The Santa Barbara County district attorney, Thomas W. Sneddon
Jr., has twice delayed filing formal charges against Mr. Jackson,
who was showily arrested, booked and set free on $3 million bail on
Nov. 20. Mr. Sneddon now says the charges will be made public the
week of Dec. 15. Veteran prosecutors say that such a delay is
unusual, though not unprecedented, and does not necessarily indicate
problems with the case. But the tip line set up to field anonymous calls from anyone with
information about the current case or similar complaints of
misconduct by Mr. Jackson has yielded little, a spokesman for the
Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department said. Of 70 calls to the
line over the last two weeks, only a handful have produced
information relevant to the case against Mr. Jackson, said the
spokesman, Sgt. Chris Pappas. And no one has come forward to tell of
separate acts of molesting by Mr. Jackson, Sergeant Pappas said.
"At this point in time," he said, "none have clearly identified
new cases for independent investigation." The delay in releasing details of the charges against Mr. Jackson
and the lack of new complaints have prompted some in the Jackson
camp to say Mr. Sneddon is playing a weak hand based on a single
child's shaky testimony. One of Mr. Jackson's lawyers suggested this
week that Mr. Sneddon might be forced to drop the prosecution before
a trial. Mark Geragos, Mr. Jackson's lead lawyer, said he would not
comment on the case "unless and until there is a charging document."
Mr. Geragos said, based on his fragmentary knowledge of the identity
of Mr. Jackson's accuser and the accuser's account, "I'm not so sure
there's even going to be a charging document." Mr. Geragos has characterized the accusation against Mr. Jackson
as a "big lie." Mr. Sneddon's office said the prosecutor would not speak to the
news media until he made the charges against Mr. Jackson public. In
a brief interview with CNN last week, Mr. Sneddon acknowledged that
he had mishandled his announcement of the arrest warrant for Mr.
Jackson by appearing to make light of the charges. He denied that he
was pursuing a vendetta against Mr. Jackson. But he repeated his
contention that the case was strong. "It just doesn't make any sense that the sheriff and I would do
something that is doomed in the long run to fail," Mr. Sneddon said.
"We have a responsibility. We didn't go looking for this case. It
came to us." One California prosecutor with years of experience handling child
molesting cases said it was certain that months of investigation
went into the case. "I imagine they're being very conservative, in light of the high
profile of this case," said the prosecutor, Roseanne Froeberg, head
of the sex crimes unit of the Orange County district attorney's
office. "We have ethical obligations to meet a high threshold before
accusing someone of such a heinous charge." Ms. Froeberg added, however, that a case that turns on the
testimony of one child, particularly one with health problems and a
complicated relationship with the person accused, can be tough to
prove in court. "A lot can change between the filing of the charge and
presentation to a jury," she said. The accuser in the case is a 13-year-old former cancer patient
who was befriended by Mr. Jackson last year and who stayed overnight
at Mr. Jackson's ranch, Neverland, outside Santa Barbara, several
times last winter. According to those familiar with his account, the
boy has a troubled family history and has given several versions of
his relationship with Mr. Jackson. This year, the boy's family approached Lawrence Feldman, the
lawyer who handled the case a decade ago of a 13-year-old boy who
had said that Mr. Jackson molested him. Mr. Jackson reached a
multimillion-dollar settlement with the boy, and no charges were
brought. Mr. Feldman referred the boy in the current case to a
psychiatrist, who reported the account of abuse to Santa Barbara
County authorities this summer. Mr. Feldman said on Wednesday that he would not discuss the case
until the charges become public. John D. Barnett, a prominent defense lawyer in Southern
California, noted that Mr. Sneddon publicly appealed to other
potential victims of Mr. Jackson to come forward. He called it
"advertising for witnesses" and said it could be taken as a sign of
weakness in the prosecution's case. Mr. Jackson's defenders and relatives contend that the case is
groundless, the confluence of a frustrated prosecutor and a greedy
mother exploiting her son's onetime friendship with a rich
entertainer. Michael R. Oxman, a lawyer who has represented several members of
the Jackson family, said that Mr. Sneddon was "out to get Michael
Jackson." "At the press conference, the district attorney paraded before
the world a bunch of uncharged and unsubstantiated claims to poison
a jury," Mr. Oxman said. "He conducted a jocular press conference as
if it's a Broadway opening. That is just unprofessional
conduct." He also said that he suspected that the victim's family was
seeking money, not the conviction and imprisonment of Mr.
Jackson. "The D.A. says this isn't about money and there's no civil suit,
like the last time," Mr. Oxman said. "Whenever anyone says it's not
about money, it's about money."
Absence of Formal Charges Against Michael Jackson May Point to a
Weakening of the Case
New York
Times
OS ANGELES, Dec. 3 — Two weeks after the arrest
of Michael Jackson on felony child molesting charges, the case
against him may have hit some snags.
Back to DA*DI's Home
Dads Against the Divorce Industry