November 4th Hearing Thread

whisperAdmin

Administrator
Staff member
capt.camm10111041742.jackson_hearing_camm101.jpg
 

whisperAdmin

Administrator
Staff member
There's been a lot. Fingst just doesn't know Sneddon's record. One of the big ones pending right now in federal court is the Gary Dunlap case. He's suing this DA's office for $10M for conspiracy, prosecutorial misconduct, violation of civil rights, etc.

You can hear Dunlaps extensive interview here:
http://forums.mjeol.com/showthread.php?t=518
 

dangerous

New member
Originally posted by whisper
There's been a lot. Fingst just doesn't know Sneddon's record. One of the big ones pending right now in federal court is the Gary Dunlap case. He's suing this DA's office for $10M for conspiracy, prosecutorial misconduct, violation of civil rights, etc.

You can hear Dunlaps extensive interview here:
http://forums.mjeol.com/showthread.php?t=518
well if the defense didnt bring it up how would he know? ITs not like these ppl actually research.
 

whisperAdmin

Administrator
Staff member
Originally posted by dangerous
well if the defense didnt bring it up how would he know? ITs not like these ppl actually research.
Well unless Fingst is actually inside the courtroom, he may not know what the defense brought up or didn't bring up. And again, this info is only as good as the people reporting it. So if their notes are lacking in info, we won't hear about it unless someone else reports it.
 

Tiger Lilly

New member
Originally posted by mjlovergurl
is this tape good or bad for micheal's sake? im confused! lol
I'm gonna sound completely dumb and ask the same thing cos I can't grasp it. By the sound of it it's not good, right?

And I can't say I'm at all surprised about Melville's ruling. In fact who is? :nonono:
 

dangerous

New member
The tape is good, thats why the defense handed it over so carelessly. Its like "Here, you want it, take it, but ur not gonna like it."

Well unless Fingst is actually inside the courtroom, he may not know what the defense brought up or didn't bring up. And again, this info is only as good as the people reporting it. So if their notes are lacking in info, we won't hear about it unless someone else reports it
true, i hope his notes are just crap. Which is more probably the case/
 

Tiger Lilly

New member
Originally posted by dangerous
The tape is good, thats why the defense handed it over so carelessly. Its like "Here, you want it, take it, but ur not gonna like it."
Okay I can understand that but you also typed this Ashley...

Originally posted by dangerous+-->QUOTE (dangerous)So the defense, for their own reasons, (they weren’t compelled to or anything) gave them a copy of the tape2 and now the prosecution wants to know where it came from, saying that it could possibly be the omission of one of the UNINDICTED coconspirators admitting to false imprison, extort, bla bla blah[/b]

How is that good?
Then whisper says this...

<!--QuoteBegin-whisper

I suspect this mother was secretly recorded making threats against Michael or talking about committing fraud, lying, threats and/or extortion. And prosecutors are just trying to turn the issue around. [/quote]

Sorry if I sound dumb, don't reply to me if you don't want. I'm confusing myself with my drivvel. :laugh
 

dangerous

New member
LOL!
The prosecution are using that reasoning (the second quote) to compel the defense to hand over the information regarding where that tape came from. They really really want to know, mainly because.... (insert whispers quote)
 

Tiger Lilly

New member
Originally posted by dangerous
LOL!
The prosecution are using that reasoning (the second quote) to compel the defense to hand over the information regarding where that tape came from. They really really want to know, mainly because.... (insert whispers quote)
Ahhh ok I get it! Thanks so much Ashley! :rose: Where would I be without you? :laugh

So not alot's happened that we didn't expect already eg Sneddon's a$s not being moved?
 

whisperAdmin

Administrator
Staff member
Originally posted by Tiger Lilly
Okay I can understand that but you also typed this Ashley...


How is that good?
Then whisper says this...



Sorry if I sound dumb, don't reply to me if you don't want. I'm confusing myself with my drivvel. :laugh
Prosecutors are trying to put their spin on it. That's all. Something tells me she may have been caught on tape saying some very incriminating things.

Prosecutors, as they have done before, are trying to put a negative spin on it and are trying to get around it. Any type of inciminating info against this accusing family automatically draws accusations from prosecutors against the person who got the incriminating info. That's their game plan: accusing everyone of breaking the law who has solid evidence against the accusing family.
 

Tiger Lilly

New member
Originally posted by whisper
Prosecutors are trying to put their spin on it. That's all. Something tells me she may have been caught on tape saying some very incriminating things.

Prosecutors, as they have done before, are trying to put a negative spin on it and are trying to get around it. Any type of inciminating info against this accusing family automatically draws accusations from prosecutors against the person who got the incriminating info. That's their game plan: accusing everyone of breaking the law who has solid evidence against the accusing family.
LOL nothing new there then. Thank you whisper! :rose:

I take it this is still going on as we speak, right?
 

SpecialJanet25

New member
I'm not surprised that dumb ass judge didn't kick Sneddon off the case. I knew that wasn't going to happen. But you know something, Sneddon is in enough trouble with a whole bunch lawsuits on his ass. I can't wait to the see the look on his face when (or if) Michael wins. LOL, Anyway, we gotten keep your heads up because this isn't over yet.
 

mixahl

New member
What about the rest of the issues Mel would decide on today (bail; prosecution's raid of the place of Michael's assistant)..? Any news on these?
 

whisperAdmin

Administrator
Staff member
Originally posted by mixahl
What about the rest of the issues Mel would decide on today (bail; prosecution's raid of the place of Michael's assistant)..? Any news on these?
I think that's to be discussed tomorrow. We really aren't getting much of any information reported.
 

whisperAdmin

Administrator
Staff member
November 4, 2004

Jackson Wants "Vindictive" Prosecutor Removed

New Media Producer: Kerry Corum

A California judge is expected to rule Thursday on a request by Michael Jackson to remove the prosecutor in his child molestation case and allow the state attorney general to intervene.

Jackson says his upcoming trial is nothing more than a grudge match by a vindictive prosecutor.

Court papers filed by Jackson's lawyer say District Attorney Tom Sneddon "is motivated by personal animosity" that prevents a fair trial for Jackson.

Sneddon has denied any such bias and Attorney General Bill Lockyer filed a motion supporting him.

Jackson's lawyers have claimed that Sneddon has had a vendetta against the singer since failing to get charges filed against him in a 1993 allegation of child molestation.

A Loyola University expert says it's unlikely that Jackson's side will prevail even if Sneddon's behavior is inappropriate.

Source: http://www.14wfie.com/Global/story.asp?S=2...34&nav=3w6oSkCq
 

Cristine87

New member
OMG, no matter what happens the judge will deny all the defense's motions & give the D.A. the benefit of the doubt! I want the freakin' trial to begin already so it can be over & done with. Michael was arrested in November of 2003, it's now a year later & we're still going through the same shit! I see like this, Michael's only hope is either an appeals court or at the worst his fate will end up in the hands of 12 individuals who I pray to God will see what the hell is going on instead of jumping on the he's-weird-so-he's-guilty bandwagon!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
F.UCKING DIEEEEEEEEE SNEDDON.

.... Ok, I have some major pent up anger right now...

This is suuuuuuuuuuch f.ucking shit.
 
Top