Re: Sneddon & Cia piden oficialmente incluir el caso del 93 a las acusaciones actuales...
(No tengo tiempo ni de haceros un resumen, que es el cumple de mi mami y no debería estar ni delante del computer..., perdonad, por no hacer ni intento de traducción):
DA: Jackson case in '93 relevant now
http://news.newspress.com/topsports/121504jackson.htm
In a move designed to bolster their child molestation case against Michael Jackson, prosecutors asked the judge to allow evidence from a prior investigation to show the entertainer allegedly has a "propensity" for committing such crimes, according to a court document released late Tuesday.
Prosecutors seek past accusations for current trial
By Quintin Cushner/Staff Writer
http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/20...ocal/news14.txt
Prosecutors in the Michael Jackson case want to introduce past accusations of sexual misconduct against the entertainer in his current case.
In a 65-page motion released Tuesday, Senior Deputy District Attorney Gerald Franklin argued that current law allows the introduction of previous "uncharged acts" if they might shed light on a suspect's predisposition to commit a crime.
The prosecution motion was heavily edited by Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville before it was released to the public. Among the few unedited passages was a statement about how the singer's home might have served as a lure for children.
"Jackson's home at Neverland Valley Ranch is a veritable paradise," Franklin wrote. "To children it was a limitless wonderland of fun and entertainment."
Since 1990, the entertainer has reportedly made financial settlements with the families of two children in exchange for their dropping accusations of child molestation.
The news program "Dateline NBC" reported Sept. 3 that the entertainer paid $2 million to the son of an employee at his Neverland Valley Ranch in 1990 to avoid a child molestation accusation.
In 1993, Jackson paid the family of another boy $15.3 million to settle a separate set of child molestation accusations. As part of that deal, Jackson admitted no wrongdoing. No criminal charges were filed in either of those cases.
The Santa Barbara County District Attorney's office filed charges this year against the singer for allegedly molesting a different boy at his ranch near Los Olivos.
Jackson, 46, has pleaded not guilty to engaging in lewd acts with the unnamed boy on four occasions in 2003 and four counts of "administering an intoxicating agent" to help him with the alleged molestations. He also has pleaded not guilty to a conspiracy charge involving child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion, and a count of attempted child molestation.
In a separate document released Tuesday, prosecutors also asked that a member of Jackson's defense team be held in contempt for violating a court "gag order" that bans commenting publicly on the case.
Senior Deputy District Attorney Gordon Auchincloss argued in the motion that the unnamed person made unauthorized comments about evidence in the case to the New York Post newspaper. The request apparently refers to comments made by Jackson defense attorney Brian Oxman.
In an interview conducted on Dec. 3, Oxman told the Post that investigators had never found DNA evidence of the boy accusing the entertainer of child molestation.
The judge may rule on both prosecution requests during a series of hearings beginning Monday. Also on the agenda are defense requests that charges against Jackson be dismissed because of vindictive prosecution, and that the trial date be delayed. Jackson's trial is scheduled to start Jan. 31.
* Staff writer Quintin Cushner can be reached at 739-2217
or by e-mail at
qcushner@pulitzer.net.
Dec. 15, 2004
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.latimes.com/news/loca...california
REGION & STATE
Jackson D.A. Seeks to Use Past Alleged Offenses
Prosecution files motion to introduce evidence from other molestation cases in the pop star's trial. Judge is to consider the request next week.
By Steve Chawkins
Times Staff Writer
December 15, 2004
Prosecutors in the Michael Jackson case signaled their intent Tuesday to introduce evidence from past, unproven child-molestation accusations lodged against the pop star.
In a 65-page motion, the prosecutors urged Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville to allow evidence of past alleged offenses to be heard by jurors in Jackson's upcoming trial.
The entertainer is charged with molesting a 12-year-old boy and masterminding a conspiracy to cover it up. In 1993, authorities in Santa Barbara and Los Angeles counties dropped a case against Jackson after the family of an alleged teenage victim accepted a multimillion-dollar settlement.
Dozens of pages in Tuesday's motion were blacked out, apparently to shield the identity of alleged victims and witnesses, both past and present. Prosecutors, however, did indicate they would introduce witnesses who would testify about past allegations when Melville considers their motion next week.
In most criminal trials, evidence of past offenses is inadmissible. But in 1995, the Legislature created Section 1108 of the state evidence code, which makes an exception in charges involving sexual abuse.
"It makes it much easier to get in evidence of prior sexual offenses," said Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School and a former federal prosecutor.
Judges must first, however, be convinced that the evidence is relevant in establishing a pattern of criminal sexual behavior by the defendant. Judges frequently accept this argument, Levenson said.
The prosecutors' motion indicates they may use Jackson's palatial Neverland ranch as a link between the 1993 case and the current case. Attorneys in the case are under a strict gag order.
In court, prosecutors have depicted Neverland as an elaborate backdrop for the seduction of children. Equipped with its own zoo, amusement park and video arcade, it is "a veritable paradise," according to the motion filed Tuesday. "To children it was a limitless wonderland of fun and entertainment."
Jackson's attorneys are expected to argue vigorously against the motion. "If it's granted, it would definitely be a blow — but not a knockout blow — to the defense," Levenson said.
Jackson's lawyers contend the current charges stem from a vendetta by Dist. Atty. Tom Sneddon and a shakedown attempt by the family of Jackson's alleged victim. They also have said the singer regrets his past payments to settle lawsuits based on false accusations.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Gracias a Marc Vivien del MJJForum:
http://www.mjjforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=42836
