Acabo de leer lo que 'the music lady' envió en su news letter. Me lo esperaba, pero aún así me impactó y pienso que todos deben leerlo por ustedes mismos.
Resumen para todos aquellos que no saben inglés:
Thambiah Sundaram, dentista comunitario de Santa Barbara, fue acusado de alrededor de 20 cargos, todos ellos falsos. Él descubrió el modus operandi de Sneddon y su equipo:
*Ellos tienen como costumbre perseguir a la gente que se les antoja, generalmente con motivos raciales, y acusarlos por los cargos que se les antoja.
*Generalmente, la cantidad de cargos suele ser excesiva, porque así, si no se encuentra culpabilidad de una cosa se encuentra de otra.
*En el proceso de arresto y acusación, la policía suele ser brutalmente agresiva y los procesos suelen violar las garantías individuales y en todo el proceso el abuso de poder es muy claro.
*Sundaram fue a un evento de 'caridad' de Tom Sneddon y oyó a varios oficiales y Sneddon hablando de como 'sacar del condado a Michael Jackson'.En ésta ocasión, hubo varias expresiones racistas.
----------------
July 10,2004
By K.C. Arceneaux
RAW STORY COLUMNIST
On April 30, 2004, the indictment against pop-star Michael Jackson was
unsealed, allowing the press and the public to view the charges
against him. Jackson has been charged with four counts of committing a
lewd act upon a child, one count of attempting to commit a lewd act
upon a child, and four counts of administering an intoxicating agent.
The additional charge of conspiracy, not included in the first set of
charges against him, included twenty-eight separate criminal acts.
Those alleged acts include child abduction, child imprisonment, and
extortion. Jackson pleaded not guilty to all counts.
On the same day that the indictment was unsealed, there was another
and far less public event unfolding, one that may have a future impact
on the Jackson case. Serious allegations of a pattern of abuses among
Santa Barbara law enforcement and the DA's office, including District
Attorney Tom Sneddon, were made by Santa Barbara County dentist,
Thambiah Sundaram, in an interview on Online Legal Review Talk Radio.
Sneddon is the DA prosecuting the child-molestation case against
Michael Jackson. In the interview, conducted by Ron Sweet, Sundaram
stated that there was opposition to a non-profit medical clinic he
operated.
Sundaram said that when city officials were unable to shut down his
clinic, he was arrested on multiple counts, including impersonating a
doctor, grand theft, and malicious mischief. Sundaram's wife was
arrested, as well. An employee at the clinic was also charged, of
committing a drive-by shooting. Neither Sundaram, his wife nor the
employee were convicted. Sundaram said that he eventually won a
judgment against Sneddon and the DA's office for a substantial,
six-figure amount, for causes including conspiracy, false
imprisonment, and other violations of his civil rights.
Sundaram's allegations against Sneddon were serious, in that he also
claimed to have heard, first-hand, statements by Sneddon and others in
the DA's office that suggest that Santa Barbara police persecution of
innocent citizens is planned, common, and often racially motivated.
Sundaram said that in 1994, he attended a fund-raising event with Tom
Sneddon and other city officials, where ways to "get Michael Jackson
out of the county" were discussed. Racist remarks were allegedly made
on that occasion. According to Sundaram, other alleged vendettas were
discussed as well, to the extent where he said it resembled a Mafia
planning session.
Sundaram's allegations are not an isolated instance.
There have been many complaints and law-suits against the Santa Barbara DA's office.
The new counts against Jackson may be consistent with a pattern that
Santa Barbara defense attorney Gary Dunlap has called "stacking
charges."
In an interview on MJJF Talk Radio, on January 2, 2004,
Dunlap gave his opinion that "stacking charges" was a common practice
of the DA's office, and claimed that this was a tactic used against him.
Sneddon had charged and prosecuted Dunlap on twenty-two counts. After
being acquitted on all counts, Dunlap is currently suing Sneddon and
others in the DA's office for $10 million for malicious prosecution,
and multiple other alleged offenses, including civil rights
violations.
Dunlap said, ". . . I mean, it's one thing to be charged
with one crime and have a trial and be acquitted on it, but the
district attorney in Santa Barbara has a policy that if they throw
enough charges against you, the jury is bound to convict you on
something."
The above cases add to the pattern of what may be law enforcement
abuses of power in Santa Barbara. There are multiple civil cases
alleging false arrests, physical brutality by the police, tampering
with evidence and perjury, in cases settled out of court, at
tax-payer's expense.
There is the example of George Beeghly, whose
case against Santa Barbara law-enforcement was also settled out of
court. The defendants in the case were Santa Barbara Sheriff Jim
Thomas, and Santa Barbara police officers. Beeghly sued for illegal
search and seizure, false arrest and false imprisonment, the use of
excessive force, conspiracy to violate his civil rights, battery and
failure to investigate, among other charges.
This information reveals a new side to the Michael Jackson
child-molestation case.
The extent of the law suits for false arrests,
false imprisonments, condoning of excessive force by the police,
tampering with evidence, and multiple civil rights violations suggests
a culture of corruption among Santa Barbara law-enforcement.
The taxpayers of Santa Barbara have paid substantial settlements in these
cases.
DA Tom Sneddon's public relation's firm, Tellem Worldwide, was
contacted and, citing a protective order as prohibiting their ability
to respond, has declined to comment. It remains unclear how the
allegations made by Dr. Sundaram and the cases involving Beeghly and
Dunlap are affected by the protective order issued in the Jackson case.
When Gary Dunlap was asked, in his interview, to comment on the
Jackson case, he said that he had no opinion one way or another on the
case.
However, he went on to say, ". . . the very fact that he's being
prosecuted by Sneddon's office does not cause me to have any reason to
believe that he's guilty in that, because of what I know about the
district attorney's office, I know that they do vindictive
prosecutions on a routine basis."
If Dunlap's allegations are true, then an investigation of the DA's office might shed new light on the Jackson case.
K. C. Arceneaux, Ph.D. karcx@yahoo.com
Resumen para todos aquellos que no saben inglés:
Thambiah Sundaram, dentista comunitario de Santa Barbara, fue acusado de alrededor de 20 cargos, todos ellos falsos. Él descubrió el modus operandi de Sneddon y su equipo:
*Ellos tienen como costumbre perseguir a la gente que se les antoja, generalmente con motivos raciales, y acusarlos por los cargos que se les antoja.
*Generalmente, la cantidad de cargos suele ser excesiva, porque así, si no se encuentra culpabilidad de una cosa se encuentra de otra.
*En el proceso de arresto y acusación, la policía suele ser brutalmente agresiva y los procesos suelen violar las garantías individuales y en todo el proceso el abuso de poder es muy claro.
*Sundaram fue a un evento de 'caridad' de Tom Sneddon y oyó a varios oficiales y Sneddon hablando de como 'sacar del condado a Michael Jackson'.En ésta ocasión, hubo varias expresiones racistas.
----------------
July 10,2004
By K.C. Arceneaux
RAW STORY COLUMNIST
On April 30, 2004, the indictment against pop-star Michael Jackson was
unsealed, allowing the press and the public to view the charges
against him. Jackson has been charged with four counts of committing a
lewd act upon a child, one count of attempting to commit a lewd act
upon a child, and four counts of administering an intoxicating agent.
The additional charge of conspiracy, not included in the first set of
charges against him, included twenty-eight separate criminal acts.
Those alleged acts include child abduction, child imprisonment, and
extortion. Jackson pleaded not guilty to all counts.
On the same day that the indictment was unsealed, there was another
and far less public event unfolding, one that may have a future impact
on the Jackson case. Serious allegations of a pattern of abuses among
Santa Barbara law enforcement and the DA's office, including District
Attorney Tom Sneddon, were made by Santa Barbara County dentist,
Thambiah Sundaram, in an interview on Online Legal Review Talk Radio.
Sneddon is the DA prosecuting the child-molestation case against
Michael Jackson. In the interview, conducted by Ron Sweet, Sundaram
stated that there was opposition to a non-profit medical clinic he
operated.
Sundaram said that when city officials were unable to shut down his
clinic, he was arrested on multiple counts, including impersonating a
doctor, grand theft, and malicious mischief. Sundaram's wife was
arrested, as well. An employee at the clinic was also charged, of
committing a drive-by shooting. Neither Sundaram, his wife nor the
employee were convicted. Sundaram said that he eventually won a
judgment against Sneddon and the DA's office for a substantial,
six-figure amount, for causes including conspiracy, false
imprisonment, and other violations of his civil rights.
Sundaram's allegations against Sneddon were serious, in that he also
claimed to have heard, first-hand, statements by Sneddon and others in
the DA's office that suggest that Santa Barbara police persecution of
innocent citizens is planned, common, and often racially motivated.
Sundaram said that in 1994, he attended a fund-raising event with Tom
Sneddon and other city officials, where ways to "get Michael Jackson
out of the county" were discussed. Racist remarks were allegedly made
on that occasion. According to Sundaram, other alleged vendettas were
discussed as well, to the extent where he said it resembled a Mafia
planning session.
Sundaram's allegations are not an isolated instance.
There have been many complaints and law-suits against the Santa Barbara DA's office.
The new counts against Jackson may be consistent with a pattern that
Santa Barbara defense attorney Gary Dunlap has called "stacking
charges."
In an interview on MJJF Talk Radio, on January 2, 2004,
Dunlap gave his opinion that "stacking charges" was a common practice
of the DA's office, and claimed that this was a tactic used against him.
Sneddon had charged and prosecuted Dunlap on twenty-two counts. After
being acquitted on all counts, Dunlap is currently suing Sneddon and
others in the DA's office for $10 million for malicious prosecution,
and multiple other alleged offenses, including civil rights
violations.
Dunlap said, ". . . I mean, it's one thing to be charged
with one crime and have a trial and be acquitted on it, but the
district attorney in Santa Barbara has a policy that if they throw
enough charges against you, the jury is bound to convict you on
something."
The above cases add to the pattern of what may be law enforcement
abuses of power in Santa Barbara. There are multiple civil cases
alleging false arrests, physical brutality by the police, tampering
with evidence and perjury, in cases settled out of court, at
tax-payer's expense.
There is the example of George Beeghly, whose
case against Santa Barbara law-enforcement was also settled out of
court. The defendants in the case were Santa Barbara Sheriff Jim
Thomas, and Santa Barbara police officers. Beeghly sued for illegal
search and seizure, false arrest and false imprisonment, the use of
excessive force, conspiracy to violate his civil rights, battery and
failure to investigate, among other charges.
This information reveals a new side to the Michael Jackson
child-molestation case.
The extent of the law suits for false arrests,
false imprisonments, condoning of excessive force by the police,
tampering with evidence, and multiple civil rights violations suggests
a culture of corruption among Santa Barbara law-enforcement.
The taxpayers of Santa Barbara have paid substantial settlements in these
cases.
DA Tom Sneddon's public relation's firm, Tellem Worldwide, was
contacted and, citing a protective order as prohibiting their ability
to respond, has declined to comment. It remains unclear how the
allegations made by Dr. Sundaram and the cases involving Beeghly and
Dunlap are affected by the protective order issued in the Jackson case.
When Gary Dunlap was asked, in his interview, to comment on the
Jackson case, he said that he had no opinion one way or another on the
case.
However, he went on to say, ". . . the very fact that he's being
prosecuted by Sneddon's office does not cause me to have any reason to
believe that he's guilty in that, because of what I know about the
district attorney's office, I know that they do vindictive
prosecutions on a routine basis."
If Dunlap's allegations are true, then an investigation of the DA's office might shed new light on the Jackson case.
K. C. Arceneaux, Ph.D. karcx@yahoo.com
gracias por avisar.
