Attorney Suing Tom Sneddon Talks to MJJF Radio-REPOST

[b]Gary Dunlap Talks to MJJF Radio – MJEOL Bullet #55[/b] REPOST [i]This information is reposted for those who may not be aware.[/i] Gary Dunlap, the attorney currently suing District Attorney Tom Sneddon for $10 million, gave an exclusive interview to [url=http://www.mjjforum.com]MJJF Talk Radio[/url]. Dunlap was prosecuted by Sneddon and later acquitted on all charges. In Dunlap’s civil suit, he alleges Sneddon violated his civil rights and levels 22 counts against the Santa Barbara DA. In the interview, Dunlap says there were major violations during the investigation and prosecution stage of the case against him. According Dunlap, Sneddon was involved in racketeering and has a history of running rough-shot over the north county. He says the judge in his case concluded that there was “substantial governmental misconduct” on the part of the prosecution. Dunlap alleges there was the illegal recording of his phone conversations, sending people to his office wearing wires, the cover-up of their misconduct by editing tapes they made of him, and illegal search and seizure. Does those last two sound familiar? Dunlap discloses that Sneddon and the sheriff’s department are very close, so much so that the DA has a history of helping them sweep some of their misconduct under the rug when police officers have used excessive force unnecessarily. Sneddon is no stranger to having lawsuits filed against him claiming misconduct by his office. Dunlap reveals Sneddon and his office have been sued numerous times, but normally settles the cases with forced confidentiality agreements as a part of the deal. These confidentiality agreements are so that the public is never made aware of these various excessive force and excessive prosecution cases leveled against his office. Dunlap also tells of another case where Sneddon was successfully sued by a man who won a judgment for “several hundred thousand dollars.” In that case, that man was illegally detained on bogus charges, says Dunlap, where the police used excessive force. Instead of prosecuting the police, the allegation is that Sneddon tried unsuccessfully to make the case go away. Dunlap cites a litany of other wrongdoings by the prosecutor and the sheriff’s department under the watch of Sneddon “crony” Jim Thomas–the former sheriff who is now, oddly, making the rounds on various talk shows talking about how guilty he thinks Michael Jackson is. Dunlap expresses he has no opinion one way or the other about whether Jackson is guilty. However, he says the very fact Sneddon is prosecuting this case makes him suspicious of Sneddon. He also offers, from his own experiences with Sneddon, that they do “vindictive prosecutions on a routine basis,” giving some credence to Jackson’s defense attorney’s comments about Sneddon’s reasons for pursuing Jackson. He also says there is no question in his mind Jackson was “overly-targeted.” Dunlap continues by saying, contrary to what some talking-heads have bandied around, Jackson does not fit any “pedophile profile.” Some psychologists have outright said there is no “pedophile profile,” and that in fact pedophiles can be anyone: from doctors, lawyers, and psychiatrists, to teachers, janitors and priests. Minneapolis psychiatrist Dr. Ralph Underwager, who has treated pedophiles and victims since 1953, has said “There’s no such thing as a classic profile. They [police investigating Jackson in 1993] made a completely foolish and illogical error” and that Jackson “got nailed” because of “misconceptions like these that have been allowed to parade as fact in an era of hysteria”(see [url=http://site.mjeol.com/modules/sections/index.php?op=viewarticle&artid=62]Was Michael Jackson Framed? The Untold Story[/url]). Dunlap shores up his objectivity in the Jackson case by revealing he had a client who once sued Jackson for wrongful termination. In handling her lawsuit—an executive ex-employee at Neverland—Dunlap says even she has never doubted Jackson’s innocence. Given the fact she had her own adversarial run-in with Jackson, Dunlap states, his client would never cover-up anything of that nature if it happened. Thus, he believes her. Furthering the discussion of the ex-employee, Dunlap also says this employee stated Jackson “marches to his own drum” and may be an easy target, but she says he was innocent 10 years ago and is innocent now. There is a boat load of other interesting facts which are disclosed by Dunlap regarding Sneddon’s past behavior. These things include Sneddon’s ability to “get his way,” intimidating judges, fostering inappropriate relationships with certain members of the media, and his preference to do things in “secret.” You can listen online to the conversation: Part 1: Part 2a: Part 2b: Part 3a: Part 3b: You can read my notes from this in-depth conversation [url=http://forum.mjeol.com/index.php?showtopic=12636]here[/url]. Or you can view an official [url=http://forum.mjeol.com/index.php?showtopic=12658]transcript of Parts 1, 2, and 3[/url].