon the Court” does this overturn the not guilty verdict for the defendant?

    Optional Information:
    Country relating to Question: United States
    State (if USA): California

    You have received an Answer! From JB Umphrey
    Wednesday, August 15, 2012 6:44 PMEST

    The answer to your question is “no.” The defendant was found not guilty and that’s how things will remain. The defendant cannot be tried twice for the same crime (double jeopardy).

    It has been my pleasure to assist you today with your information needs. It is my goal that you are satisfied. No expert can promise you an answer that is favorable to your circumstances. But I will do my very best to explain the legal principles that are related to the facts you’ve described so that you can better understand the “why” of things.

    You replied
    Wednesday, August 15, 2012 6:49 PMEST

    Can you explain the legal principles that are related to the facts I’ve described so that we can better understand the “why” of things.

    You have received an Answer! From JB Umphrey
    Wednesday, August 15, 2012 6:52 PMEST

    I am happy to do so. The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides: [N]or shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb . . . .”

    Since the defendant has already been acquitted, under the Constitution, he cannot be tried again for the same crime. The Constitution does not allow it.

    The not guilty verdict stands.

    You replied Wednesday, August 15, 2012 6:54 PMEST
    Is there any problem with me posting these answers in a public forum to resolve a legal dispute?

    You have received an Answer! From JB Umphrey
    Wednesday, August 15, 2012 7:01 PMEST

    The Fifth Amendment is a part of a public document. You can post this link:

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CONAN-1992/pdf/GPO-CONAN-1992-10-6.pdf

    Best wishes!
    ~~ J.B.

    RIGHTS OF PERSONS – FIFTH AMENDMENT
    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    http://www.ballew.com/bob/htm/fotc.htm “Fraud On The Court By An Officer Of The Court” And “Disqualification Of Judges, State and Federal”

    Like

  19. Rodrigo permalink
    August 16, 2012 4:21 am

    I’m trying to take in what I’ve read.

    This is SERIOUSLY unbelievable. That’s from MJ ‘fans’ as well? Cause I thought I was reading Desiree’s writing there.

    I’m not going to judge their reasons for doubting Wagener and everything that’s going on, it’s down to them what they think and say. But I’ve lost a lot of respect for those ‘fans’.

    We Are The World – my ass.

    Like

  20. TIna permalink
    August 16, 2012 3:20 am

    Thanks Helena, after reading your blog for a long time about the 2005 trial and all available court transcripts I was really hoping for this day to come but when it comes the reaction which I saw in some “fans” page is really unbelievable.I hope this doesn’t stop us from doing the right thing.

    Like

  21. August 16, 2012 3:12 am

    “please can someone explain me if there is any chance this could affect Michael’s non guilty verdict?”

    Tina, and how can finding the prosecutor cheating against the defendant affect the non-guilty verdict? The only way it can affect it is by making the verdict more valid than ever and pronouncing Michael doubly innocent! Because the prosecution could not provide any evidence of Michael’s guilt even despite the fraudulent methods they used!

    Like

  22. August 16, 2012 3:05 am

    Людмила, спасибо за ссылку – сегодня уже очень поздно, завтра будем разбираться. Это явная ложь. Интересно только, сознательная или нет.

    Ludmila, thanks for the link. It is very late here now, so let’s leave it until tomorrow. This is an obvious lie. The only thing I wonder about is whether it is intentional or not.

    Like

  23. TIna permalink
    August 16, 2012 2:59 am

    please can someone explain me if there is any chance this could affect Michael’s non guilty verdict?

    Like

  24. August 16, 2012 2:57 am

    Below is the text from http://www.twitlonger.com/show/is01p5. Since they call themselves a “justice” project I wonder what “injustice” means to these people?
    This “justice” is obviously lying about the not-guilty verdict to be overturned in case Sneddon is held accountable for the fraud of court! This can absolutely not affect the verdict – the verdict will be all the more valid if the prosecutor who fought the defendant is found guilty of tampering with the evidence and cheating against the court!

    RT RT Let’s discuss this whole William Wagener affidavit to the court in the most calm way possible. We encourage discussion because it’s the only way to get to the essence of any issue in the MJGlobal community.

    First let’s state some obvious points –

    Every Michael Jackson fan KNOWS that Tom Sneddon was out to get him and was maliciously using every power vested in him and by any means to convict Michael: legal and otherwise.

    Every Michael Jackson fan would love the idea of Sneddon having to pay for his obvious evidence tampering during the 2005 trial.

    Every Michael Jackson fan would love to see a fact filled documentary produced that clearly demonstrates that Michael was maliciously prosecuted by Sneddon.

    But every Michael Jackson fan needs to understand the ramifications of following a path where the outcome may be contrary to the goal of bring Justice to Michael.

    Next- Malicious Prosecution

    After trial Tom Mesereau said that in his estimation, Michael had grounds to bring a case of malicious prosecution against Sneddon. Michael was emotionally spent after sitting in the court room listening to lies against him for 5 months, and was in no position to bring such a case.

    This type of case cannot be brought by anyone else except the person it was perpetrated against. Since ONLY Michael could bring such a case and the statutes of limitations have run out this is a moot point.

    Next- Fraud Upon the Court

    Now William Wagener files a affidavit for “fraud upon the court” which has no statute of limitation.

    By definition is something that the officer of the law (lawyers , judge) etc does that causes the court not to be impartial and in effect causes them not to do their legal duty.

    “7th Circuit states “a decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final.”

    Michael was found Not Guilty, despite the actions of Sneddon and the
    let’s ponder on the ramifications of having William Wageners affidavit accepted and the verdict voided.

    Is that what MJ fans want?

    Do we want the Not Guilty verdicts voided? We think not.

    So if a fraud upon court is proven all of the orders and judgments are voided
    and this voids the verdict – How would this affect Sneddon?

    If the Board of Supervisor’s did open an investigation and found that Sneddon did participate in “fraud upon the court” what will happen to Sneddon?

    Nothing.

    The most they can do is suspend his license to practice law or disbar him- but as we all know Sneddon is retired and blissfully pulling in a government pension.

    So it’s a lose, lose proposition and this Affidavit of William Wageners should NEVER have been put to the Board of Supervisor’s of Santa Maria County, NOR should ANY of Michael Jacksons fans supported this ill-thought out presentation and cause.

    William Wageners Documentary

    Do we think a documentary should be made regarding the malicious prosecution of Michael Jackson that will highlight the evidence tampering done by Tom Sneddon ?

    YES …

    We can support that endeavor and just like Tom Mesereau made it clear in his letter that he supports such efforts that show Michael was totally innocent.

    We have never thwarted the efforts of Willaim Wagener, we simply ask people to understand the issues.

    Funding for such an endeavor is not financially viable even though Michael has over 50Million fans all over the world.

    Why?

    Over half of Michael’s fans live in third world or impoverished nations and don’t have the means to make their own ends meet much less finance this documentary.

    Additionally, due to the worldwide economic crisis, the rest of Michael’s fanbase may struggle even if living in developed nations.

    Therefore, Michael’s fanbase,, while filled with much honor and love for Michael, can not sustain the financial burden of this documentary alone.

    William Wagener must find some Angel Investors for financing and his advocates need to stop attempting to make Michael’s fans feel guilty when they can not carry this financial burden.

    To goad someone into sending money by using terminology that they are not “genuine” “true” or “real” fans is disingenuous and is emotional blackmail of a sort.

    Every fan of Michael Jackson would love to see this documentary completed, but don’t try to make them feel less than real fans because monetarily they can not see it to its fruition.

    Michael Jackson never once asked his fans for monetary support .. in fact HE was the one to GIVE –

    All we ask from the MJGlobal family is to ask questions before you support a cause, understand the implications and ramifications of supporting it before you do.

    Emotions can make you jump into a cause that has Michael Jackson’s name on it- before you research – even MJJJP signed the Wagener petition on emotion before we looked deeper into the issue.

    We are all human and make mistakes- but as long as we learn from them they become lessons.

    Like

  25. August 16, 2012 2:54 am

    The world needs people like Michael and people like William J..Wagener to prevent immoral,deceitful conduct of persons in high office.-My Facebook does not work since I closed it sometime ago.-Somewhere there was a tel.nr given to Mr.Wagener.But how could he just like that pick up the phone ?There is also a big timedifference.I have petitioned and
    I wish with all my heart this effort of Mr.Wagener will be successfu.

    Like

  26. August 16, 2012 2:47 am

    http://mjcbjunky.tumblr.com/post/29483259626/that-awkward-moment-when

    Tina, I’ve had a look and this is DISGUSTING. Another proof that there are fans and “fans”.

    Like

  27. August 16, 2012 2:30 am

    “How long will it actually take for them to come to the decision about Sneddon?”

    I hear it will take some time.

    But I am very concerned about the way people react to William Wagener’s affidavit. Today I’ve read the following on Facebook:

    ALL of Michael Jackson’s fans are AGAINST Tom Sneddon whatever William Wagener wants you all to believe! What I want to know is why don’t YOU all get together in a singular effort to see how much ‘progress’ he’s made towards making this 3 million dollar documentary? Test the finances; check where they are with this – enquire as to how much progress he has made and ask to see the transactions/financial reports – IF he is willing to show you these all well and good – if not I would ask where all your hard earned money has actually gone to; it’s a sad but plausible possibility straight in Mr Wagener’s pocket! :-/

    I wonder what the documentary has to do with Wagener’s affidavit? The affidavit is a non-money project, and is clean and transparent. If people are so terribly suspicious of Wagener and don’t want (or cannot) give money for the documentary, they can at least support the affidavit – especially if they declare that they are against Sneddon. Only from the way they behave one begins doubting that this is true.

    Why did Mr Wagener NOT do all this when Michael was here with us fighting for his life; character and reputation in the courts in 2005, I would also ask?! I would just want to know MORE answers to MORE questions I have! If that makes me a “fake fan” by William Wagener’s reckoning just for daring to disagree/challenge him and his followers; so be it; I really don’t care!

    I also have questions to this fan. Why does each time someone tries to do something good for Michael the immediate answer is “Why didn’t he do it earlier?”.
    Why is doing something now no good with them? is doing nothing better? Is the old proverb “Better late than never” still true for these people?
    And why, when the project is money-free, fans start screaming about their “hard-earned money”? No one is asking for money here, so why all this screaming?
    Oh, the fan wants to know what’s going on with the documentary? Most probably nothing is going on with it, because the money collected is surely a small fraction of what is required for it.
    Why doesn’t Wagener tell how much has been collected? Because the sum must be so small that he is probably sparing the feelings of fans and doesn’t want to disappoint those who contributed their money. It would be embarrassing to disclose the sum – Michael’s haters will laugh outloud at it.

    Whatever the situation with the documentary, as to the affidavit the fans are simply looking for pretexts not to support it.

    It looks like a hide-and-seek game. Wagener speaks of one thing and they speak of another. He says he is not a fan but does a lot for Michael, they say they are fans but do nothing. He acts, they talk. He speaks of a money-free project and they scream about money in reply. He says Sneddon should be held accountable and they assure that they are against him, but do nothing in support of their statement and attack Wagener instead.

    What’s this? Why does the word sabotage come to mind?

    Like

  28. TIna permalink
    August 16, 2012 2:25 am

    This is how some “fans” ridiculed WW effort . It is really sad and beyond my belief.

    http://mjcbjunky.tumblr.com/post/29483259626/that-awkward-moment-when

    Like

  29. Людмила permalink
    August 16, 2012 1:48 am

    Леночка, сегодня так расстроилась. Сама принимала активное участие в сборе подписей и распространении петиции, просто до крика души.. А тут на тебе: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/is01p5
    Если я правильно их поняла, то это, по их мнению, может как-то навредить Майклу. Хотя я не согласна- нарушения, это другое. К приговору не имеет отношения. Я очень распереживалась..

    Translation:

    Lena, it upsets me so much. I took an active part in collecting signatures and spreading the petition, up to full abandon of myself. And here is what we have: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/is01p5
    If I understood it right they are of the opinion that it can somehow damage Michael. But I do not agree – those [Sneddon’s] breaches of law have nothing to do with the verdict. I am very upset…

    Like

  30. Rodrigo permalink
    August 16, 2012 1:10 am

    Yes it was cold, it’s a very big thing all of this. I just hope and pray that it’ll turn out for the best.

    How long will it actually take for them to come to the decision about Sneddon?

    Like

  31. August 16, 2012 12:56 am

    “I choked up when Daniel was speaking. You can sense the full sincerity and hurt in their voices when speaking about Michael. This has to work. Justice HAS to be done” – Rodrigo

    Yes, Daniel must have been one of those whom Michael was helping and he probably knew him personally. His words and tears were very sincere. Don’t know whether the affidavit will work but these people have shown that they do care. The atmosphere there struck me as cold, though on the other hand what else could it be?

    This is the beginning only but it is nevertheless the beginning. Water wears away the stone.

    Like

  32. Rodrigo permalink
    August 15, 2012 8:11 pm

    I choked up when Daniel was speaking. You can sense the full sincerity and hurt in their voices when speaking about Michael. This has to work. Justice HAS to be done.

    Like

  33. August 15, 2012 5:53 pm

    This is William Wagener’s Youtube video:

    Sneddon Accused of 2005 Crimes, 3 felonies

    William Wagener, objective TV Host & Reporter who was the only TV personality to predict correctly 100% not Guilty for Michael Jackson in 2005, leads a dozen M.J. Fans to call for INDICTMENT by a Special Prosecutor of the “dirty 4” , Tom Sneddon, Ron Zonen, Gordon Auchincloss, and Mag Nicola. At the August 14th, 2012 meeting they looked the 5 leaders of the Santa Barbara County, square in the EYE and asked them to read the AFFIDAVIT of William Wagener and appoint on outside Special Prosecutor to investigate, Indicte, arrest , convict and sentence for former S.B. Prosecutors of Michael Joe Jackson , to prison. The Supervisors had never heard the FACTS , did not attend the trial, and were visible shocked to hear that Sneddon and Snakes “fabricated” false evidence and conspired to do so. In so doing, Sneddon committed 3 felonies at least, and William Wagener, an admitted non- Michael Jackson fan in 2005, wants justice to be applied equally to the alleged dirty 4 prosecutors who allegedly committed crimes against the Court, called FRAUD on THE COURT, by fabricating false evidence.

    The Supervisors, did not respond as they are prohibited by law to do so unless it is on the agenda. They could ignore it, send the Affidavit of Will Wagener to County Counsel, or just appoint a special prosecutor once the item is put on a future agenda, in Sept. or October , or November. Bill Brown the elected Sheriff plus 5 other deputies were there to make sure all the rules were obeyed. William Wagener did NOT get to finish his statement, but his back up team did. The Supervisors now a constructive NOTICE of a CRIME by Sneddon, and have a duty to do something about it.

    Let us pray that something good will come of it.

    Like

  34. August 15, 2012 4:32 pm

    Susanne, your comment was captured by the spam filter – it always does when it sees several links. Sorry for that, I will try to change the settings.

    Here is the picture you’ve sent of William Wagener and supporters of his affidavit against Sneddon and Co. on August 14, 2012.

    This is the routine way History is made. I applaud these people – they are at least trying:

    Like

  35. susannerb permalink*
    August 15, 2012 4:16 pm

    It seems my last comment was not posted, so here it is again:

    Cadeflaw was not able to get WW on the phone yesterday, so we are waiting for more information. But Mary Brookins told that a video of the presentation will soon be posted on Youtube.
    Also, on this website a video of the whole supervisor meeting will be uploaded today or tomorrow: http://www.countyofsb.org/ceo/media.aspx
    There was a lifestream of the meeting yesterday, but most of us didn’t know it and only some saw it. Apparently William’s supporters were given one minute to speak and several of them took the chance.
    Here is a photo of the group that supported WW:

    Like

  36. Alison permalink
    August 15, 2012 11:02 am

    I listened to it, but William didn;t come on and there was no news how it went.
    The lady from Germany who we cc’d the letters to, Ute Wilhem, came on first and she sounded very nice, and very passionate for justice for Michael, she thanked everyone for their support and was just encouraging. generally they were all saying how frustrating and sad it is that Michael Jackson fans are now so factioned off from each other, that the fans are his greatest legacy and that this is letting him and his legacy down. they said that fans saying we are too small a number to make a difference should remember to look at Michael himself and see what one man achieved in making a difference and that we should learn from him that we are not small and insignificant as society and governments make us feel, that if we have vision and take it on board to do something (my words / interpretation), that we are Big.

    at the end a woman who had sent an email to William saying he shouldn’t call fans fake just because they disagree with him came on but i didn’t really understand much of what she said, it just left me feeling a bit depressed.

    Like

  37. Mz. Right permalink
    August 15, 2012 7:04 am

    YES! This is long overdue!! For MJ — R.I.P.

    Like

  38. August 15, 2012 4:58 am

    Mr. William Wagener and several other persons address the Santa Barbara Country Board of Supervisors today. Some time this evening or tomorrow morning Mr. Wagener will upload film footage of before and after the Board meeting. It was decided the meeting would be closed, however, within the next 72 hours the County should film footage of the in session proceedings available on their website. Most had difficulties with viewing live proceedings maybe someone will get luck and download it for the rest.

    http://www.countyofsb.org/ceo/media.aspx

    http://www.facebook.com/william.j.wagener

    Like

  39. August 14, 2012 11:41 pm

    “More information about WW’s presentation here: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/cadeflaw/2012/08/14/william-wageners-affidavit-a-rolling-stone
    Will start in about an hour from now!”
    – Susanne

    Guys, could you please write a note about it here? I won’t be able to listen to it.

    Like

  40. susannerb permalink*
    August 14, 2012 10:52 pm

    Alison, I don’t know if that’s possible, but MichaelJacksonSimForum, who created the petition, said they will try and there should be a way. The false signatures are about 25-30, they are on the previous pages (starting with #2678) and still there at the moment. Interestingly they only emerged today, the day of the affidavit presentation. This looks like an attempt of sabotage.

    Like

  41. Alison permalink
    August 14, 2012 10:26 pm

    Excellent spontaneous post. there’s been more signatures since this morning but still only 2887, but anyway it all helped today.
    Susanna – if they found fake signatures, have they been removed ? so the figure is a real number or are they still in there?

    off to get some tea then come back to listen to blog talk in about half an hour, thanks for the link Susanna.

    Like

  42. August 14, 2012 10:22 pm

    Great post! We’re running into other sorts of problems as well (all of which, actually, are almost amusing to me): people are forging fake signatures for the petition, because they do not understand Mr. Wagener, nor do they understand the context of WHY he was incarcerated in 2002. Some so-called “fans” are taking the offensive now…rather ridiculous, no? It’s almost funny that some people think the only way to defend MJ is to try to bury the past up in absolutes. What’s the point of that? Where is the fluidity, the current in that? Why are they building a dam? Because they fear that, somehow, Sneddon and his gang are going to come after them with an axe? COME ON, PEOPLE! IT ISN’T THAT HARD!

    Like

  43. susannerb permalink*
    August 14, 2012 10:05 pm

    More information about WW’s presentation here:
    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/cadeflaw/2012/08/14/william-wageners-affidavit-a-rolling-stone
    Will start in about an hour from now!

    Like

  44. August 14, 2012 7:16 pm

    MOA, thank you very much for the affidavit! I will add it now to this spontaneous post.

    Like

  45. August 14, 2012 6:10 pm

    日本の全Michaelファンの方々へ
    サンタ バルバラ法廷へのスネッドンに対するサインをお願いします!!!
    http://www.thepetitionsite.com/662/053/218/support-of-affidavit-concerning-criminal-conduct-of-tom-sneddon-2005-michael-jackson-trial/
    Support of Affidavit Concerning Criminal Conduct of Tom Sneddon – 2005 Michael Jackson Trial
    TO ALL MICHAEL’S FANS
    WE NEED YOU!!!
    JUSTICE FOR MICHAEL JACKSON
    Yoshimi

    Like

  46. August 14, 2012 6:00 pm

    Saw a Facebook page that gives the affidavit of William Wagener. Here it is:

    AFFIDAVIT Of William J. Wagener

    I hereby state, under penalty of Perjury, that it is my opinion, that I carefully observed in the actual courtroom significant fabricated false evidence that Prosecutors fabricated false evidence against an innocent man, and the most famous resident of Santa Barbara County, Michael Joseph Jackson. I have attended Law School, and over 400 court cases & Hearings. I also attended every day of Michael Joseph Jackson 2005 public Trial, except for 3 days of testimony & Verdict day June 13,2005. I said, in the Jury Pool, in 2005 during a break, shouldn’t Thomas Sneddon be indicted for faking fingerprint evidence. It is my firm opinion, prosecutors, Thomas Sneddon , Ron Zonen, Gordon Auchincloss, & Mag Nicola individually or in combination did with Malicious Malice of forethought, contrive, and fabricate false Fingerprint evidence on a Barely Legal Magazine that did not exist until more than 5 months after Gavin Arvizo admitted he was last at Neverland. Prosecutor then encouraged Gavin Arvizo to testify against Michael Joseph Jackson and to state on the record, that Michael Jackson gave him that specific magazine, which is impossible because it had not been printed until many months later. And that Thomas Sneddon, gave that specific magazine to Gavin Arvizo at the secret Grand Jury indictment hearing without any gloves on and afterward sent it out for Fingerprint Analysis, and if not for the court reporter capturing the comment of a grand juror about the lack of gloves on Gavin Arvizo at the Grand Jury, it might have lead to A conviction on fabricated evidence. Further, that a Prosecutor of more than 25 years experience does not make this mistake by accident. It is my firm opinion, that a objective jury trying Tom Sneddon for this felony, would find Tom Sneddon guilty as charged. Furthermore this was and continues to be FRAUD ON THE COURT, because the Prosecutors have pretended that nothing felonious was done by them, and no one from the pool of the Santa Barbara County District Attorneys office, will indict one of their own. What a surprise.

    Second, Mag Nicala fabricated false evidence on dates of phone calls to make it appear That Michael may have made phone calls, but their own Prosecutor’s witness took the witness stand and stated that the Prosecutors had it all wrong, as seen on the over head projection, after it had been admitted as evidence. Prosecutors tried to remove it from Jury consideration, and Defense objected, and the Jury saw the blatant lie for what it was, just another of a long list of fabricated false evidence. It is my firm opinion that if and when Mr. Nicola is indicted by a jury of 12, they would find Mag Nicola guilty of felony fabrication of false phone contact evidence and FRAUD ON THE COURT.

    Thirdly, It is my considered and firm opinion that the cooperation between the prosecutors to present fabricated evidence, to the court, and to the jury is FELONY Conspiracy, by The Prosecutors against a man the Jury found completely NOT GUILTY of all 10 original Charges plus that last minute 4 misdemeanors. This Conspiracy and the silence of a corrupt Santa Barbara District Attorneys office for 7 years and continuing is an On going felony and stops the Statute of Limitations from running, in my opinion. One can not escape Justice by continuing the fraud on the court, on the public.

    Lastly, there appears to be many other felonies committed in the 2005 trial, that a good and honest prosecutor could find. But I am limiting this affidavit to these three, and it is Your duty under your oath of office to see that these four do not escape true justice. It is valuable to the community to know that justice is applied equally and that none are above the law, not even prosecutors, who commit willfully and maliciously FRAUD UPON THE COURT, and felonious Fabrication of Evidence against a man, who even the F.B.I. found faultless. In my opinion, and can never be, a statute of limitation for FRAUD ON THE COURT, and wilful Fabrication of Felonies in due process of rightful law, While the evidence is on the Court record, which it certainly is, and is NOT in dispute.

    As a long time resident of this City and this County, I demand that this Board of Directors of Santa Barbara County, appoint a Special Prosecutor to review this Affidavit of my opinion, and the court record of 2005 trial of Michael Joseph Jackson, that Criminal Conduct of fabrication of Evidence of fingerprints and phone call conspiracy and the conspiracy by two or more of the four prosecutors to commit such crimes against a man the Jury found completely innocent member of the County, Michael Joseph Jackson. I suggest this board ask Atty. Susan YU to recomment an unbiased special prosecutor. I am convinced that if indicted, the 2005 Court record will be sufficient to support a conviction of Thomas Sneddon, now retired, and some or all of his three assistants who daily blodgened Michael Jackson with lies. Katherine Jackson and many others who sat through this trial of fabricated falsehoods, also suffered, and at the very least, there should be an Official appology to the Jackson family for the fabrication of false evidence and wilful malicious prosecution executed by the four prosecutors with malice afore thought.

    There Can be NO IMMUNITY for prosecutors who willfully, and maliciously fabricate false evidence against a man even the FBI found no falt with. To do so, is to claim a Honor and /or Title of Nobility, making some citizens in Government service above the citizens they supposedly server, and is prohibited by the U.S. Constitution.

    Delivered this day, 14 of August, 2012, in person to the Board of Directors of Santa Barbara County, California, and public meeting in Santa Maria, California, and now that the FRAUD is made known, the Statute of Limitations does start to run, and if this board of Directors fails to appoint a special Prosecutor to conduct a thorough and fair examination of the 2005 Court Record of Michael Joseph Jackson, then this board will be In effect an accessory AFTER the Fact, because Today, you have this statement as evidence a criminal act by Santa Barbara County elected and employed officials was Exposed and made known to you.

    I, William J. Wagener, am over the age of 60 years and mentally competent and do state that the above statement is my firm opinion of criminal acts: Committed by members of the Santa Barbara County District Attorneys Office, Mssr. Sneddon, Zonen, Mag Nicola & Auchincloss. And I state under penalty of Perjury that this is my firm opinion, and that in my opinion based a true law, natural law, common law, and Gods Law, that there is NO immunity for prosecutors who wilfully, maliciously, fabricate false evidence, nor can the Statute of Limitations begin to run until the FRAUD on the COURT is exposed, which I am doing this day, by giving you this affidavit that the above named prosecutors did at least these three felonies in combination and illegal criminal cooperation with one another. Therefore you have a duty, now that you have this statement to appoint a special prosecutor and get on with the indictment and any others that helped them fabricate false evidence to maliciously and with wilful malice aforethought bring false charges against this innocent man, Michael Joseph Jackson, formerly the owner and resident of Neverland in this County of Santa Barbara, in Republic of California.

    http://www.facebook.com/notes/love-u-sev/affidavit-of-william-j-wagener-traduction-francaise-par-martine-vaudon/10151122494496737#!/notes/love-u-sev/affidavit-of-william-j-wagener-traduction-francaise-par-martine-vaudon/10151122494496737

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: