Michael Jackson Fans Go After Prosecutor

Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Share Article

A number of people showed up to the board of supervisors meeting Tuesday to express concerns that former DA Tom Sneddon committed felonies in his prosecution of pop star Michael Jackson in 2005, allegedly misusing his power to pursue a conviction on the molestation charges. An online petition has begun, and the group is asking for a full investigation be conducted by an independent special prosecutor. Jackson, who for a time lived at his Neverland Ranch in the Santa Ynez Valley, died in 2009.


Independent Discussion Guidelines

Nothing worse than a mad MJ fan.

AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 1:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Apart from the fact that Sneddon did an excellent job of making himself look like an idiot, isn't this a few years too late to have semblance of relevancy?
I could pose the already answered question: Do these people have any lives what so ever?
I'm just proud that we have had authority figures like Jerry Sandusky and MJ to mentor our youth...
I gotta get back to my project that will prove that Stanley "Tookie" Williams was really just a misunderstood do-gooder and was framed by a racist society...

italiansurg (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 1:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

After reviewing the facts of that "trial" guilty as charged would have been the proper verdict . A true molester, using wealth and fame to attracted his victims.
SNEDDON screwed up that case! Should have been a slam dunk.

MAN (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 1:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Michael Jackson drama will never die...

LegendaryYeti (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 2:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

the article should have begun thusly... 'A number of people with a lack of purpose in their lives showed up....

lawdy (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 2:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I didn't pay attention to the trial when it happened. But skimming the Wikipedia citation, it seems the accuser and his family were pretty shady:

My hunch is there was so much media spin in this trial only the judge, jurors, and lawyers really knew what was going on.

I dug up some of what Sneddon may be accused of here (seizures beyond scope of search warrant, etc):

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 2:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Of course the family of the accuser were bizarre; they took cash under the table to cover up their kid getting buggered. Excellent family values...

italiansurg (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 6:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Arvizo vs. Jackson trial ended in acquittal on all counts. I couldn't Google any reports of a cash settlement. But there was a settlement in an earlier 1993 case, also involving a questionable acuser.

Most folks are so far removed from these cases, I don't see one can make an informed opinion unless you're a juror. Especially since the media seems to have done a crappy job of reporting as described in the Huffpo piece.

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 6:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Never too late for justice.

A locally produced video is an excellent view that I've lost track of

DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 8:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I know Larry Nimmer, he's a good guy.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 8:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thanks DM for the link ... I'm usually more interested in *why* people think what they think, than *what* they think. So Nimmer's site was fascinating from that angle.

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 10:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Looking through the trial transcripts it's obvious the case should never have come to Court in the first place, there was so little concrete evidence that would stand up to close scrutiny. The media had a field day of course - juicy gossip sells - although they were somewhat remiss in reporting any facts in Jackson's favor. Conspiracy by Aphrodite Jones is an interesting read which reveals to some extent the media bias at the time. Sneddon had his eyes of the prize of Jackson in jail for over ten years, driven by motives which are not difficult to identify - although they may be more troublesome to prove. Although Jackson was acquitted, the damage done to his reputation, his career and undoubtedly his well-being was immeasurable. It's too late now for Jackson himself, but exposing the whole trial as a malicious set-up will at least be some comfort to his family and especially his children.

Pen (anonymous profile)
August 16, 2012 at 8:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

MAN: I wonder what "facts" you are reviewing - probably what you recall from the media coverage at the time - which indeed would suggest Jackson was a guilty man. Were you aware he was investigated by the Department of Family and Child services who found no evidence - Arvizo admitted to them there had been no sexual misconduct? Were you aware the FBI tracked Jackson for ten years on Sneddon's order, but could find no hint of any wrong-doing? Were you aware that all prosecution witnesses were discredited as either being disgruntled ex-employees or had a financial motive for their stories? Probably not, as the tabloid editors knew you would not be interested in a truth less sensational than the lurid accusations being leveled at one of the biggest names in showbiz. Try doing some real research before you make your judgments.

Pen (anonymous profile)
August 16, 2012 at 8:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

(This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of use policy.)

e1986gonzalez (anonymous profile)
August 16, 2012 at 12:21 p.m.

Some people posting here have to remember that the Michael Jackson fans and the public who are passionate about justice are behind Michael because they are here to see that the justice system is upheld without corruption.

Sneddon, who has been fraudulent and abused his power as an attorney is liable for prosecution. The Justice system needs to make an example for society that nobody gets away with doing wrong, whether Michael Jackson is here with us today or not.

Michael Jackson was indeed an innocent man and no human on this planet deserves to be treated so unjustly; not then, not now, or in our future.

RIZA (anonymous profile)
August 17, 2012 at 8:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

It is a sorry state of affairs when those individuals in society who act in the name of truth, honour, justice and decency are labelled "crazy," "mad" and "strange," whilst those who delight in persecuting and vilifying innocent people are allowed to live a life untarnished by consequences.
Michael Jackson was an innocent man. Both the 93 and 05 cases were clear examples of extortion. (Anyone who took the time to look at the evidence, or lack thereof,) would reach the same conclusion.
The 1993 extortion attempt was made clear by the comments made by the accuser's father in a taped phone conversation in which, when asked how certain situations will affect his son, he states, "That's irrelevant to me...It will be a massacre if I don't get what I want. It's going to be bigger than all us put together...This man [Jackson] is going to be humiliated beyond belief...He will not sell one more record." This is clearly not the heartfelt statement of a man seeking justice for his son.
David Nordahl, an intimate friend of Mr.Jackson's for more than 20 years, reiterates the point: "That little boy's dad, who considered himself to be a Hollywood screenwriter because he had written (one script,) had assumed that Michael was going to make him a business partner in (his new film company. When Michael declined to make that offer, the father extorted the money from him using false allegations.) To listen to the illuminating interview David gave about who Michael Jackson really was in full, follow this link:
Several false assumptions are made about the 93 case which are, as follows:
1) It wasn’t Mr Jackson but his insurance company who paid to the Chandlers.
2) The claim was for ‘negligence’ only (no molestation charges) which was withdrawn after reaching the financial settlement. Mr Jackson always maintained his complete innocence.
3) The settlement had absolutely no limitations for Jordan Chandler to testify in court in case the family wanted justice for their son and insisted on taking the case to a criminal court. They could go on with it while still keeping the money.
4) This opportunity was open to the Chandlers up to the year 2000 but Tom Sneddon, [the Santa Barbara DA] prolonged it as he wanted Jordan to show up in the 2005 court. However each time the prosecutors demanded a testimony from Jordan he left the country.
5) Mr Jackson later regretted the Chandler case had been settled out of court, stating to several friends that he felt it made him look guilty in the public mindset.

Tori4 (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2012 at 6:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Several sources have in fact suggested that Jordie Chandler has privately admitted to lying when he accused Mr.Jackson, (several college friends state that he told them, during Mr.Jackson's 2005 trial that he thought he was innocent and that his father forced him to do something he didn't want to do.) It is also telling that he refused to testify against him during the 2005 case.
In terms of the 2005 trial, that again was a clear case of extortion: a family driven by avarice, and a corrupt judicial system willing to support them. Mr.Jackson invited the Arvizo's to Neverland because he was told that one of the young boys, Gavin, was dying of cancer. In his kind, loving way, Mr.Jackson offered them free rein in his house, amusement park, cinema, in a bid to offer this child a chance for a normal and happy childhood given the daunting prospects he faced. However, when Gavin recovered the Arvizo's started to exploit Mr.Jackson's generous and kind nature, routinely using his credit cards, his cars and vandalising his property. When Mr.Jackson attempted to distance himself from the family, they, anxious perhaps that they would lose moneyed privileges, invented their accusations. (All of this evidence is available in Larry Nimmer's "The untold story of Neverland", which was used as evidence in the 2005 court case.)
The family's accusations were then used by DA Tom Sneddon, who, it is clear, had a vendetta against Mr.Jackson for many years. Mr.Sneddon, throughout the course of the case, exhibited all the signs of malicious prosecution, abusing his power, and, engaging in illegal acts, (the like of which fans recently discussed in court, such as evidence tampering, (eg. putting fingerprints on evidence, fabricating phone evidence,) in order to try and convict Mr.Jackson for a crime he did not commit. His motives for these actions I can only put down to jealousy and deep seated prejudice.

Tori4 (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2012 at 6:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

At no point did the media concern themselves with the facts of the 2005: That the prosecutions’ flimsy, non-existent case consisted of a family with a prior history of extorting celebrities, (Chris Tucker testified in court that they had tried to take advantage of him also, at which point he warned Michael as a friend to be wary of their motives,) and a couple of legal art books, that the witnesses for the state perjured themselves on the stand on an almost daily basis and were completely annihilated by Mr.Jackson's defense, that the mother of the accuser was unstable and had serious mental health issues, (throughout her testimony she continually referred to "the Germans," a non-specific group that was "after her",) that the DA and the DA's office exhibited several signs of malicious prosecution-for example, during the grand jury hearings, the DA, Tom Sneddon, was caught trying to fabricate fingerprint evidence, that the DA's office, which has a history of racially motivated attacks, stacked the charges against Mr.Jackson by employing an utterly ludicrous conspiracy theory, namely, that he had attempted to keep the family "hostage," despite the fact that bill and receipt payments indicated they had been using Mr.Jackson's cars and credit cards to shop and sight see in the nearby town during this alleged period of "imprisonment." Mr.Jackson was the only one tagged with this absurd "conspiracy" charge. Everyone else that worked at his ranch was named an un-indited co-conspirator. Since the very notion of a conspiracy requires the involvement of more than one person, the very fact this charge was employed at all should cause any rational person to question the DA's motives.
This information is all supported by official government documents-both the FBI files and the DCFS ongoing investigation found one thing against Mr.Jackson-nothing-both documents declared him innocent. Here is a link to a discussion of the DCFS article which stated there was never any evidence against Mr.Jackson:

Tori4 (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2012 at 6:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Michael Jackson's case was a tragic example of what happens when justice is no longer blind. Tragically, also, Michael was not the only one to suffer at the hands of a subjective vendetta by a bigoted DA. Tom Sneddon has built a career of of prosecuting people he simply didn't like the look of. One need only glance over past cases dealt with his by his office to reach that conclusion. For example, police officers that hounded Michael Jackson, an innocent man, for 20 years, yet refused to prosecute an officer in their own department found guilty of sleeping with an underage girl. That particular officer’s flimsy and horrific excuse? He mistook her for his wife. Or, take the reports of Tom Sneddon treating ethnic minorities in his workplace in a bigoted and demeaning manner. To read a more thorough account of the injustices committed against others during Tom Sneddon’s tenure, follow this link:
Yes, the fans in this case are speaking up for a humble, gentle and decent man whom they admire as an artist and humanitarian. But, more importantly, they are speaking up for a fellow citizen wronged by a corrupt judicial system. Were it one of your friends, your family members, your associates, would you not want them to do the same? To quote the infinitely wise Dr.King, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

Tori4 (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2012 at 6:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)


I couldn't have said it better myself
great post Thank You
I'm the same way usually but you got it all and then some

mjsangel (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2012 at 2:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

mjsangel (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2012 at 2:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This thread motivated me to watch "This is It" last night. It was an entertaining behind-the-scenes look at how a major concert is put together. Amazing how they were able to stitch all those rehearsal clips together into something seamless. The musicians were awesome too, especially Orianthi Panagaris.

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2012 at 2:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well I'm glad some group is finally questioning the abuse of power and corruption in "mad dog" Sneddon's reign.

arnieg (anonymous profile)
August 22, 2012 at 10:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"An injustice anywhere, is an injustice everywhere." Martin Luther King. Sneddon and his actions need to be fully exposed so this doesn't happen again. Travesties cannot be swept under a rug and confined to some distant past. If that were to be the case there would be no progress in this world. No right to vote. Child exploitation would still be legal as would slavery, as would bigamy, as would all forms of oppression. People forget that the freedoms they enjoy so liberally today came at an expense: the blood, sweat, lynchings, incarceration, and tears of people "with no lives" who have suffered, fought & died for these freedoms to be instated. Because of the life that was forced upon him from infancy - people still see Michael Jackson as a "pop star". He is a HUMAN BEING. One who just happened to have an overwhelming amount of fame of fortune due to his unique talent & genuine compassion - he didn't deserve to be persecuted the way he was. Sneddon was instrumental in engineering another mans suffering instead of doing his job - which entails public service, funded with public funds. Those resources could have been spent going after real criminals - not wasted on a vindictive campaign/witch hunt to bully a child star who had survived and transformed years of his own abuse and bullying into success, achievement & endless humanitarian work. Sneddon's unabashed abuse of power has far reaching systematic & societal repercussions if left unexposed, unchallenged and unpunished. If you are not part of the solution - you are part of the problem.

GGood (anonymous profile)
November 27, 2012 at 4:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: