June 28, 2010
The conversation with Brian (our new witness of molestation
emerging in the comment section) has made me change plans again
and say a word of praise about our favorite guy the Santa
Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon.
Yes, youve heard me right. Im not going to look
much into all the wrong Tom Sneddon did to Michael Jackson,
which everyone knows about Ill focus on a special
kind of professionalism Sneddon displayed during his 10-year
long persecution of Michael Jackson the professionalism
which should be constantly thrust into the face of Michaels
Tom Sneddon was the BEST man the prosecution could ever muster.
Their BEST man did his BEST job with the BEST support he could
get from the media and nevertheless reached NOTHING as a result
(except ruining Michaels health, alas)
. If such
an experienced, skillful and dedicated hater of MJ as Tom Sneddon
wasnt able to put Michael behind bars it can only mean
one thing - the absence of evidence in Michaels case
was absolute, total, radical, exhaustive, complete and unconditional.
If it hadnt been for Michaels ruined life I would
be almost grateful to the Prosecutor for the thoroughness with
which he swept those Michaels cases with a
- His people traveled to every corner of the world to interrogate
everyone in sight (for ex. to a far-away place like Australia
they went twice to meet Brett Barnes who even the first time
vehemently denied any abuse).
- He encouraged the whole nation to participate
in a hunt for victims of the predator in 2003, collaborated
with the FBI in search of every scrap of evidence and went through
whatever he could find with a really fine tooth comb.
- He confiscated all Michaels medical records looking
for the changes his genitalia might have undergone and stripped
him of all dignity by making him undress in front of the
gang of curious people and photographing his private parts naked
- What he couldnt find he falsified just
as those fingerprints on adult magazines put by the Arvizo accusers
right in front of the grand jury.
What he couldnt show he hid from the public eye
saying it was a match while it wasnt remember Tom
Sneddons declaration where he admitted it was him
(not the doctor) who made a determination about the similarity
of Jordans drawing and photos of MJs private parts
though they were completely at variance with each other
both in color and non-circumcision condition.
The prosecutor checked up on all past abuses and
made the legislation change to be able to bring those
cases into the 2005 trial or allow third parties to testify
on behalf of some fictitious victims.
In short Tom Sneddon completely outdid himself in collecting
whatever there was to collect about Michael Jackson in order
to humiliate him beyond measure and get rid of him once and
You are asking me why I am saying all that?
Because all the heroism Ton Sneddon demonstrated in the prosecution
field means that not a single speck of dust Michael Jackson
ever stepped on was overlooked and went unexamined without a
magnifying glass. In such circumstances it was IMPOSSIBLE to
miss a single piece of evidence or anything even remotely resembling
And this fact completely RULES OUT the possibility of any new
witnesses appearing out of the blue now - which is the outrageous
thing weve just seen with our own eyes in this blog.
This makes our approach to these guys simple and easy as a piece
of cake each time a new applicant presents himself as
a witness of molestation his attempt should be immediately
laughed off, eradicated and smashed with an iron fist.
A word for the volunteers for the status
of new witnesses or victims:
It is a little too late, guys. Youve had enough
time for the past 15 years to state your case and lay out your
cards. It is OUR turn now - so please have the decency
to step down and let the other side have their say. Weve
been listening to you long enough and are not taking it any
Your best guy Tom Sneddon has done ALL the job for you, so
relax and please Do Not Disturb.
* * * * *
THIS SUPPLEMENT includes
a wide range of opinion about Tom Sneddon and is provided here
to show that the District Attorney used every trick possible
in his trade for persecuting Michael Jackson:
1) The National District Attorneys
Association was full of praise for their Attorney
when he was still in office:
- After a brief period as a criminal defense attorney with a
Beverly Hills law firm and army service during the Vietnam War,
he joined the Los Angeles DAs office as a deputy DA. In
1969 he moved to Santa Barbara County to become deputy DA. In
1982 he was elected DA and has been re-elected five consecutive
times since his initial and contested election.
- He continues to be a formidable courtroom presence and still
prosecutes high-profile cases. His take-no-prisoners courtroom
demeanor won him the nickname, Mad Dog early in
his career, but the years apparently have mellowed him. His
present nickname is Snuffy.
- Called a ferocious athlete since his undergraduate
days at Notre Dame, where he was on the boxing team, he coached
youngsters teams for 18 years and at age 61 he can still
pitch a wicked softball.
- A newspaper article described him as arguably the single
most powerful person in all of Santa Barbara County.
- Sneddon has served far longer than any other DA in the countys
history and during that period has created what one observer
has called a high-powered office of talented career prosecutors
where the turnover is conspicuously low and the morale strikingly
- Tom Sneddon, a native of the Los Angeles area, supervises
a staff of 247, including 50 attorneys.
- Asked what has given him the greatest satisfaction in his
career, he has a two-word answer: Helping people.
2) DA HELPED DIANE DIMOND OUT OF A
HARD SPOT By Lloyd Grove with HUDSON
Wednesday, March 16th 2005
Yesterday, I learned that the Santa Barbara district attorney
played a key role in killing a slander suit that Jackson
filed against her a decade ago.
In 1995, when Dimond was working for Hard Copy,
she reported that Sneddon was searching for an explicit 27-minute
videotape showing Jackson molesting a boy.
Sneddon soon concluded that no such video existed, but not before
Dimond appeared on L.A.s KABC radio and her Paramount-produced
tabloid show to trumpet the imagined X-rated details.
It was taken right before Christmas, as the story goes,
and it was recorded by one of Michael Jacksons own security
cameras, Dimond said on the radio, touting her Hard
Copy scoop. Truly explicit, she added,
noting that she had not seen the alleged tape.
Sneddon, in an unusual instance of a prosecutor involving himself
in a civil suit, signed a declaration supporting Dimonds
version of events. The trial judge dismissed the suit, saying
Jackson couldnt prove malice or false reporting.
Jackson appealed the judges ruling, and Sneddons
declaration was cited extensively in the November 1998 California
Court of Appeals decision affirming the summary judgment.
Neither Jacksons lawsuit nor Sneddons role in snuffing
it is disclosed in Dimonds official bio on the CourtTV.com
Web site or in the detailed history of her Jackson coverage,
which includes her exclusive November 2003 interview with Sneddon.
3) Who Is Tom Sneddon? A Look At
The Man Pursuing Michael Jackson
LOS ANGELES, Dec. 18, 2003
By Tatiana Morales
Jerry Roberts, editor of the Santa Barbara News-Press
tells The Early Show, I think people do feel that he is
a man on a mission. You know, this is going to be the signature
case of his career
The two words that you hear the most are probably pugnacious
and tenacious, Roberts says, He has a reputation
for being fiercely competitive. Hes a law-and-order guy
who sees the world in black and white. Theres bad guys
and good guys, and he sees himself as the good guy.
Still, even his detractors concede Sneddon is good at what he
Gary Dunlap [defense attorney who was falsely accused by Tom
Sneddon and later acquitted] says, I know hes a
very effective prosecutor. Tom Sneddon is not a lightweight.
He lost his opportunity against Michael Jackson in 1993,
and he doesnt want to leave office without paying that
Is Tom Sneddon?
4) The DA In The Michael Jackson Case
Wed Nov 19, 2003
Tom Sneddon, the District Attorney in Santa Barbara in charge
of the 1993 case, said about it: When that case went
it went out of my mind. I havent given it
a passing thought. Heres a sampling of just
a few Internet entries on this issue to see whether this statement
The Independent (London), August 20, 1994
A ruddy-faced veteran prosecutor with a reputation for bloody-mindedness,
Thomas Sneddon is not willing to accept that his case is hopeless
without the testimony of its central figure Jordan Chandler.
Michael Cooney, an attorney who knows Sneddon well, says: Tom
Sneddon is a very determined individual who will go further
than almost anyone to prove something which he feels needs proving.
Once he decides action is worth taking, he will pursue it to
the very end.
Showbiz Today, September 22, 1994
GIL GARCETTI, Los Angeles County District Attorney: We
have concluded that because the young boy who was the catalyst
for this investigation has recently informed us that he does
not wish to participate in any criminal proceeding where he
is named as a victim, that we must decline prosecution involving
TOM SNEDDON, Santa Barbara County District Attorney:
Should circumstances change, should other evidence become available
within this period of the statute of limitations, like Los Angeles
County, we would re-evaluate the situation based upon what information
is available to us at that particular point in time.
The New York Times, September 22, 1994
Los Angeles County District Attorney Gil Garletti and Santa
Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon announced that
after a 13-month investigation in which 400 witnesses
were interviewed, no charges would be filed against Michael
The boy who had accused him of misconduct has declined to testify
against him in court in any possible prosecution. The formal
investigation concluded in September 1994 and the case is closed.
However, under California law, cases involving minors expire
six years after the date of any alleged accusation, and in this
particular case the statute of limitations expires in 1999.
The Chattanooga Times, August 19, 1995
Meanwhile, Saturdays Today newspaper said Santa Barbara,
Calif., District Attorney Tom Sneddon had twice contacted Presleys
mother, Priscilla, for information about Jacksons
relationships with young boys.
The New York Beacon August 23, 1995
Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon told the magazine
that Jackson has not been cleared of sexual involvement
with two boys, as Sawyer said during his interview of Jackson
on ABCs Prime Time Live.
The state of the investigation is in suspension until
somebody comes forward, Sneddon said to the Vanity
Fair. In the June 14 interview, Jackson told Sawyer there
was not one iota of information that was found that could
connect me to these charges of child molestation.
But Sneddon told the magazine in its September issue that he
has seen photos of Jacksons genitalia, and his statement
on TV is untrue and incorrect and not consistent with
the evidence in the case .
The Advertiser January 27, 1996
The reality is, no matter what he does, he cant
escape the fact that he paid out millions of dollars to prevent
a 13-year-old boy from testifying against him in court,
says Santa Barbara District-Attorney Tom Sneddon, who originally
investigated claims Jackson had molested the boy at his Neverland
Mr Sneddon says, contrary to popular belief, it would be inaccurate
to say Jackson was cleared of all charges. The state of
the investigation is in suspension until somebody comes forward
and testifies, he says.
Broadcast News (BN) February 15, 2001
Sneddon tells the New York Daily News the case against Jackson
was never closed and it can be re-opened at any time. He says
the statute of limitations hasnt run out because Jackson
was living out of the country for so much time.
DA in the Michael Jackson Case
5) The District Attorney
December 15, 2007 Excerpts from the Floacist: The
- After having spent millions of dollars on the Michael Jackson
investigation in 1993, District Attorney Tom Sneddon did not
find enough evidence to bring charges against the pop star.
- Over the next few years, Sneddon and several of his employees
made numerous statements to the press where they implied that
there was indeed evidence to corroborate Jordan Chandlers
story. They failed to explain, however, why two grand juries
did not indict Michael Jackson if such evidence actually existed.
- According to reporter Geraldo Rivera, members of the Santa
Barbara Police Department were shown footage of the strip search
of Jacksons genitalia. Ive got a videotape
that was shown to every cop in Santa Barbara of Michael Jacksons
penis, Rivera said.
- In 1995, Sneddon told Vanity Fair magazine: The state
of the investigation [of Jackson] is in suspension until somebody
- Upon viewing the Living with Michael Jackson documentary that
aired in February 2003, Sneddon saw an opportunity to re-open
the case. In a press statement released on February 6, 2003,
Sneddon said: We encourage anyone who may be a victim
or has credible evidence that a crime may have been committed
contact the Department of Social Services Hotline (800) 367-
0166, or Santa Barbara County Sheriffs Department Sgt.
Phil Willis at (805) 681-4053.
- A few days later, somebody leaked Jordan Chandlers Declaration
of December 28, 1993 onto the Internet.
- On February 13, Tom Sneddon gave an interview to tabloid journalist
Diane Dimond where he again stressed the fact that if another
victim came forward, the case would be re-opened.
5) Malicious Prosecution? Has Jackson
been treated fairly?
by the Floacist (with some additional facts from other sources)
October 25, 2007
Prosecution? Has Jackson been treated fairly?
- During the raid of Neverland, police went into areas that
they were not permitted to go into and took items that were
not on the search warrant.
- At his press-conference (Nov. 19, 2003) Tom Sneddon acknowledged
that he knew about these allegations since June but didnt
take action until November because of Halloween. The fact that
70 policemen made a surprise raid to Neverland when Michael
Jackson was in Las Vegas exactly on the day he was releasing
his new CD was a pure coincidence.
- Though the warrant for arrest of Michael Jackson was issued
on the same day as the search warrant and Michael surrendered
to the authorities the next day (Nov.20, 1993) the charges were
brought against Jackson only a month later (Dec. 18,
2003). Tom Sneddon is said to delay filing charges until December
so that the SBPD could set up a website for members of the press.
- Tom Sneddon dismissed the Department of Children and Family
Services investigation as an interview and accused
(the DCFS of being incompetent (the DCFS conclusion was that
the accusations were unfounded). However it
turns out that Sneddons own department also investigated
Michael Jackson in February and came back with the same ruling
as the DCFS. NBC News correspondent Mike Taibbi, discovered
that two weeks after Living with Michael Jackson
aired, the Santa Barbara County Sheriffs Department launched
their own investigation into Michael Jacksons alleged
activities. The investigation lasted from February until April
16th and was closed with no further action required.
- Sneddon said that the law was changed so that child victims
in a molestation case could be forced to testify. This was a
LIE; the law was changed so that if a civil suit was filed,
it would remain inactive until the criminal trial was resolved.
- At the press conference, more victims were invited to come
- During the press conference announcing the accusations against
Michael Jackson, Tom Sneddon laughed and made several jokes
at Jacksons expense.
Tom Sneddon gave yet another interview to Diane Dimond where
he called Michael Jacko Wacko.
Dimond admitted to knowing about the allegations months in advance.
Why was the DA leaking information to a tabloid journalist?
- Sneddon enlisted the help of a PR firm to deal with
the media. Tellem, the PR firm working for Sneddon, also works
for Dave Schwartz, the stepfather of Jacksons first
- In December, Jackson told Sixty Minutes that he was
roughly handled by police officers when he was arrested; he
showed photographic evidence to substantiate his claims. The
SBPD responded to Jacksons allegations by releasing audio
clips of Jackson whistling in the car before he was booked.
Jackson, however, did not claim that he was abused on his way
to the station. The only mistreatment he alleged before the
booking was when the handcuffs were put on but you can hear
him on the audiotape complaining about the handcuffs being too
- The actual abuse was not alleged to have occurred until Jackson
was brought into the booking station. The SBPD did not show
any footage of Jackson in the booking station, claiming that
they did not film Jacksons booking because they
didnt anticipate that there would be any problems.
- Sheriff Jim Anderson said that if Michael Jacksons claims
of police abuse turned out to be false, he would charge Jackson
with making a false complaint. Since Jackson never actually
made a formal complaint, Andersons statement is
not in accordance with the law.
- Sneddon has obtained 69 search warrants, including
warrants to search Jacksons bank statements, financial
records and security boxes. What evidence of child molestation
did Sneddon hope to find in Jacksons financial records?
- The charges from the criminal complaint are completely
different from the charges in the indictment. After the inconsistencies
in Sneddons case were brought to the attention of the
public, the timeline of alleged abuse changed, the number of
times the abuse allegedly occurred changed and allegations of
kidnapping have suddenly materialized.
- Jacksons defense team filed a 126-page motion asking
for the indictment to be thrown out. The document states that
during the grand jury proceedings, Sneddon bullied witnesses,
failed to properly present exculpatory evidence, refused
to let the jurors question the prosecution witnesses and provided
the jurors with a false legal definition of the term conspiracy
(for which Jackson was indicted)
- According to a motion filed by the defense, the amount of
search warrants that have been given to them by the prosecution
does not match the amount of search warrants that have
actually been issued by the prosecution. Six search warrants
are missing, 10 affidavits used to support the search warrants
have been heavily redacted and 49 affidavits used to support
the search warrants have not been given to the defense at all.
What is Sneddon hiding?
- According to the defense team: There is no case in the
history of the state of California that has condoned anything
like the abuse of power demonstrated in this grand jury proceedings.
6) Michael Jackson is speaking about
Interview with Ed Bradley on 60 minutes
December 28, 2003
MICHAEL JACKSON: They did it to try and
belittle me, to try and to take away my pride. But I went through
the whole system with them. And at the end, I wanted the public
to know that I was okay, even though I was hurting.
ED BRADLEY: What happened when they arrested you? What
did they do to you?
MICHAEL JACKSON: They were supposed to go in, and just
check fingerprints, and do the whole thing that they do when
they take somebody in. They manhandled me very roughly. My shoulder
is dislocated, literally. Its hurting me very badly. Im
in pain all the time. This is, see this arm? This is as far
as I can reach it. Same with this side over here.
ED BRADLEY: Because of what happened at the police station?
MICHAEL JACKSON: Yeah. Yeah. At the police station. And
what they did to me
if you .. if you saw what they did
to my arms
it was very bad what they did. Its very
swollen. I dont wanna say. Youll see. Youll
We were given a photograph said to be taken after Michael
Jackson was released on bail. Jackson says the swelling above
his wrist is where the police handcuffed him.
ED BRADLEY: How did they do it? I mean, what, physically,
what did they do?
MICHAEL JACKSON: With the handcuffs, the way they tied
em too tight behind my back
ED BRADLEY: Behind your back?
MICHAEL JACKSON: Yeah. And putting it, they put it in
a certain position, knowing that its going to hurt, and
affect my back. Now I cant move. I
keeps me from sleeping at night. I cant sleep at night.
And Jackson says there was more.
MICHAEL JACKSON: Then one time, I asked to use the restroom.
And they said, Sure, its right around the corner
there. Once I went in the restroom, they locked me in
there for like 45 minutes. There was doo doo, feces thrown all
over the walls, the floor, the ceiling. And it stunk so bad.
Then one of the policemen came by the window. And he made a
sarcastic remark. He said, Smell
does it smell
good enough for you in there? How do you like the smell? Is
it good? And I just simply said, Its alright.
Its okay. So, I just sat there, and waited.
ED BRADLEY: For 45 minutes?
MICHAEL JACKSON: Yeah, for 45 minutes. About 45 minutes.
then one cop would come by, and say, Oh,
youll be out in
in a second. Youll be out
in a second. Then there would be another ten minutes added
on, then another 15 minutes added on. They did this on purpose.
What about Jacksons allegations? Was he mistreated?
Did the police injure his arm and shoulder? Did they lock him
in a bathroom for 45 minutes? To get answers to those questions,
we made repeated calls to both the sheriffs office and
the office of the district attorney. They declined our request
for an interview and referred us to the statement on their Web
site, which says about allegations of mistreatment: That
is not true. It was the sheriffs deputies who executed
the search warrant of the Neverland ranch.
The full transcript:
Jackson Interview Transcript
7) Tom Mesereau, Michael Jacksons
Defense Attorney about the 2005 trial:
The prosecution was permitted to introduce evidence that
Jackson had settled other claims of child molestation in
civil court. The actual dollar amounts were not admitted
(as if anyone hadnt heard them!). It was also permitted
to introduce evidence of alleged prior similar acts of
child molestation. Prosecutors were permitted to introduce such
evidence extending back 10 years. As icing on the cake,
the court permitted them to call third-party witnesses
who watched the alleged acts without any requirement that the
actual alleged victims testify.
8) The jurors about Prosecution in the 2005 trial:
to some jurors after the 2005 trial?
HULTMAN: Well, I think the prosecution did everything
they could possibly do with this case. I think the problem
was the family. But as the prosecutor would tell you, they dont
pick their victims is what they said. And in this case, the
accuser and his family had some real credibility problems. And
that was kind of the key to the whole issue.
COCCOZ: I want to say, you know, I think the prosecution
did a wonderful job. They went through with a fine
toothed comb. And I think Mr. Sneddon, you know, he did
his best. And we have to, you know, really give them credit
But there was nothing we had a closet full of evidence.
There was nothing in that closet that was able to convince any
of us of the alleged crimes. And, I mean, it was I kept
waiting and waiting throughout the trial you know, when are
they going to bring in some kind of evidence that was going
to be convincing and they never brought it.
9) William Wagener On Second
May 10, 2010
I want to ask the judges why they
didnt demand that Tom Sneddon be indicted for falsifying
evidence in the Michael Jackson trial. I was a witness
I was right there in the courtroom, watched him get caught falsifying
the fingerprints evidence, the phone evidence that they tried
to create saying it was a conspiracy. Half a day on that! Then
Tom Sneddon wanted to withdraw it from the evidence pool in
the court. No, the Defender Tomas Mesereau said That stays
on. The jury looked at all this evidence: There
is no way we can convict this guy. We got a pile of crap from
Thank you Helena for your generosity
sharing your investigation!
This guy literally falsified evidence and it is under
record. This thing which he did to Michael Jackson was so beyond
the pale of forgiveness. Thomas Sneddon should be serving time
in prison. You cannot falsify evidence and then just say, Oh,
we lost the case. No, no..
He had that boy put his fingerprints on the magazine at the
grand jury and the reason we know that is because the alert
Tom Mesereau the Defense Attorney got the grand jury transcript
and one the jurors said: Shouldnt that boy be wearing
gloves?. Then after the grand jury they sent it out for
So when did the boy have his fingerprints on the magazine when
the boy testified he hadnt even been at Neverland for
months when that magazine was published? And yet he claimed
it was the magazine Michael Jackson gave him in bed.
If the DA were green behind the ears and he made a stupid mistake
like giving the evidence to a boy and then sending it out
Ok, he made a mistake and we could let it go. But 25 years?
We shouldnt be forgiving Tom Sneddon. The man should be
serving time in jail
The man is guilty as sin.
10) I couldnt resist the temptation
to also include a D.S. VIDEO here
- the song is actually one of my favourites: