I am taking a nuetral position here...however the case lacked any merriit from the start. Seems like MJ was prosecuted only because of his status. If the accusation was against an ordinary citizen, a good prosecutor would have immediately realized how unscrupulous the accuser's Mother was and would have simply not given it any merrit. But, even though she was a lying crook, Tom Sneddon decided to prosecute at the expense of tax payers money. It's time Tom sneddon retired and let some mature prosecutors take over his role. He's one dumb prosecutor!! As for MJ, he better learn his lesson well this time. He's talented but stupid. And stay away from boys!

I agree that MJ needs to wise up. But Tom Sneddon is not dumb at all. He is very smart and ethical and he believed that MJ molested that boy. He is a good DA and very respected by both sides, DAs and defense attorneys. He went to UCLA law school which is a very hard school to get into. I'm not saying he made the right decision to prosecute MJ, but I know that he did it with the best of intentions and wasn't be overzealous. Sure did cost the tax payers a boat-load, though.

I agree, he's definitely not stupid. But he really messed up bad on this case. He must have had a personal vendetta with Jackson. This case should have never gone to trial with what he had, which was absolutely nothing.

It does seem like the DA didn't have that much, but the truth is, we don't know as much as they knew. Sneddon did NOT have a vendetta against Jackson.

Talk of vandetta: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050613/D8AN0VG01.html

I've heard that theory for the last year and a half. It simply isn't true. Sneddon has a very full life with 12 children and hundreds of other people to prosecute. He doesn't sit and stew over one defendant that he lost to.

That's hard to believer after he sent 70 sheriffs to search his home. Clear indication of a personal quest from Sneddon.

m49erfan YOU sure do pass of as being informative to the people who do not know better. You try to come across as someone who knows Sneddon and his record of respectability as a D.A. HOWEVER, I KNOW FACTS which dispell your credibility as knowledgeable or informative. 1) SNEDDON HAS BEEN SUED ON SEVERAL OCCASSIONS FOR HIS METHODS, lots and lots of questionable conduct brought up against him for his conduct and his credibility and not with the MJ CASE> do research you will find wealth of good info 2) You were trying to through in 'little' details as if giving impression of personal insight well wrong boyO--- TOM SNEDDON HAS ONLY 9 CHILDREN. I remain humbly as a resource of edification and clarification.

Sneddon is only doing his job, which is to keep society at large safe from pedophiles. No more, no less. And, pedophiles are NOT curable, for lack of a better word. It's only a matter of time before this pedophile is back in cuffs.

"Sneddon is only doing his job, which is to keep society at large safe from pedophiles. No more, no less. And, pedophiles are NOT curable, for lack of a better word. It's only a matter of time before this pedophile is back in cuffs." --- If you're right about Jackson, which certainly seems plausible, then I don't think Sneddon was doing that job particularly well. I don't think he was "only doing his job" when he was personally doing surveillance in this case. That's way beyond his job, and in fact risks compromising his job. I think he was not doing his job well when he openly gloated at the press conference where he initially announced the charges. That little show was very unprofessional. I think he was not doing his job well when he chose to introduce the conspiracy charges into the case, thus making the mother a central prosecution witness who quickly became a central prosecution problem, with details of the allegations which reduced portions of his case to low farce. I think he was not doing his job well when he decided to personally lead this case, rather than having Zonen do so. As DA, he should have assigned the case to his best, not to himself. This would have simultaneously given him a more effective lead prosecutor, and reduced the appearance that it was personal. And I don't think he was don't his job well when he showed up for trial so underprepared. The day (Sunday) before some of the phone records testimony, he was only just retrieving some of the records. This was two years after the calls were made... The defense noticed that many of the mother's calls were to people she denied knowing. The prosecution did not. The defense noticed the problem with the alarm in the brother's testimony. If the prosecution were properly prepared, that odd detail would have been part of the boy's direct examination, not a "gotcha" contradiction raised in cross. I'm not quite sure what all was going on with Sneddon. But I don't buy that he was doing his job "no more, no less". In some ways, he was doing far more, and in other ways, far less. Since the prosecution and defense in this case were both so focused on pattern, I'll remark that I see a pattern here. Despite his protests to the contrary, Sneddon took this too personally, and lost his professional objectivity. His case had weaknesses, for which he needed to be prepared. As far as I can tell, he still hasn't even noticed that they existed.

The prosecution were not dumb, as in, clueless or stupid. They didn't lose because they used the wrong tactics or arguments to put forth their case. They lost because their client lied to them. Like the ignorant bully that he is, Tom Sneddon took the case on, to flex his ignorance even more. Well, a quote from the bible scripture says "Pride, is before a mighty fall", and he experienced that, well and truly. All the bluster and arrogance that he subjected Michael to, in the early stages of his involvement, was suddenly silenced on the 13 June 2005. He was sent packing, with his tail between his humiliated little legs. Justice was done, that day. The right person was judged innocent, and the liars and the fillibusters were left exposed for the whole world to see. The prosecution weren't dumb...they were just greedy. Greedy for publicity. Greedy for the glory of bringing down Michael Jackson. Swept along by all the attention and publicity surrounding Michael Jackson, Tom Sneddon probably thought he had it all sewn up. Rather than checking his case thoroughly before taking the molestation case to court, he charged into the fray, and four months later, he is heading back to wherever he came from, with his tail between him humiliated little legs. Justice was served!