I
INMATE W17S
Guest
Ojala que esto sea verdad, y es mas, que sea un BOOM mundial, y se metan bajo tierra estos dos malditos desgraciados :rabia: :tej: :dc: :bronca: :f5:
-
Cambios en el aspecto y funcionamiento del foro. Ver detalles
¿ Se reunio Sneddon a solas con Janet Arvizo ?
- Iniciador del tema Moonscape
- Fecha de inicio
Pues de que es cierto yo creo que si. se habla de documentos.y aho no se juega. ademas una televisora americana.
lo es ta dicendo. eso si es toda una hazaña por fin alguien va desemarañsando..-- solo le digo aun no olvido lo wur dijo snedom en la conferencia de prensa como se reia y burlaba ese hijo..... como lo odio solo puedo decir que espero que siga saliendo mas cosas como esas. YQ UE SNEDOM SE QUEDE ..EL QUE RIE ULTIMO RIE MEJOR...:sacabo: :feo: :dc: :dc: :dc:
lo es ta dicendo. eso si es toda una hazaña por fin alguien va desemarañsando..-- solo le digo aun no olvido lo wur dijo snedom en la conferencia de prensa como se reia y burlaba ese hijo..... como lo odio solo puedo decir que espero que siga saliendo mas cosas como esas. YQ UE SNEDOM SE QUEDE ..EL QUE RIE ULTIMO RIE MEJOR...:sacabo: :feo: :dc: :dc: :dc:
Aqui pongo mas articulos de la vendetta de Sneddon. Ahora no los puedo traducir, a ver si alguien puede traducir al menos lo mas importante... Pero vamos que hasta sin traducir esto huele a mierda por todos lados, ( lo de Sneddon, no los articulos ) Sneddon esta para que lo encierren, es peligroso y ya sabemos que no es la primera vez que mete a alguien inocente entre rejas.
[font=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Michael Jackson case: A DA's vendetta[/font]
[font=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]By K.C. Arceneaux
RAW STORY CONTRIBUTOR[/font]
The role of a District Attorney is to seek the truth, not to seek conviction at all costs. There are strong indications that Tom Sneddon, the District Attorney prosecuting Michael Jackson for alleged child molestation, is driven more by a vendetta than a search for the truth. ABC News reported on Thursday that they had seen a document signed by Sneddon indicating that he personally investigated aspects of the case that were "most often handled by the police." They added that Sneddon met alone with the alleged victim's mother in a parking lot, an action that might place him as a witness his own case.
Moreover, they claimed that Sneddon took photographs of the office of a private investigator employed by Jackson, and may have met with the accuser's mother on at least one other occasion. He may have also handled some of the stakeouts himself. It is highly irregular that these activities were undertaken without the presence of the police or investigators, and adds credence to the idea that Sneddon is not impartial enough to prosecute the Jackson case.
Tom Sneddon has consistently used the media to sway public opinion against Jackson. The televised scene of the raid on Nov. 18, 2003 on Jackson's Neverland ranch would have been more worthy of a raid on the home of a serial killer than on the home of an entertainer with no prior police record.
Sneddon tipped off Court TV reporter Diane Dimond about the raid and reported the event live from Neverland. The timing of the raid was on precisely the day Jackson released his new CD, "Number Ones." Indeed, the tone of the press conference following the raid was inappropriately gleeful, with Sneddon remarking, "Like I listen to that kind of music."
Sneddon later apologized for his levity. Subsequently, he referred to Jackson as "Jacko Wacko" in an interview with Dimond. He later apologized for these remarks, as well.
Following the filing of charges against Jackson on Dec. 18, 2003, Sneddon summarily dismissed the Los Angeles Police Department and the Department of Children and Family Services investigations of Jackson. The investigations concluded that complaints of molestation had been unfounded.
"They have a lot of problems down there [in LA] and that office has a lot of problems," he quipped.
What he failed to mention was that the Santa Barbara Children's Services and Santa Barbara law enforcement had conducted similar investigations and had come to similar conclusions.
Jackson's three million dollar bail was three times that of the average murderer and nearly fifty times that of the bail schedule for the alleged crimes. Sneddon has hired a public relations firm, and there is a web-site devoted to the case.
It is assumed that the wheels of justice are turning smoothly. The public remains largely unaware that currently, Tom Sneddon is being sued for $10 million for malicious prosecution by Santa Barbara defense attorney Gary Dunlap. Dunlap alleges that Sneddon violated his civil rights on twenty-two counts, including wire-tapping, illegal search and seizure, and the cover-up of misconduct by editing tapes. Dunlap was charged, tried and acquitted on all counts. Dunlap went on to state that vindictive prosecutions are done in Santa Barbara "on a routine basis."
There have been other civil cases against Sneddon of which the public is unaware because they settled out of court. Among them is the case of Efren Cruz. In December 2001, the LA Times ran a story titled, "Man Wrongly Convicted of Murder Sues Prosecutors." Cruz served four and a half years in Pelican Bay prison for a shooting he did not commit, and upon his release sued Sneddon and three senior prosecutors for $120 million, for malicious prosecution, negligence, conspiracy to keep him in prison and violating his civil rights. Allegedly, the prosecutors withheld evidence that would have exonerated Cruz.
The evidence was the real killer's secretly taped confession. The lawsuit was settled out of court at taxpayer's expense, for an undisclosed but certainly substantial amount.
Given the pattern of lawsuits for malicious prosecution against Sneddon, the irregularities in the investigation of the Jackson case and the use of the media as a tool of the prosecution, it would seem to best serve the interests of justice for Sneddon to step down and to be replaced by a less biased prosecutor. If Sneddon could knowingly keep an innocent man in prison and charge another with crimes he did not commit, one wonders what he is capable of doing in the Jackson case. Not only is there a man's life at stake, but our criminal justice system will suffer a blow to its integrity if this high-profile case is not conducted with consummate fairness and dignity.
Dr. K. C. Arceneaux is a Pushcart nominee and winner of a Tara Fellowship from the Heekin Group. First North American Serial Rights, Copyright April 29, 2004.
http://www.rawstory.com/exclusives/contributors/michael_jackson_case.htm
__________________________________________________________________
Commentary: All the little voices deserve equal attention
by Steve Corbett / Times Columnist
While the world watches Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon prepare to make his case against superstar Michael Jackson on charges of child molestation, the Santa Maria parents of another alleged molestation victim wonder why Sneddon abandoned them in their search for truth.
David Bruce Danielson retired last year from the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department, where he worked as a detective until his July 20, 2002, arrest on suspicion of child molestation.
In August 2002, Sneddon decided not to prosecute Danielson, of Orcutt, who was then 49, married and a veteran forensic investigator who had worked on some of the county's most serious criminal cases.
During a subsequent internal investigation into the molestation allegations, Danielson remained on paid administrative leave until he retired, according to sheriff's Lt. Julie McCammon.
Citing confidentiality, Sheriff's Department officials declined to release specifics about how long Danielson collected his paycheck while on administrative leave or how much money he received when he retired June 17, 2003.
Danielson received full pay during the time he did not work and applied that time to his pension, McCammon said. Danielson did not return to partial duty because of the seriousness of the child molestation allegations, she said.
The completed internal investigation did not exonerate Danielson, Sheriff Jim Anderson said Monday.
"He retired in lieu of termination," Anderson said.
Danielson could not be reached for comment.
Sneddon did not respond to a request to discuss the difference between freeing Danielson and prosecuting Jackson. But the district attorney has previously said that Danielson's lack of provable criminal intent figured prominently into the decision to release the detective.
Although Sneddon has offered few details about the charges against Jackson, the veteran prosecutor obviously believes Jackson acted willfully.
But Danielson admitted only to accidentally fondling the then 14-year-old child in a one-time occurrence, according to Sneddon, who said in an August 2002 interview that the deputy admitted touching the girl "in areas people would consider inappropriate."
Sneddon said Danielson came home after a night of drinking and crawled into his wife's bed where the child, who was a guest in the home, was sleeping.
"He touched (the child) a few places (and) by what he was touching realized it wasn't his wife," Sneddon said. "He said, 'Oh my gosh,' and jumped out of bed."
Sneddon said the subsequent investigation into the girl's claims did not provide the required evidence necessary to file a formal charge and prepare for court.
The child's parents, whose names are not being used to protect the identity of the alleged victim, believe that a provable case existed against Danielson.
The girl's mother and father also wonder why the Sheriff's Department - and not an outside police agency - conducted the investigation. One of the detectives even identified himself as a friend of Danielson, the child's mother said shortly after Sneddon declined to prosecute.
The child's father said last week that the Jackson case seems to depend on the word of a child who, like his daughter, cooperated with Santa Barbara County law enforcement officials.
But Sneddon didn't take his daughter's statements seriously enough to go to court.
Jackson's alleged victim, however, is expected to testify as Sneddon's star witness.
Shortly after Sneddon decided not to prosecute Danielson, the child wrote about her feelings, her father said.
"When I came clean I expected to be set free from the burden I had been carrying for so long, however, the only person set free was David Danielson," the child wrote.
"I am astounded at the stupidity the DA showed by allowing this man to be released of all charges. David Danielson may be free, but I am still emotionally trapped. There is not one day that I don't wish I wouldn't have come clean..."
"This happened to me when I was 14," she wrote. "I am now 16. I am a junior in high school, and I feel alone in this. I am asking the community to please help me to bring this man to justice. I don't want this to happen to other young girls. Santa Barbara County, please HELP..."
The child signed her letter "The "IGNORED' Teen.
The girl's father describes the now 17-year-old high school senior as bright, busy and sensitive. Yet, he worries that she will feel even more alone now that Sneddon has taken the word of another alleged child molestation victim more seriously than hers.
"Maybe it's because it is high profile, higher profile, but still, in her mind it's the same situation," he said. "She's still angry."
Although the child is "over what actually happened," the child's father said "her anger stems toward Sneddon." Although the girl's family dealt with an assistant district attorney in Santa Maria, "it all boils down to Sneddon's hands" in Santa Barbara, he said.
Despite Danielson's shocking admission to several people, Sneddon judged the evidence to be weak.
Maybe so.
But, in this uncelebrated case, even the best legal judgment does little to convince a still-vulnerable child that trust and truth matter.
Steve Corbett's column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. He can be reached at 739-2215 or e-mailed at scorbett@pulitzer.net. Read Corbett online at www.santamariatimes.com.
OLD LINK: http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/20...traffic/962.txt
http://www.mjjforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=27741
_________________________________________________________________
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/188839p-163393c.html
DA's moves vs. MJ may nix trial
By LEO STANDORA
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
The prosecutor in the Michael Jackson child-sex case went after the pop star with such unusual zeal that defense lawyers may have enough ammunition for a mistrial before the first witness is even sworn in, it was reported yesterday.
Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon secretly interviewed key witnesses, conducted his own stakeouts and took pictures of locations relating to the case, ABC News reported.
Experts called the behavior unusual.
The revelations, contained in a memo that ABC said appeared to be written by Sneddon himself, came on the eve of today's arraignment of Jackson in Santa Maria, Calif., on child-molestation charges.
Jackson has long argued that Sneddon has a vendetta against him, especially after another child-sex case against the singer fell apart a decade ago.
Jackson once even sang about how he felt victimized, penning the lyrics: "Tom Sneddon is a cold man."
Sneddon spokeswoman Susan Pellem said her boss couldn't comment because the case is under a gag order.
Jackson, 45, already has been charged with seven counts of lewd acts on a child under the age of 14 and two counts of plying the boy with alcohol. A sealed indictment set to be made public today is expected to back those counts.
Former New York sex-crimes prosecutor Linda Fairstein told "Good Morning America" that Sneddon's personal sleuthing could be grounds for a mistrial.
"It's way too personal. It's way out of line," she said.
Originally published on April 30, 2004
__________________________________________________________________
[font=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Michael Jackson case: A DA's vendetta[/font]
[font=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]By K.C. Arceneaux
RAW STORY CONTRIBUTOR[/font]
The role of a District Attorney is to seek the truth, not to seek conviction at all costs. There are strong indications that Tom Sneddon, the District Attorney prosecuting Michael Jackson for alleged child molestation, is driven more by a vendetta than a search for the truth. ABC News reported on Thursday that they had seen a document signed by Sneddon indicating that he personally investigated aspects of the case that were "most often handled by the police." They added that Sneddon met alone with the alleged victim's mother in a parking lot, an action that might place him as a witness his own case.
Moreover, they claimed that Sneddon took photographs of the office of a private investigator employed by Jackson, and may have met with the accuser's mother on at least one other occasion. He may have also handled some of the stakeouts himself. It is highly irregular that these activities were undertaken without the presence of the police or investigators, and adds credence to the idea that Sneddon is not impartial enough to prosecute the Jackson case.
Tom Sneddon has consistently used the media to sway public opinion against Jackson. The televised scene of the raid on Nov. 18, 2003 on Jackson's Neverland ranch would have been more worthy of a raid on the home of a serial killer than on the home of an entertainer with no prior police record.
Sneddon tipped off Court TV reporter Diane Dimond about the raid and reported the event live from Neverland. The timing of the raid was on precisely the day Jackson released his new CD, "Number Ones." Indeed, the tone of the press conference following the raid was inappropriately gleeful, with Sneddon remarking, "Like I listen to that kind of music."
Sneddon later apologized for his levity. Subsequently, he referred to Jackson as "Jacko Wacko" in an interview with Dimond. He later apologized for these remarks, as well.
Following the filing of charges against Jackson on Dec. 18, 2003, Sneddon summarily dismissed the Los Angeles Police Department and the Department of Children and Family Services investigations of Jackson. The investigations concluded that complaints of molestation had been unfounded.
"They have a lot of problems down there [in LA] and that office has a lot of problems," he quipped.
What he failed to mention was that the Santa Barbara Children's Services and Santa Barbara law enforcement had conducted similar investigations and had come to similar conclusions.
Jackson's three million dollar bail was three times that of the average murderer and nearly fifty times that of the bail schedule for the alleged crimes. Sneddon has hired a public relations firm, and there is a web-site devoted to the case.
It is assumed that the wheels of justice are turning smoothly. The public remains largely unaware that currently, Tom Sneddon is being sued for $10 million for malicious prosecution by Santa Barbara defense attorney Gary Dunlap. Dunlap alleges that Sneddon violated his civil rights on twenty-two counts, including wire-tapping, illegal search and seizure, and the cover-up of misconduct by editing tapes. Dunlap was charged, tried and acquitted on all counts. Dunlap went on to state that vindictive prosecutions are done in Santa Barbara "on a routine basis."
There have been other civil cases against Sneddon of which the public is unaware because they settled out of court. Among them is the case of Efren Cruz. In December 2001, the LA Times ran a story titled, "Man Wrongly Convicted of Murder Sues Prosecutors." Cruz served four and a half years in Pelican Bay prison for a shooting he did not commit, and upon his release sued Sneddon and three senior prosecutors for $120 million, for malicious prosecution, negligence, conspiracy to keep him in prison and violating his civil rights. Allegedly, the prosecutors withheld evidence that would have exonerated Cruz.
The evidence was the real killer's secretly taped confession. The lawsuit was settled out of court at taxpayer's expense, for an undisclosed but certainly substantial amount.
Given the pattern of lawsuits for malicious prosecution against Sneddon, the irregularities in the investigation of the Jackson case and the use of the media as a tool of the prosecution, it would seem to best serve the interests of justice for Sneddon to step down and to be replaced by a less biased prosecutor. If Sneddon could knowingly keep an innocent man in prison and charge another with crimes he did not commit, one wonders what he is capable of doing in the Jackson case. Not only is there a man's life at stake, but our criminal justice system will suffer a blow to its integrity if this high-profile case is not conducted with consummate fairness and dignity.
Dr. K. C. Arceneaux is a Pushcart nominee and winner of a Tara Fellowship from the Heekin Group. First North American Serial Rights, Copyright April 29, 2004.
http://www.rawstory.com/exclusives/contributors/michael_jackson_case.htm
__________________________________________________________________
Commentary: All the little voices deserve equal attention
by Steve Corbett / Times Columnist
While the world watches Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon prepare to make his case against superstar Michael Jackson on charges of child molestation, the Santa Maria parents of another alleged molestation victim wonder why Sneddon abandoned them in their search for truth.
David Bruce Danielson retired last year from the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department, where he worked as a detective until his July 20, 2002, arrest on suspicion of child molestation.
In August 2002, Sneddon decided not to prosecute Danielson, of Orcutt, who was then 49, married and a veteran forensic investigator who had worked on some of the county's most serious criminal cases.
During a subsequent internal investigation into the molestation allegations, Danielson remained on paid administrative leave until he retired, according to sheriff's Lt. Julie McCammon.
Citing confidentiality, Sheriff's Department officials declined to release specifics about how long Danielson collected his paycheck while on administrative leave or how much money he received when he retired June 17, 2003.
Danielson received full pay during the time he did not work and applied that time to his pension, McCammon said. Danielson did not return to partial duty because of the seriousness of the child molestation allegations, she said.
The completed internal investigation did not exonerate Danielson, Sheriff Jim Anderson said Monday.
"He retired in lieu of termination," Anderson said.
Danielson could not be reached for comment.
Sneddon did not respond to a request to discuss the difference between freeing Danielson and prosecuting Jackson. But the district attorney has previously said that Danielson's lack of provable criminal intent figured prominently into the decision to release the detective.
Although Sneddon has offered few details about the charges against Jackson, the veteran prosecutor obviously believes Jackson acted willfully.
But Danielson admitted only to accidentally fondling the then 14-year-old child in a one-time occurrence, according to Sneddon, who said in an August 2002 interview that the deputy admitted touching the girl "in areas people would consider inappropriate."
Sneddon said Danielson came home after a night of drinking and crawled into his wife's bed where the child, who was a guest in the home, was sleeping.
"He touched (the child) a few places (and) by what he was touching realized it wasn't his wife," Sneddon said. "He said, 'Oh my gosh,' and jumped out of bed."
Sneddon said the subsequent investigation into the girl's claims did not provide the required evidence necessary to file a formal charge and prepare for court.
The child's parents, whose names are not being used to protect the identity of the alleged victim, believe that a provable case existed against Danielson.
The girl's mother and father also wonder why the Sheriff's Department - and not an outside police agency - conducted the investigation. One of the detectives even identified himself as a friend of Danielson, the child's mother said shortly after Sneddon declined to prosecute.
The child's father said last week that the Jackson case seems to depend on the word of a child who, like his daughter, cooperated with Santa Barbara County law enforcement officials.
But Sneddon didn't take his daughter's statements seriously enough to go to court.
Jackson's alleged victim, however, is expected to testify as Sneddon's star witness.
Shortly after Sneddon decided not to prosecute Danielson, the child wrote about her feelings, her father said.
"When I came clean I expected to be set free from the burden I had been carrying for so long, however, the only person set free was David Danielson," the child wrote.
"I am astounded at the stupidity the DA showed by allowing this man to be released of all charges. David Danielson may be free, but I am still emotionally trapped. There is not one day that I don't wish I wouldn't have come clean..."
"This happened to me when I was 14," she wrote. "I am now 16. I am a junior in high school, and I feel alone in this. I am asking the community to please help me to bring this man to justice. I don't want this to happen to other young girls. Santa Barbara County, please HELP..."
The child signed her letter "The "IGNORED' Teen.
The girl's father describes the now 17-year-old high school senior as bright, busy and sensitive. Yet, he worries that she will feel even more alone now that Sneddon has taken the word of another alleged child molestation victim more seriously than hers.
"Maybe it's because it is high profile, higher profile, but still, in her mind it's the same situation," he said. "She's still angry."
Although the child is "over what actually happened," the child's father said "her anger stems toward Sneddon." Although the girl's family dealt with an assistant district attorney in Santa Maria, "it all boils down to Sneddon's hands" in Santa Barbara, he said.
Despite Danielson's shocking admission to several people, Sneddon judged the evidence to be weak.
Maybe so.
But, in this uncelebrated case, even the best legal judgment does little to convince a still-vulnerable child that trust and truth matter.
Steve Corbett's column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. He can be reached at 739-2215 or e-mailed at scorbett@pulitzer.net. Read Corbett online at www.santamariatimes.com.
OLD LINK: http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/20...traffic/962.txt
http://www.mjjforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=27741
_________________________________________________________________
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/188839p-163393c.html
DA's moves vs. MJ may nix trial
By LEO STANDORA
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
The prosecutor in the Michael Jackson child-sex case went after the pop star with such unusual zeal that defense lawyers may have enough ammunition for a mistrial before the first witness is even sworn in, it was reported yesterday.
Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon secretly interviewed key witnesses, conducted his own stakeouts and took pictures of locations relating to the case, ABC News reported.
Experts called the behavior unusual.
The revelations, contained in a memo that ABC said appeared to be written by Sneddon himself, came on the eve of today's arraignment of Jackson in Santa Maria, Calif., on child-molestation charges.
Jackson has long argued that Sneddon has a vendetta against him, especially after another child-sex case against the singer fell apart a decade ago.
Jackson once even sang about how he felt victimized, penning the lyrics: "Tom Sneddon is a cold man."
Sneddon spokeswoman Susan Pellem said her boss couldn't comment because the case is under a gag order.
Jackson, 45, already has been charged with seven counts of lewd acts on a child under the age of 14 and two counts of plying the boy with alcohol. A sealed indictment set to be made public today is expected to back those counts.
Former New York sex-crimes prosecutor Linda Fairstein told "Good Morning America" that Sneddon's personal sleuthing could be grounds for a mistrial.
"It's way too personal. It's way out of line," she said.
Originally published on April 30, 2004
__________________________________________________________________
:jajaja: :jajaja: :miedo: que será de seguro nada mas para aclarar las cosasRomi Jackson dijo:Ay Diosito... creo ke el Snedonn y esa "señora" se estan cabando sus propias tumbas!!