Jackson’s lawyers want charges dismissed

Posted by

Jackson’s lawyers want charges dismissed Attorneys plan motion to have some counts thrown out From Miguel Marquez CNN Friday, June 18, 2004 Posted: 11:00 PM EDT (0300 GMT) [img align=right]http://site.mjeol.com/uploads/img40d3b8665b146.jpg[/img] Michael Jackson has pleaded not guilty to the charges against him. LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) — Lawyers for pop singer Michael Jackson plan to file a motion challenging the charges against their client in an attempt to have some of the counts dismissed. On April 30, Jackson pleaded not guilty to an indictment of 10 charges — including four counts of child molestation, four counts of administering an intoxicating agent, one count of attempted child molestation and one count of conspiracy to commit child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion. A tentative trial date has been set for September 13. Court minutes released Friday show that defense attorney Robert Sanger told Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville in a closed hearing June 10 that the defense team would file a 995 motion on or before June 25. That date is when the next hearing in the case is scheduled. However, arguments on the matter will not be heard at that proceeding. “By filing a 995 motion, the defense will be asserting that the defendant was indicted, or information was filed, without reasonable or probable cause,” Darrel Parker, Santa Barbara County assistant court administrator told CNN. “Any effort to set aside an indictment or information essentially means the defense wants to try and dismiss the charges,” Parker said. The hearing’s minutes further reveal that Sanger indicated a motion to suppress evidence would likely follow the filing of the 995 motion. Additionally, the minutes indicate that Melville ordered the 995 motion sealed until a hearing can be scheduled, saying that “it is the court’s intention that arguments will be held publicly to the greatest extent possible and recess for portions of the hearing if necessary.” :nav Source: http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/06/18/jackson.case/ :3pinned [url=http://forum.mjeol.com/index.php?showtopic=17554]Your Comments?[/url]

Leave a Reply