Post by MJSUNIFC on Jun 26, 2004 20:45:21 GMT -5
santa maria times reports-
Dismissal hearing set amid secrecy in case
By Quintin Cushner/Staff Writer
The judge in the Michael Jackson child-molestation case said Friday that he will consider a defense motion to dismiss all charges against the entertainer next month.
Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville can dismiss none, some or all of the charges against Jackson when he rules on the motion July 9, according to local criminal attorney Adrian Andrade.
A motion to dismiss is a common defense tactic used to argue that there's insufficient evidence to charge a defendant, Andrade said. The defense request likely will allege weaknesses in the grand jury proceedings used to indict Jackson, Andrade said.
After the judge's ruling, either side can file a writ with the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Ventura, requesting that body to reconsider the decision, he said.
Jackson, 45, has pleaded not guilty to engaging in lewd acts with an unnamed boy under the age of 14 on four occasions between Feb. 20 and March 12, 2003, and four counts of "administering an intoxicating agent" - reportedly wine - 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.
The acts allegedly took place at the singer's Neverland Ranch near Los Olivos.
The remainder of Friday's hearing was occupied by the issue of public access to court documents, as Melville continued to shroud the case in extreme secrecy.
Attorney Ted Boutrous, who represented a coalition of media organizations at the hearing, objected to Melville's ruling. He noted that secrecy in this instance could affect other high-profile cases nationwide.
"This is a critical juncture," Boutrous said in court. "This case raises important issues on how the system functions."
Boutrous said after the hearing that he may appeal Melville's ruling next week.
Documents kept sealed in the Jackson case included transcript of the grand jury proceedings, portions of the indictment, identities of Jackson's alleged co-conspirators and 47 search warrants.
Because the documents are sealed, both the media and the public are largely ignorant about the strengths and weaknesses of the government's case against the singer, Boutrous said.
"The parties have even started to speak in a secret speech code," he argued in court. "The public has no idea what forms the basis of the charges against Mr. Jackson."
Boutrous has also objected repeatedly to the sealing of documents in the case on grounds that it's a violation of free speech.
"The overwhelming secrecy we believe violates the First Amendment," Boutrous said, concluding his argument with, "The time has come in this case to let the sun shine in."
In response, Melville defended his right to keep documents secret, arguing that it is the only way to guarantee the famous defendant an impartial jury.
"The difficulty of seeing that an individual in this country gets a fair trial is exasperating when the individual is known around the world," Melville said.
Both prosecutors and the defense stood in support of Melville's ruling.
Conflict between the two sides in the case arose when Robert Sanger, one of Jackson's three attorneys, said that although he planned to file his motion to dismiss by Friday, he would now need until June 29.
The lead prosecutor in the case, District Attorney Tom Sneddon, complained that the delay came as a surprise, and would cause his side to rush its reply for the July 9 hearing.
"I'm a little piqued about this," he said.
During the discussions, Boutrous stood up and objected. He expressed apprehension that since the grand jury transcript remains secret, the judge might hold the proceeding behind closed doors.
"I respectfully suggest that it would be an outrage," he said of that possibility.
Soon after, Melville let loose the only emotion he's displayed during the case so far, when he chided Boutrous for accusing him of violating the law.
"Everything I'm doing is according to the law," he said. "I'm following the law."
During discussion of "discovery" evidence in the case, defense attorneys argued that they were not permitted to examine materials outside of the earshot of Sheriff's Department officials familiar with the case.
Melville instructed the two parties to work out the matter between themselves, and reminded them of his previous ruling that allowed the defense to examine evidence without being overheard by law enforcement.
Both sides next retreated with the judge into chambers to discuss secret issues of evidence. The prosecution emerged after about 45 minutes, while the defense lingered for about 15 minutes more.
Before recessing court around 11 a.m., Melville issued an order compelling Jackson's former defense lawyers, Ben Brafman and Mark Geragos, to turn over papers to the singer's new lead attorney, Thomas Mesereau.
If they don't comply with this order, both may be ordered to appear during the July 9 hearing to explain why, Melville said.
Jackson will not be present July 9, which will be the first time a hearing in the case coincides with other court business. All hearings thus far have occurred on court furlough days when no other cases were in session.
However, the defendant will likely appear in court starting Aug. 16, when defense motions to suppress evidence in the case will be heard.
About 20 spectators, most of whom were Jackson supporters, assembled outside the Santa Maria Courts Complex Friday.
Nancy Balcorta of Glendale appeared outside the courthouse with her 7-year-old son, Troy. She believes Jackson is incapable of harming a child, adding she would have no problem leaving her own son alone with the singer.
santamariatimes.com/articles/2004/06/26/news/local/news02.txt
Dismissal hearing set amid secrecy in case
By Quintin Cushner/Staff Writer
The judge in the Michael Jackson child-molestation case said Friday that he will consider a defense motion to dismiss all charges against the entertainer next month.
Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville can dismiss none, some or all of the charges against Jackson when he rules on the motion July 9, according to local criminal attorney Adrian Andrade.
A motion to dismiss is a common defense tactic used to argue that there's insufficient evidence to charge a defendant, Andrade said. The defense request likely will allege weaknesses in the grand jury proceedings used to indict Jackson, Andrade said.
After the judge's ruling, either side can file a writ with the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Ventura, requesting that body to reconsider the decision, he said.
Jackson, 45, has pleaded not guilty to engaging in lewd acts with an unnamed boy under the age of 14 on four occasions between Feb. 20 and March 12, 2003, and four counts of "administering an intoxicating agent" - reportedly wine - 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.
The acts allegedly took place at the singer's Neverland Ranch near Los Olivos.
The remainder of Friday's hearing was occupied by the issue of public access to court documents, as Melville continued to shroud the case in extreme secrecy.
Attorney Ted Boutrous, who represented a coalition of media organizations at the hearing, objected to Melville's ruling. He noted that secrecy in this instance could affect other high-profile cases nationwide.
"This is a critical juncture," Boutrous said in court. "This case raises important issues on how the system functions."
Boutrous said after the hearing that he may appeal Melville's ruling next week.
Documents kept sealed in the Jackson case included transcript of the grand jury proceedings, portions of the indictment, identities of Jackson's alleged co-conspirators and 47 search warrants.
Because the documents are sealed, both the media and the public are largely ignorant about the strengths and weaknesses of the government's case against the singer, Boutrous said.
"The parties have even started to speak in a secret speech code," he argued in court. "The public has no idea what forms the basis of the charges against Mr. Jackson."
Boutrous has also objected repeatedly to the sealing of documents in the case on grounds that it's a violation of free speech.
"The overwhelming secrecy we believe violates the First Amendment," Boutrous said, concluding his argument with, "The time has come in this case to let the sun shine in."
In response, Melville defended his right to keep documents secret, arguing that it is the only way to guarantee the famous defendant an impartial jury.
"The difficulty of seeing that an individual in this country gets a fair trial is exasperating when the individual is known around the world," Melville said.
Both prosecutors and the defense stood in support of Melville's ruling.
Conflict between the two sides in the case arose when Robert Sanger, one of Jackson's three attorneys, said that although he planned to file his motion to dismiss by Friday, he would now need until June 29.
The lead prosecutor in the case, District Attorney Tom Sneddon, complained that the delay came as a surprise, and would cause his side to rush its reply for the July 9 hearing.
"I'm a little piqued about this," he said.
During the discussions, Boutrous stood up and objected. He expressed apprehension that since the grand jury transcript remains secret, the judge might hold the proceeding behind closed doors.
"I respectfully suggest that it would be an outrage," he said of that possibility.
Soon after, Melville let loose the only emotion he's displayed during the case so far, when he chided Boutrous for accusing him of violating the law.
"Everything I'm doing is according to the law," he said. "I'm following the law."
During discussion of "discovery" evidence in the case, defense attorneys argued that they were not permitted to examine materials outside of the earshot of Sheriff's Department officials familiar with the case.
Melville instructed the two parties to work out the matter between themselves, and reminded them of his previous ruling that allowed the defense to examine evidence without being overheard by law enforcement.
Both sides next retreated with the judge into chambers to discuss secret issues of evidence. The prosecution emerged after about 45 minutes, while the defense lingered for about 15 minutes more.
Before recessing court around 11 a.m., Melville issued an order compelling Jackson's former defense lawyers, Ben Brafman and Mark Geragos, to turn over papers to the singer's new lead attorney, Thomas Mesereau.
If they don't comply with this order, both may be ordered to appear during the July 9 hearing to explain why, Melville said.
Jackson will not be present July 9, which will be the first time a hearing in the case coincides with other court business. All hearings thus far have occurred on court furlough days when no other cases were in session.
However, the defendant will likely appear in court starting Aug. 16, when defense motions to suppress evidence in the case will be heard.
About 20 spectators, most of whom were Jackson supporters, assembled outside the Santa Maria Courts Complex Friday.
Nancy Balcorta of Glendale appeared outside the courthouse with her 7-year-old son, Troy. She believes Jackson is incapable of harming a child, adding she would have no problem leaving her own son alone with the singer.
santamariatimes.com/articles/2004/06/26/news/local/news02.txt