ItsBlackItsWhite · @ItsBlackItsWite
30th Mar 2013 from TwitLonger
There's hard info here that totally discredits Diane Dimond - transcripts and news articles as well as well researched blog posts. (and an article from DDs home town paper. Seems she's a self taught "journalist".) For instance, transcripts of DD running her mouth off abt non-existant love letters and a security tape allegedly showing MJ molesting his nephew. The DAs office proved the non-existance when they couldn't find either the letters or tape. This goes back to the 1990s when Sneddon got DD excused from MJs slander suit.
If anyone can use any of this info, feel free. Diane Dimond should never be on TV again, ever, about anything.
MJEOL 1-2-2004 http://site2.mjeol.com/mjeol-bullet/diane-dimond-s-suspicious-involvement-bullet-54.html
In a new article from David Bauder of the Associated Press, it is revealed that Jackson "news" reporter and tabloid writer Diane Dimond went to Court TV chairman Henry Schleiff months before the police raided Michael Jackson's Neverland Ranch.
According to the report, she told Schleiff she was "working on a great story," and asked him to foot the bill by committing "money and manpower to help dig it out."
Some have already found it incredibly strange that she was the sole reporter to break this current story, as well as being the first source for information about an arrest warrant, which no other reporter or news agency could independently verify before District Attorney Tom Sneddon's first press conference confirming it.
It appears rather odd in retrospect that Dimond would be the only one privy to such information. Dimond has long been rumored to be a mouthpiece for the prosecution. In fact, it was reported here earlier that many observers have noticed a very close "relationship" between the media - in particular, Dimond - and the District Attorney.
During that now infamous press conference by Sneddon and Sheriff Anderson (see transcript outdated link), the following exchange occurred:
SNEDDON: Are you aware of other civil cases that have been handled outside of the media since 1993 that were kept quiet?
ANDERSON: Not to my knowledge.
QUESTION: Really?
ANDERSON: Yes.
SNEDDON: Well, I am.
QUESTION: How many?
SNEDDON: Ask Diane, she knows everything about Michael Jackson. [LAUGHTER]
If it seems ridiculously odd that Sneddon would refer a question of that magnitude to a tabloid reporter, the same reporter once sued by Jackson, the same reporter breaking' stories, and the same reporter scorned from 1993 then you are not alone.
Sneddon also claimed he wouldn't do any interviews about this case. Yet soon after the press conference, Court TV broadcasted a sit-down interview with, you guessed it, tabloid reporter Diane Dimond, herself.
Now with this new AP report, the questions and speculations are continuing to roll in. Some observers have questioned whether or not Dimond, and others, approached this family after the Bashir documentary in hopes they would levy allegations against Jackson.
If Dimond was working on this story, and needed money and resources to help her "dig it out," one has to wonder what her role is in making it come to fruition. Dimond does have a well-documented history for seeking out alleged "victims" of Michael Jackson. When she was still working with the now defunct tabloid TV show Hard Copy, Dimond was chasing a story that completely blew up in her face. Some time after the 1993 allegations, there was a "street kid" in Canada claiming to have been "molested" by Michael Jackson.
Instead of going to the police, his alleged guardian wrote a letter to Diane Dimond. Dimond flew all the way to Toronto to get this kid's very elaborate and highly researched story. Like the family now, he too claimed he only wanted "justice." Dimond, of course, took the bait, got his "confessions" on camera, and took him to the authorities so he could "tell his story."
As it turned out, the kid was being fed very detailed lies from a Jackson-obsessed nut named Rodney Allen, who felt it was his mission to make Michael Jackson "pay" for some imagined wrong done to him. Rodney Allen, the "guardian" writing the letters to Hard Copy, admitted on camera he fed the information to the child and made the kid lie over and over again to both Dimond and the authorities at first. After the kid was questioned for hours by the police, he finally admitted he lied about the entire situation from beginning to end. It could have turned into another international scandal akin to this current one:
Quote (begin videotape)
Diane Dimond, Hard Copy: I care about this one kid who gave me all sorts of information about Neverland, about Havenhurst, about Disneyland, about Michael Jackson's body. Where did he get all that information?
Allen: He got it from me.
Dimond: You planted all this stuff in this kid's head?
Allen: I didn't plant it in his head. He was asking questions. I answered them the best I can. I told him what I could tell him about the place because I want Michael to face it.
Dimond: So this kid is an A-1, number one liar?
Allen: Professional. (end videotape)
Dimond voiceover: The whole story was a scam. A Toronto street kid meets a man obsessed with the Michael Jackson case, and the results could have been an international scandal. Meanwhile, back at the police station the boy finally broke down. He admitted that he and Rodney Allen had made up the whole story. (begin videotape)
Dimond: The young boy was lying?
Det. Darryl Campbell: That's my belief. And as a result of that, he was charged, yes.
Dimond: Can you tell us what he was charged with?
Campbell: Public mischief. (end videotape)
Dimond: Well the boy is still in custody tonight. And police continue their investigation of Mr. Rodney Allen.
In an effort to save face, Dimond pretended to be a victim in the entire scam when she turned in her report to Hard Copy. You can view the video of the entire Hard Copy story for yourself here: http://www.cmjfc.ca/scam.rm or here at MJEOL: http://site.mjeol.com/dimondscam.rm
Dimond herself has already begun to see the "rewards" of her Jackson scoops, whether they turn out to be true or false.
Despite heavily pushing a false story about "love letters", which turned out to be from a London tabloid, she's been given a promotion: hosting her own show on Court TV called Hollywood At Large.
Many people thought she dropped off the face of the earth after the first Jackson scandal in 1993. This resurrection has been rather surprising.
She has also admitted to knowing the accuser from 1993 as well. Thus, she does have a history of seeking out scam artists who have leveled abuse allegations against Jackson. So what does all of this mean? It may mean that both the public and Jackson's defense team should look at the peculiar coincidences surrounding Dimond's involvement with these allegations of abuse, if they haven't already done so.
The close "relationship", whatever its nature, between she, the district attorney, and the sheriff's department, is highly problematic because it calls into question the motives of the prosecution. Given her history of being scammed concerning molestation allegations against Jackson, one would hope she learned her lesson. I guess not.
DA Helped Dimond Out Of A 'Hard' Spot
LOWDOWN
BY LLOYD GROVE WITH HUDSON MORGAN
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
Does Court TV reporter Diane Dimond owe Tom Sneddon big time?
Yesterday, I learned that the Santa Barbara district attorney - whose prosecution of Michael Jackson is Dimond's beat - played a key role in killing a slander suit that Jackson filed against her a decade ago.
In 1995, when Dimond was working for "Hard Copy," she reported that Sneddon was searching for an explicit 27-minute videotape showing Jackson molesting a boy
Sneddon soon concluded that no such video existed, but not before Dimond appeared on L.A.'s KABC radio and her Paramount-produced tabloid show to trumpet the imagined X-rated details.
"It was taken right before Christmas, as the story goes, and it was recorded by one of Michael Jackson's own security cameras," Dimond said on the radio, touting her "Hard Copy" scoop. "Truly explicit," she added, noting that she had not seen the alleged tape.
Sneddon, in an unusual instance of a prosecutor involving himself in a civil suit, signed a declaration supporting Dimond's version of events. The trial judge dismissed the suit, saying Jackson couldn't prove malice or false reporting.
Jackson appealed the judge's ruling, and Sneddon's declaration was cited extensively in the November 1998 California Court of Appeal's decision affirming the summary judgment.
Neither Jackson's lawsuit nor Sneddon's role in snuffing it is disclosed in Dimond's official bio on the CourtTV.com Web site or in the detailed history of her Jackson coverage, which includes her exclusive November 2003 interview with Sneddon.
"The lawsuit was a public event, and it need not be disclosed every time Diane reports on Jackson, nor will it be," Court TV officials said in a statement yesterday.
Doesn't Dimond have a conflict of interest?
"Court TV does have a conflict-of-interest policy, and neither Diane's reports on Jackson nor the fact that Mr. Sneddon submitted an affidavit supporting the defense of a lawsuit 10 years ago is even close to any kind of conflict of interest - at Court TV or any other news organization," the statement insisted.
"For Diane Dimond to cease reporting on Jackson because he sued her would mean that he had intimidated her from reporting on his activities."
I guess I'll leave it to the court of public opinion.
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2005-03-16/gossip/18287023_1_diane-dimond-tom-sneddon-court-tv
Per Jet magazine, Jan 30, 1995 the slander suit was for $100M and named TV show Hard Copy and it's producer Stephen Doran, radio station KABC – AM and talk show hosts Roger Barkley and Ken Minyard , Hard Copy's production co Paramount Pictures Corp.and freelance writer Victor Gutierrez, who says he saw the tape.
http://books.google.com/books?id=Oj0DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA54&lpg=PA54&dq=Michael+jackson+slander+suit+diane+dimond&source=bl&ots=luE1m4Ha9D&sig=NcPJTH1_bra7MaevsObH7uzgyi4&hl=en&ei=GcDGTZPxLpO-sQOw9_DrAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFAQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=Michael%20jackson%20slander%20suit%20diane%20dimond&f=false
http://articles.latimes.com/1995-01-13/local/me-19724_1_michael-jackson
Michael Jackson Sues 'Hard Copy' Reporter and Radio Talk Show
Metropolitan Digest / LOS ANGELES COUNTY NEWS IN BRIEF
January 13, 1995|SHAWN HUBLER | TIMES STAFF WRITER
Three days after a "Hard Copy" report alleged that Michael Jackson was videotaped in an illicit sexual encounter, the pop star filed a $50-million lawsuit against the tabloid television show's reporter and a radio talk show that aired her assertions.
The lawsuit, filed Thursday in Los Angeles County Superior Court, alleges that "Hard Copy" correspondent Diane Dimond slandered Jackson with a false and unsubstantiated report, and compounded the injury by repeating the allegations on KABC-AM radio
The suit also alleges that Dimond falsely reported that authorities had renewed their investigation of child molestation against Jackson.
The suit--which also names "Hard Copy" producer Stephen Doran, Paramount Pictures Corp. and KABC talk show hosts Roger Barkley and Ken Minyard--stems from a Jan. 9 episode of "Hard Copy" and an appearance on Barkley and Minyard's show that morning.
Jackson's lawyer, Howard Weitzman, said the show was based on British tabloid reports published last weekend and on a claim made by Victor Gutierrez, a self-proclaimed biographer of Jackson who is also named in the suit.
But a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County district attorney's office said an investigation into Jackson has not been reopened, and Weitzman said "The tape doesn't exist. The conduct never took place."
Moreover, he said, he warned the producers of the TV show that if they aired the story, they would be making a false report.
"I called and said, look . . . no tape exists. This is a vicious lie and a rumor," Weitzman said. "They said they were going to air it anyway."
After the report was broadcast, Jackson announced he would sue members of the media who "spread vicious lies and rumors about me in their attempts to make money, benefit their careers, sell papers or get viewers to watch their programs."
Lawyers for "Hard Copy" and the other defendants could not be reached for comment. But a spokesman for the TV show told the Associated Press that the show's producers stand by the report, and view the suit as an attempt by Jackson's lawyer to discourage "independent ongoing investigations."
http://www.mjcafe.net/the%20legend%20speeches%20&%20faq/c13.htm
Victor Gutierrez is a freelance writer who appeared on the U.S. tabloid television show "Hard Copy" to claim that there was a videotape of Michael Jackson molesting a boy. Some background on his story can be found in the book Jackson Family Values, by Jermaine Jackson's ex-common-law wife, Margaret Maldonado. She writes that in early 1995,
" I received a telephone call from a writer named Ruth Robinson. I had known Ruth for quite a while and respected her integrity. It made what she had to tell me all the more difficult to hear. "I wanted to warn you, Margaret," she said. "There's a story going around that there is a videotape of Michael molesting one of your sons, and that you have the tape."If anyone else had said those words, I would have hung up the phone. Given the long relationship I had with Ruth, however, I gave her the courtesy of a response. I told her that it wasn't true, of course, and that I wanted the story stopped in its tracks.She had been in contact with someone who worked at the National Enquirer who had alerted her that a story was being written for that paper. Ruth cross-connected me with the woman, and I vehemently denied the story. Moreover, I told her that if the story ran, I would own the National Enquirer before the lawsuits I brought were finished. To its credit, the National Enquirer never ran the piece."Hard Copy," however, decided it would. "Hard Copy" correspondent Diane Dimond had reported that authorities were reopening the child molestation case against Michael. She had also made the allegations on L.A. radio station KABC-AM on a morning talk show hosted by Roger Barkley and Ken Minyard.Dimond's claims were based on the word of a freelance writer named Victor Gutierrez. The story was an outrageous lie. Not one part of it was true. I'd never met the man. There was no tape. Michael never paid me for my silence. He had never molested Jeremy. Period."
After the "Hard Copy" story aired, the LAPD told the Los Angeles Times that they had seen no such videotape, they were not looking for it, and there was no renewed investigation into molestation allegations. Michael Jackson subsequently filed a $100 million slander lawsuit against Gutierrez, "Hard Copy", and KABC-AM for perpetuating the story. None of these parties ever produced the videotape or any evidence it existed. Because Jackson's lawyers could find no sign of the videotape or the origin of the tale, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Reginald Dunn ruled that Gutierrez was no longer protected by the California Shield Law, and ordered him to name his source. Gutierrez did not, instead claiming that a host of people, including Elizabeth Taylor and Los Angeles County District Attorney Gil Garcetti, could verify the existence of the videotape (none of these people in fact supported him). Consequently, on October 15, 1996, Judge Dunn ruled that Gutierrez's story was false and that he had acted with malice and was therefore liable for presumed and punitive damages (the amount of which would be determined at a later date.) The writer then fled to Mexico.
In October 1997, a legal action to assess the amount of "presumed and punitive damages" to be paid to Michael Jackson by Victor Gutierrez was delayed due to Gutierrez filing for bankruptcy. Mr. Jackson's lawyers stated that the assessment of such damages would be determined and that Gutierrez would not be protected indefinitely by his action.
On April 9, 1998 Michael Jackson won the slander suit against free-lance writer Victor Gutierrez. A Los Angeles jury ordered Victor Gutierrez to pay Michael Jackson $2.7 million for failing to prove the existence of a videotape that allegedly showed Michael in an inappropriate conduct with a young boy.
"We talked to the jurors afterwards," Michael's lawyer Mr. Modabber said. "They said they wanted to send a message that they were tired of the tabloids telling malicious stories about celebrities for money. They said they hope this will send a message not to do this."
(Sources: Jackson Family Values, LA Times, Reuters, AP, Hollywood Reporter)
© © Copyright 2011 MJCafe.net Inc. All rights reserved.
http://www.allbusiness.com/services/motion-pictures/4926892-1.html
Paramount, which produces "Hard Copy," was dismissed from the suit last year. So too were former "Hard Copy" correspondent Diane Dimond and producer Stephen Doran. Jackson is appealing their dismissal from the case
.
"Gutierrez told a D.A. investigator and two witnesses who testified at the trial that the boy's mother was his source," Modabber said. "He told anyone who would listen. The only people he would not tell were the ladies and gentlemen of his jury -- that's when he became ethical. Now he's getting on his high horse saying he's protecting his sources."
This is the sixth lawsuit Jackson has won since 1995 but the first in which he was the plaintiff.
The five previous suits against Jackson, Modabber said, "were all frivolous," filed by "people who were trying to shake him down for money. People think that if you file a lawsuit against Michael, he will be an easy target. But they are wrong. We're tired of him getting dogged. We're not settling. We're going to trial and winning."
The following are taken from this court document, which includes a transcript of DDs radio interview--
http://law.justia.com/cases/california/caapp4th/68/10.html
Q: "You are going to give us the first scoop on Michael Jackson of 1995."
Dimond: "You know, ... just when you think the story is going away, it's not. It ... the investigation is red hot again and here is the deal. The District Attorneys' Office, the top investigators within the District Attorneys' Office are looking for a 27 minute video tape that they believe shows Michael Jackson and a young boy."
Q: "This is a recent video, or something[.]"
Dimond: "Yes.... It was taken right before Christmas as the story goes and it was recorded by one of Michael Jackson's own security cameras. He likes, everybody knows that he likes to bug rooms and put cameras up and the whole 9 yards[.]"
Q: "How do they know about this?"
Dimond: "Well, it's kind of a convoluted story but the bottom line as I understand it is: someone close to ... Michael Jackson knew of the existence of this tape. It is an x-rated tape, I must tell you and [-]"
Q: "It is an x-rated tape?"
Dimond: "It is ... yes."
Q: "Of Michael Jackson[?]"
Dimond: "Truly explicit."
Q: "It's what? Michael Jackson and little boy. Are you 100% sure that this tape exists?"
Dimond: "I am as sure as I can possibly be." [68 Cal. App. 4th 16]
Q: "You have not seen it?"
Dimond: "I have not seen it but one of my best sources on the Michael Jackson story has seen it."
Q: "Who ... you have no doubts about."
Dimond: "I have never had a doubt about this person, ever. I know the District Attorneys' Office is looking for it because they are calling up reporters saying 'Have you seen it.' ... Do you know where we can get it?"
Q: "Who had it and was showing it? His security people?"
Dimond: "Well, someone close to Michael Jackson found this tape and, in deep concern for the boy involved, gave it to the boy's mother."
Q: "Uh oh. Should Michael not know that one of his own security cameras was recording what he was doing?"
Dimond: "Oh no, he knew. He absolutely knew."
Q: "He is asking for trouble. [Inaudible.]"
Dimond: "You know, I remember way back when, more than a year ago, we interviewed the head of the pedo[ph]ile unit at the FBI in Quantico, Virginia and he said you know the down fall of pedo[ph]iles is that they love to keep a momento of their victims. Or, they love to take pictures or take videos. We don't know why, but they do this. It is for their own self gratification later but it always comes back to bite them."
Q: "... It looks to me. I think old Mike had better get his checkbook out again.... That's the way this is going to end up."
Dimond: "I got to tell you, Ken, is what the DA's office is worried about. There is like a mad scramble to get to this tape before the Jackson camp gets to this tape."
Q: "Here is what happened.... If that tape ... does exist as you say."
Dimond: "Right."
Q: "Somebody close to Michael Jackson got a hold of it and thought holy, baloney this is worth a lot of money. Look, I'll split it 50/50 with you and we can get maybe $50 million." [68 Cal. App. 4th 17]
Dimond: "That could very well be."
Q: "And he gave it to the mother of the boy?"
Dimond: "Correct."
Q: "So she has it."
Dimond: "And, I have to tell you, if my source is correct, who has seen this tape, and again, he always has been. The acts that are being performed on that tape are exactly what the accuser a year ago said Michael Jackson did to him."
Q: "Well, I mean you don't need to beat around the bush. What are those acts?"
Dimond: "We are talking about oral sex."
Q: "Um, hmm. Performed on Michael Jackson or by Michael Jackson?"
Dimond: "By Michael Jackson.... So, ... You know, it is going to unfold this week. I am trying to confirm right now, we understand that there might ... have been copies made of this tape."
Q: "I bet there was."
Dimond: "And you know, if ... the Jackson camp gets it, or if it is somehow hushed up or bought off or whatever. I understand there might be a copy of it."
Q: "Now, wait a minute. After all that happened during 1994 with Michael Jackson. What was a parent letting their kid do with Michael Jackson in his house."
Dimond: "Bingo."
Q: "Is this up in Santa Barbara?"
Dimond: "No, it was here in Los Angeles."
Q: "In LA, so it's our own District Attorney."
Dimond: "And, I got to tell you, I know, I know many of the investigators within the District Attorneys' Office. They got the top guys on this. They are [68 Cal. App. 4th 18] not beating around the bush. I got to tell you too, this mother, when she got this tape, made an initial contact to the LAPD Sexual Exploitation Unit and they told her unbelievably. Well, okay, you say you have the tape, just take it to any local precinct and turn it in. And she said to herself. This is not the kind of protection I need, thank you very much, forget it."
Q: "Well, ... so why didn't she?"
Dimond: "Because she is afraid. This is a very powerful man you are talking about. This is a man who has a lot of money to spread around, who can make your life very miserable. He can make [-]"
Q: "Well, but if you got [-]"
Dimond: "He can make it wonderful and very miserable."
Q: "It looks to me that if you got him on tape doing it, he is going to have a pretty hard time."
Dimond: "One of the DA's investigators was quoted as saying, 'if we get this tape and ... if it shows what we think it shows, we put the handcuffs on Michael Jackson.' "
Q: "Well, Diane. You have to keep us informed on this. I know that Hard Copy will have it on tonight."
Dimond: "And, listen, if anybody calls you with this tape, let me know."
Q: "I will let you know."
Dimond: "I will let you know."
Later on in the broadcast, they briefly returned to the story:
Q: "Going back to the Michael Jackson video."
Dimond: "Yeah."
Q: "How did you[r] friend see it? Who showed it to your friend[?]"
Dimond: "Oh, I just can't tell you that. That would go [-]"
Q: "The mother?"
Dimond: [inaudible] [68 Cal. App. 4th 19]
Q: "Well, it had to be either the mother of the boy or [inaudible]."
Q: "Or the security person who gave the tape."
Dimond: "You guys always have the most insightful questions. I think I better hang up right now."
That concluded The Ken and Barkley Show interview.
From a transcript of Hard Copy included in this document:
Dimond: "It is impossible to independently confirm the existence of the video but several sources including some as far away as London say that this tape is black and white, 27 minutes long, and reportedly recorded by one of Jackson's own security cameras. Sources also tell Hard Copy the tape was somehow turned over to the Mother of the young boy seen on the video."
Sneddon handled the investigation of allegations against appellant on behalf of the Santa Barbara District Attorney's Office. In December of 1994, he "received information that a video tape existed depicting [appellant] engaged in sexual contact with a minor child." According to the reports received by Sneddon, Gutierrez had seen the videotape. At around the same time, Dimond contacted Sneddon to inquire about reports that his office was looking for such videotape or investigating new allegations of molestation against appellant. Sneddon informed her that he "was not at liberty to comment upon such reports" but stated that the investigation was "still open ...." Although Sneddon did not discuss this with Dimond, at the time of their conversation, a decision had already been made to send Gonterman to look into the existence of the tape and procure it if possible. Gonterman's investigation led to the conclusion that no such videotape could be located or proven to exist. According to Sneddon's "recollection and belief" this conclusion was reached sometime after the Hard Copy broadcast on January 9.
On January 7, 1995, the London Sun, a British newspaper, which reported that " 'Los Angeles police and legal officials were in a frantic race' " to obtain the alleged videotape, was brought to Dimond's attention. fn. 6 After being informed of that article, Dimond again spoke to Gutierrez, who claimed to have seen the videotape and agreed to do an on-camera interview.
The one significant area of dispute between the parties centered on fact No. 38 concerning Dimond's belief in Gutierrez's accuracy. In this regard, appellant's position was supported by the testimony of Brian Anderson's wife, Lisa Marlowe. According to her testimony, sometime during the weekend of January 7 and 8, 1995, Dimond called Anderson from whom she had first heard rumors about a new development concerning appellant. Anderson was not home, so Dimond spoke with Marlowe. Dimond asked Marlowe whether she or her husband had heard the story about a video depicting appellant with a young boy. Marlowe replied she had not and stated, " 'That sounds like B.S.,' " to which Dimond responded, " 'That's what I thought.' " Marlowe also said, " 'Don't tell me this came from Victor [Gutierrez], because he never mentioned it to us' " and " 'This sounds like a setup,' because why would this surface all of a sudden" to which Dimond's reply was " 'Yeah, that's what I thought.' "
In addition, according to the testimony of the woman Gutierrez allegedly identified as the victim's mother, fn. 8 her sons were not molested by appellant, she has never received any payment from appellant, and she has never met Gutierrez. Appellant also established the lack of any record of Gutierrez at the hotel where he claims to have met the mother and viewed the tape.
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2005-08-30/gossip/18304913_1_diane-dimond-court-tv-wyclef-jean
Dimond's Not Forever At Court Tv
LOWDOWN
BY LLOYD GROVE WITH HUDSON MORGAN
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
For die-hard fans of Michael Jackson, it's ding dong, Diane Dimond's gone.
But for Dimond - the acquitted pop star's lightning-rod nemesis, who just got the bad news that Court TV won't be renewing her contract - it's a chance for "a little paid vacation," she told me yesterday.
Dimond added that her book about the singer's saga, "Be Careful Who You Love," is coming out in November.
"They can do whatever they want, those who have drunk the Kool-Aid on Diane Dimond," the controversial television personality said.
She was referring to the folks - notably Jackson defense attorney Thomas Mesereau - who complained that her reporting on Jackson's child-molestation trial was biased in favor of the prosecution.
"Two weeks ago, I was in Birmingham, Ala., to cover the Natalee Holloway case, and Mr. Mesereau was staying in the next-door hotel doing a death-penalty case," she said. "And he stopped by my hotel and he railed about me to the bartender for 15 minutes, about what an evil person and terrible reporter I am."
Mesereau didn't return my phone call, but I asked Dimond why she rouses such anger.
"It just that I have a really high BS meter, so when they want to spin me - and I say this modestly - I just know too much about it for the spin to work," she answered. "I can smell spin from the prosecution side, too. I'm actually not biased at all. People on both sides were mad at me, so I must have been doing it exactly right."
The hard-charging Dimond - who's been at the network since 2001 and admitted that she might have liked to re-up - preempted Court TV's official spin by confiding on Sunday to her Yahoo.com fan club that "my contract with Court TV is/was coming to an end in December and they decided to end it early. Court TV told me on Wednesday that they planned to dismantle my Investigative Unit and Friday was my last day there."
Court TV, meanwhile, called her "a respected journalist" who was "key to the network's successful coverage" of Jackson.
Really? My BS meter is buzzing: So why didn't they keep her?
http://aboutmichaeljackson.com/m-news+article+storyid-269.html
Michael Jackson Statement on Drug Overdose Rumors
10 December 2005
Earlier this week the National Enquirer reported that Michael Jackson had suffered several drug overdoses and that his condition was now 'critical'. That story is entirely false.
It is not unusual for tabloid papers like the National Enquirer to publish such fiction - but in recent weeks many stories have come out of Santa Barbara, seemingly linked to the DA's office there, alleging one thing or another about the King of Pop.
Today, Michael's publicist, Raymone Bain, has issued a statement on his behalf.
It reads; Michael Jackson has been working with several artists recording his Katrina Relief song, and with me all week, including today. He is doing fine. I have never seen him happier or healthier. Whomever these individuals are who are intent on disseminating false information throughout the media regarding Mr. Jackson, should begin hiring good attorneys. Likewise, the few irresponsible journalists who continuously rely on these ‘sources,’ and report this false information. Mr. Jackson’s tolerance level has come to an end. The Green light that people have thought they have had to willfully impugn Michael Jackson’s character and integrity has now become Red.
It is interesting to note that these odd rumours and stories - apparently connected to the same office which tried unsuccessfully to prosecute Michael earlier this year - have coincided with news of a major new Michael Jackson release.
It began suspiciously with Dimond being leaked information ahead of time that Jacksons Neverland Ranch was going to be raided by the Santa Barbara Sheriffs Department (SBSD). According to an eyebrow-raising report from The Hollywood Reporter dated Nov. 20 2003 titled Court TV coup: Dimond lands another scoop, Dimonds highly placed sources tipped her off about the search weeks beforehand (Court TV coup: Dimond lands another scoop ). The practice of leaking such info to the media is clearly unethical. But since when have ethics mattered to vindictive law enforcement and tabloid reporters? She apparently had knowledge of something as she negotiated with the current Chairman of Court TV, Henry Schleiff.
She said: "I told them, 'I want to go get you a big, juicy story, but I can't tell you what it is; you just have to trust me. And you have to let me hire the camera crews because I don't want anyone to know where I'm going."
Clearly long before the news of the raid broke, she was already using her confidential information for career advancement. The report goes on to detail how Dimond flew from New York to Santa Barbara, arriving in enough time to take a nap, station one of her two camera crews outside of Neverland, and get shots as the police were coming in to raid Jacksons ranch looking for evidenceevidence which turned out to be non-existent. The other camera crew was stationed outside of the local police station just in case Jackson was arrested, states the report.
Love letter lie. Dimond was part of circulating a story about non-existent love letters allegedly written by Jackson to the 2003 accuser, Gavin Arvizo. During a November 24 2003 Larry King Live show, Dimond reported that Mr. Sneddon and the sheriff were looking for explicit love letters when they raided Jacksons ranch. Never mind how illogical it is for Jackson to be in the possession of letters supposedly written to the kid. Moving on. When pressed by Larry King if she definitely knew these love letters existed, she said Absolutely. I do. From the transcript:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0311/24/lkl.00.html
DIMOND: I hear that he realized allegations were on the way. He remembered love letters -- that's how they're described, love letters -- that he had written to this 12-year-old boy that were in the boy's home. At the time, the boy, the mother, the family was up at Neverland. Someone somehow was dispatched, I'm told, by the Michael Jackson camp down to their Los Angeles-area apartment, and suddenly, those letters disappeared.
KING: Could that have been this...
DIMOND: That's what Mr. Sneddon and the sheriff were looking for when they went into Neverland, that stack of love letters.........
(Chris Pixley, defrense atty) PIXLEY: We won't know that the DA has made a decision to file charges against him until next week. They sure are making noises as though they are. But you know, I couldn't disagree more with what Nancy's saying here simply because, at this point in time, what we know is that Michael Jackson is one of the most famous celebrities in the world. Of course, he has to comport himself differently than the rest of us do when somebody makes an allegation against him. It wouldn't be unusual at all to get a private eye involved when a mother is alleging that he acted improperly with her child. To me, what's interesting here...
(Nancy) GRACE: That's not even the headline!
PIXLEY: Well...
GRACE: The headline is...
PIXLEY: What's the headline, Nancy?
GRACE: ... the love letters. Love letters. A 45-year-old man...
(CROSSTALK)
KING: Wait a minute! Hold it!
GRACE: ... love letters to a 10-year-old boy...
(CROSSTALK)
KING: Do we -- hold it! Does anyone here -- does anyone here -- anyone -- know of the existence of these letters?
(Johnny) COCHRAN: I don't. I mean, I think that's...
DIMOND: Absolutely. I do.
COCHRAN: ... again, speculation.
DIMOND: I do!
COCHRAN: I don't know of this.
KING: Hold it!
COCHRAN: I've never seen them. The only...
DIMOND: I absolutely know of their existence!
(CROSSTALK)
KING: Diane, have you read them?
DIMOND: No, I have not read them, but I absolutely know that that...
COCHRAN: So how do we know?
DIMOND: ... was tops on the list of the DA and sheriff's department, things to look for inside Neverland. Listen, Larry...
KING: But you don't know what they say.
DIMOND: ... these are letters that are written in Michael Jackson's hand. They are said to be -- no, I've not read them, but...
KING: OK. Well, then...
DIMOND: ... they -- they went after them because they're said to be so sensational and so salacious in nature...
KING: Yes, but how...
DIMOND: ... that this could be a key to the prosecution...
KING: I see. Now, let me...
DIMOND: ... if and when this goes to trial.
(I'M SKIPPING SOME HERE)
KING: Diane Dimond, do you think these letters are going to be leaked?
DIMOND: Oh, gosh, I hope so!
(LAUGHTER)
DIMOND: Boy! Man, oh man! I'd be right there. No, you know, I think this DA and this sheriff are really, really careful. I think they have planned this out so close to the vest, there's just a little cadre of people that know what's going on up there. And no, I'd be surprised if they're leaked.
(skipping ahaead)
DIMOND: I think everyone would agree with that. Everyone would agree with that. But you know, Elizabeth Taylor is his very dear friend, and I respect her loyalty to him. But I really take umbrage with the fact of the media should eat crow, they've been attacking him unfairly. You know what, Liz? We're just doing our job. What kind of reporter would I be if I knew that the Neverland ranch was going to be raided last Tuesday morning and I didn't do everything to get there and report that to the people?
PIXLEY: ... the idea that these love letters...
DIMOND: Absolutely!
PIXLEY: ... that you know nothing about may be just that, nothing?
DIMOND: First of all, Chris, I...
PIXLEY: We found out over the past 10 months...
DIMOND: ... do know about them, and I know about them from high law enforcement sources. But I have always said, I don't know if...
PIXLEY: The DA that's playing it close to the chest?
DIMOND: ... Michael Jackson is a pedophile. This charge...
PIXLEY: You said they play it...
DIMOND: ... should go to court.
PIXLEY: ... close to the chest. You think this is a...
KING: All right...
PIXLEY: ... good DA's office that doesn't leak stories, that play it close to the chest. But you know from high-ranking officials exactly what these letters say, or at least...
DIMOND: I didn't say I know what they say!
PIXLEY: ... what they are likely to say...
DIMOND: If you're going to...
PIXLEY: ... that they're salacious.
DIMOND: And you know what, Chris? Get it right!
(CROSSTALK)
KING: One at a time! One at a time!
DIMOND: I get it right when I quote somebody!
KING: One at a time.
DIMOND: You get it right when you quote me!
(I'm skipping quite a bit, trying to focus on DD & love letters)
CALLER: I want to know why Tom Sneddon -- I guess I pronounced his name right -- chose her to have the interview within 24 hours after making a statement that he would not be giving any? Is it because he knows she dislikes Michael, too?
DIMOND: I don't dislike Michael Jackson. I'd like to know the truth about him. Why did he give me an interview? Because I asked him. I had the story. I said, "Are you going to comment or not?" I've known him for ten years. Not that we're good buddies or anything. But I think he felt that I was going to report it. And if I was going to do it, I should have as many facts as he could give me.
http://redblackghost.wordpress.com/2010/11/21/diane-dimond-amazing-mislead-of-the-public-criticised-of-being-unfair-and-unbalanced-part-1/
It took a November 24 2003 appearance from Sedgwick County (Kansas) District Attorney Nola Foulston on On the Record w/ Greta van Sustren to add another dimension to the Dimond story. Foulston told the host that these “love letters” do not exist and that any information about them which came from the media is “patently false”. Ouch. From the transcript:
FOULSTON: Greta, you’re making an assumption, and the assumption is wrong. The letters, at this particular point in time, do not exist. I’ve been in contact with Mr. Sneddon, posed the same question to him, and he was surprised. …At the time, as late as today, there has been no discovery per se of any, quote, “love letters.” And so any information that has come to you or to other members of the media is patently false.
VAN SUSTEREN: And that is extraordinary information. I guess you fall in a category with Trace and Pat tonight, breaking news, Nola, because that’s extraordinary information, you know, that — because people have been talking about these love letters… (CROSSTALK)
FOULSTON: Well, I can tell you tonight that in my discussion with Mr. Sneddon within the last hour, there are no love letters that have been found. And I can’t tell you that at a later point in time, but the information that is being disseminated is not from law enforcement. Certainly, it’s not from Mr. Sneddon. Certainly, it’s not been discovered in any documents that have been heretofore reviewed by law enforcement. …So I’m telling you this evening, there are no such animals. “The New York Post” has the wrong story and Diane Dimond has the wrong story because it is not correct.
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2005-03-15/gossip/18294369_1_vaccaro-sneddon-items
Did Jax Reporter Brief Da?
LOWDOWN
BY LLOYD GROVE WITH HUDSON MORGAN
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
Has Court TV's Diane Dimond helped prosecutors gather evidence in the Michael Jackson case?
New Jersey businessman Henry Vaccaro Sr. claims that's exactly what she did last March, vowing to alert Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon after discovering a pair of soiled Calvin Klein briefs - presumably Jackson's - among the items in Vaccaro's extensive collection of Jackson family memorabilia in a warehouse in Asbury Park.
The morning after Dimond's visit, Vaccaro told me yesterday, Sneddon personally phoned Vaccaro, said that Dimond had informed his office about the underwear and other potential evidence, and asked to borrow the items for use in the investigation.
But Dimond, through a Court TV spokeswoman, insisted yesterday that she simply had sought comment from Sneddon's office "on some evidence that might be of interest to the prosecution."
Yesterday, journalistic ethics expert Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Pew Research Center for Excellence in Journalist, told me: "The standard is that journalists should try to avoid becoming an extension of law enforcement or any government agency."
If Dimond did so, "that would be very unusual," Rosenstiel added.
In her Court TV report last March on Vaccaro's collection, Dimond is shown daintily lifting the soiled briefs and speculating that they might contain "DNA evidence." When the camera was turned off, Vaccaro recalled, "she told me she was going to call the prosecutor about this."
Dimond, who has tangled with Jackson defense attorney Thomas Mesereau, is known to many close observers of the trial for coverage that seems to favor the prosecution in her reports on Court TV, as an analyst for other television outlets and in a newspaper column.
Dimond's behind-the-scenes contact with Sneddon's office was revealed in just-unsealed court papers involving litigation between Vaccaro and the Jacksons concerning who rightly owns the collection (which Vaccaro seized through a previous federal court judgment).
In a Jan. 13, 2005, letter to Sneddon, requesting the return of the items, Vaccaro writes: "I was contacted by your office after Diane Dimond of Court TV informed you that there were various items of potential interest to you among the contents of a warehouse in Asbury Park, N.J."
Society Page Special. Monday, Nov. 20, 2006.
.....I wasn't about to miss Santa Barbara's social event of the century, District Attorney (and my former boss) Tom Sneddon's retirement party. After 24 years of heading the DA's office, Tom is hanging it up. I dusted off my tux and headed down to the DoubleTree hotel for the black tie optional affair.
.....The dinner, attended by 450, was also something of a Michael Jackson trial reunion. The whole prosecution team was there including deputy DA's Ron Zonen, Gordon Auchincloss, Mag Nicola, investigating officer Steve Robell, and paralegal, Chris Linz. Jackson trial judge Rodney Melville attended
Even the media corps from the Jackson trial was represented. Flying in from New York to attend the event were former Court TV reporter Diane Dimond and her husband, WCBS radio reporter Michael Schoen.
After the speeches and presentations the DJ set up and the dancing began lasting past midnight. .....And I know what your question is and the answer is no, not one Michael Jackson song was played.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:7FMpfPS-oCoJ:www.west.net/~smith/blog/archive1.shtml+da+tom+sneddon+retirement+party&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ipXJC17_CqwJ:www.independent.com/news/2006/nov/21/blog-on-blogs-and-other-missiv/+santa+barbara+independent+sneddon+retirement+party&cd=12&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com
Re: Sned's retirement party-
Making a heartfelt speech, I was told, was former Court TV reporter Diane Dimond, who covered the Jackson case relentlessly over the years.
http://dianedimond.net/media/albuquerque-journal/
From Dimond's hometown paper: The Albuquerque Journal : "I told her she ought to go to college, and we were prepared to send her to college," said her mother, Ruby. "But she didn't want any part of it. I thought she was crazy to go off on her own like that. She was so young. But she knew from the beginning she could do it. She just waded in with both feet."
While Dimond was in her junior year of high school, her friend, Linda Hebenstreit, whose father owned the local CBS television affiliate, KGGM, got her a job as a weekend receptionist at the station.
“One day the news director came out to the front desk in a panic. All of the writers went out to dinner and got into a car accident. He asked me if I could write and I said ‘you bet!’ Of course, I’d never done it before, though I did like to write and had even entered writing contests. So I wrote copy based on the wire service stories, and the anchor read it on air. I was hooked. I loved it when it came out of the anchor man’s mouth. My God, he’s reading my words!”
Dimond started hanging out more in the news room, and the staff took advantage of it, putting her to work writing news copy. KGGM, which also owned a radio station at the time, liked Dimond’s voice and taught her to do promos and station identifications. Before long, she was reading the news on KGGM’s radio station.
She also began dating the KGGM-TV anchor, Chuck Dimond.
It was there in 1976 that Dimond won a Silver Gavel Award from the American Bar Association for a series of reports revealing that the Sheriff’s Office had misused federal law enforcement grant money.
“I learned there and then what goes into making an investigative report,” she said. “It was exciting, like being a private detective. It felt exhilarating. It felt important.”
Ask anyone in the public relations business (other than Susan Tellem, of course) whether or not there is any issue with a public relations firm representing a District Attorney’s office and you might get more than your share of stares and questions. Yet, Sneddon and Ms. Tellem insist that Tellem International is merely handling media requests and concerns for the sake of efficiency. In addition, Ms. Tellem offered her services for free. Wow! Score one point for benevolence! Not.
Tellem, via its prime connections to Sneddon’s Girl Friday Diane Dimond and other major media outlets like Fox, has been instrumental in spreading poisonous and venomous stories about Jackson. Even worse, the firm also managed to sponsor jury tainting stories that have been carried by such illustrious news programs as the Dan Abrams show and Catherine Crier Live. There are far too many examples of these shady jury pool tainting tactics. Consider this crass comment from their website concerning the case and their standing in it:
"The first thing you learn in Journalism School is to check sources. Some media have relied on third-tier sources like Brian Oxman, a self-appointed Jackson family spokesman, to do their fact checking for them. This has resulted in inaccurate information. We request that media give us call if they need to check facts."1
It simply makes little sense to us that a public relations firm with no bias concerning Jackson’s guilt or innocence would be accusing a Jackson defense attorney of lying. This statement is an obvious attempt to discredit any source that provides information that contradicts what their client would like to surface. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of reliable sources are the ones providing information favorable to the defense.
In addition, Tellem should be the very last place for one to “check facts” considering that they only know how to tell one side of a story. We do understand that they are faithfully representing their client; however, they would do well to take others to task for merely saying things their “client” would agree with.
When Tellem is not taking personal swipes at Jackson attorneys and supporters, they are pushing the envelope of professional ethics. Consider one of their prime acts as representatives for the prosecution: “In addition, Tellem used AP as a breaking news tool since the DA’s office had no budget for BusinessWire or other fast acting national distribution service. When a story needed telling, Tellem contacted AP, and they put it on the wire immediately.” But Tellem gets even bolder concerning their "mission" when they remind us that “On January 8, 2004, the DA requested a gag order, which remains in place. While this has reduced the number of calls, each time there is a court appearance, they begin again. An unexpected consequence of working with the DA were death threats from Jackson fans (these were turned over to the FBI).”2
We are simply floored by the blurring of professional and ethical lines in the media. How are we to receive objective news from AP when Tellem uses it as its own little mouthpiece to spread the gospel of Sneddon? One would think that Tellem had the “budget” to use BusinessWire to accommodate their client. We are not simply arguing that they do not have the right but merely pointing out the blurring of ethical lines that could jeopardize news on any case or issue being reported objectively.
http://surftofind.com/seminal4
Henry Vaccaro speaking-
Going back to 1976 I was the original investor in Kramer Guitar Co I eventually became Chairman of the Board. Kramer grew so fast that by the late 80's it was the hottest guitar in the country, played and endorsed by Eddie Van Halen, Bon Jovi, Hank Williams Jr, Twisted Sister on and on. We made a custom guitar for Tito Jackson and Kramer was used on The Victory Tour. In 1989 Kramer was sold to a investment group they defaulted on a bank loan and H.V.V. corp purchased the assets from the bank, and tried to revitalize the Kramer Brand. However a dispute with the bank over the ownership of some trademarks forced H.V.V. corp into a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy. In 1991, while in Bankruptcy H.V.V. won it's suit against the bank and was then approached by the Jackson Family through their newly established corporation called Jackson Communications Inc. to purchase,and fund the Plan of Reorganization for H.V.V.corp. which would lead to J.C.I. owning Kramer. Part of the deal was that I would sit on the Advisory Board of Directors of J.C.I. In 1992 I attended a Board meeting lasting 4 days held at the family home, Havenhurst, in Encino. I met the entire family except Michael. That Plan of Reorganization was approved by the Court. J.C.I. made the first payment and then defaulted and made no other payments. The Court converted H.V.V. to a Chapter 7 and sold the assets at auction I got NOTHING. I am now completely broke. So I filed suite against J.C.I. and was awarded a judgment of $1.4 million J.C.I. claimed they had no assets, the Federal Judge allowed me to pierce the corporate vail and personal judgments were entered against all stockholders that could be served. We could never serve Michael, Janet or Jackie, my lawyer was not concerned as he figured we could easily collect $1.4 million from the rest of the family. After losing everything in a personal bankruptcy and then getting screwed out of the last thing your family own's meaning the Guitar Company is a bitter pill to swallow. So I fought Back. Like any reasonable person in my shoes would have done, nothing personal just business.
Mr. Vaccaro, your attorney, Pease, filed legal docs in early 2005 in the SB criminal case, asking for return, to you, by Thomas Sneddon of certain items of Michael Jackson's (claimed to be owned by you), which Sneddon had come into possession of in 2004. So my question is: did you turn over to Mr. Sneddon, in 2004, or at any other time, either willingly or as a result of subpoena, any of Michael Jackson's personal possessions from the storage lockers? If so, may I ask what items were given to DA Sneddon?
When the warehouse which was leased by Tito was seized.the US Marshall would not allow any of or MJ's or Janet's personal property to be removed.The removed memorabilia was taken to a bonded warehouse in Oxnard.Before I could auction it off Mr &Mrs Jackson,Tito ,Jermain,Randy, Marlon and Rebee filed for bankruptcy. Under the Law I had to give everything back. A trustee was appointed who took control of both warehouses.
After word got out about my collection I received a visit from the Prosecutors office with subpoena. I complied. Items taken were items of MJ's clothing, personal notes and photos.
After the word got out about my collection two detectives from Sneddons office showed up with a subpoena to go through all the memorabilia I complied. They took a item of MJ's clothing ,photos and some hand written notes.
After the family refused to pay me I hired a detective who found a warehouse leased to Tito in Oxnard. It was seized by US Marshall's who removed everything except property that could be MJ's or Janet's. It was taken to a bonded warehouse and inventoried.
Before I could sell It Mr & Mrs Jackson,Tito Jermain ,Randy, Marlon and Rebee Filed for bankruptcy,under the law I had to give everything back.A trustee was appointed to take over the debtors assets. That meant that both warehouses were under his control. In the papers filed under oath the debtors swore that they were not holding property for any third party Like MJ or Janet.
To hide the true value of the warehouse contents it was listed as Household contents worth $5,000,00 ,on their Bankruptcy Papers.The Judge issued a order for any third party Like MJ or Janet, to file a claim of ownership if they had any interest. THEY DID NOT FILE ANY CLAIM OF OWNERSHIP. Before the warehouse seizure MJ filed a claim of ownership on two Rolls Royce Automobiles and a piano that were taken from Havenhurst,He lost his claim as he refused to go to court to prove his ownership. I am only speculating but his fear of the court and the fact that he would have to testify might be the reason that he would not file another claim.. The judge gave MJ and Janet every opportunity to claim ownership even appointing a Mediator MJ and Janet would not cooperate.
Finally after two years in bankruptcy the only persons to claim ownership were Tito's children The Three T's. The trustee went to court and the judge signed a Order to Abandon all the property at both warehouses to The Three T's MJ agreed with the Order. That Order required The Three T's to pay back storage fees of aprox $60 thousand and legal fees of $25 thousand within a 30 day period. THEY DID NOT PAY. The trustee went back to court where the judge cancelled the Order to Abandon and issued a new Order to Sell By Auction. We put a bid of $85,000,00 in writing to the trustee it was accepted subject to a auction,where anyone could overbid. In other words this was the minimum.
The day of auction MJ lawyer is in court along with other family members NOBODY HAD A CERTIFIED CHECK AS REQUIRED So we were awarded the bid.Prior to the bid we contacted the warehouse that was owed the $60 thousand and purchased their lien for $40 thousand This meant that my total purchase price was $65,000.00.NOBODY EVER APPEALED THE AUCTION SALE.I am a little guy from New Jersey who could barely afford a lawyer against some of the largest Law Firms in California that were paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to protect their clients , You Judge the Results. Part Two of Bridgett's Question Everything was sold to Howard Mann he has formed a partnership with MRs Jackson there fore MJ's children will benefit. "
http://lesliemjhu.blogspot.com/2011/02/interview-with-henry-vaccaro.html
SENT TO TANJA 5-9-11
Monmouth County assistant prosecutor Bob Honecker told CNN his office was contacted about the items by Santa Barbara County authorities March 5. Those officials arrived in New Jersey on March 17, he said.
http://www.angelfire.com/pa2/STONEMANGUITARS/asburypark.html
From:floacist.wordpress.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/14/national/14sneddon.html
14 Strikes and the Big Case of a 37-Year Career Is Out
By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: June 14, 2005
SANTA MARIA, Calif., June 13 - He tried to smile. He said he had no regrets. But there was little District Attorney Thomas W. Sneddon Jr. could do to cover up the bitter disappointment of the complete and utter defeat in the biggest case he has handled in his nearly four decades as a prosecutor.
Some legal experts said Mr. Sneddon should not have been surprised that his witnesses failed him. “When you bring a case that requires expenditure of such enormous financial and community resources and you are so wiped out by a verdict, it calls into question the prosecutor who brought it,” said Anthony M. Glassman, a former federal prosecutor in Los Angeles.
“It surely could not have been a mystery that the alleged victim and his family had all the baggage they had. Those just aren’t the kinds of cases that prosecutors with good judgment should be bringing.”
You just had to be there in court
By Andrew Cohen
Guest Columnist
This is not a difficult result to analyze or explain. A jury acquitted Jackson of molestation because the evidence simply wasn’t strong enough to support the felony convictions sought by prosecutors. He was acquitted because the witnesses against him were among the worst I have ever seen in a court.
Even though neither you nor I would ever let our children near him, Jackson is free today because it is not against the law to sleep in a bed with young boys. If you are angry with these jurors, don’t be. Rest assured that as a group they were perfectly willing to send Jackson off to jail until he’d be eligible for Social Security. The case against Jackson was so bad that even you would have acquitted him based solely upon the evidence. Yes, it was that bad.
http://denverpost.com/opinion/ci_2800469