Personal Vendetta Will Get Sneddon Tossed from Prosecuting Jackson? MJEOL Bullet #208 In the defenses Motion for Recusal of the Santa Barbara District Attorneys Office, Michael Jacksons lawyers say that the DAs office has a conflict of interest which will make it unlikely that Mr. Jackson will receive a fair trial. Many observers of the case do agree that district attorney Tom Sneddon is too personally involved in this case; so much so that he may be blinded by a personal vendetta to fully understand the difference between justice and what is his own vindictiveness. Jacksons lawyers say that the current DA is so blinded by his zeal to prosecute Jackson that he has been involved in some of the most ridiculous behavior ever executed by a district attorney. They say that faced with retirement and a complete failure to prosecute Jackson in 93, Sneddon renewed his campaign against Mr. Jackson after the Bashir documentary. The law on recusing a DA is as follows:
(1) a conflict of interest must exist and (2) the conflict must be so grave as to render it unlikely that [the] defendant will receive fair treatment during all portions of the criminal proceedings People v Griffin 33 Cal. App. 4th 536, 569 (2003) (citation omitted). (see Defense Motion to Recuse Santa Barbara District Atty pg 25 | pg 29 of .pdf file)
Astonishingly, the defense reveals that the original officer assigned to the case determined that there wasnt any misconduct on Jacksons part in their first, two-month investigation into this very allegation in 2003. If you remember, the sheriffs notes, along with the accusers accusations, were leaked to NBCs Mike Taibbi earlier this year.