In Mr. Garcetti and Mr. Sneddons opposition to Michael Jacksons attorneys Motion for a Protective Order in December of 1993, they asserted that they wanted to ensure the Court that, the progress of the child molestation investigation of Michael Jackson was not connected to or dictated by the discovery process in the civil case.
They openly and publicly declared that the civil case had nothing whatsoever to do with the criminal case. It was their intention to take full advantage of the information obtained in the civil proceedings to assist their efforts in the criminal prosecution, however, even with that assurance they were still unable to collectively indict Michael Jackson on child molestation allegations.
More than 400 witnesses were interviewed, two Grand Juries were impaneled, and tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars were spent over an eight month period before Mr. Garcetti and Mr. Sneddon decided to end their criminal investigation. Mr. Garcetti announced that the investigation would remain open pending any witnesses coming forward until the six year statue of limitation had expired.
Had Mr. Sneddon and Mr. Garcetti found anything credible to indict Michael Jackson on, he would have been indicted and tried on the criminal charges. The settlement of the civil proceedings did not interfere with the criminal prosecution case nor did Michael Jackson buy his way out of being indicted.
The only problem the settlement caused was that under California law children cannot be forced to testify against their will, but the law does not allow authorities to punish victims of sex crimes who declined to testify. The reason why they could not indict was because the 13-year old boy was their only witness, and without his cooperation they had no case.
Two Grand Juries which consisted of 24 peers in two different counties, an extensive search of Michael Jacksons Neverland Ranch, Century City condo, his parents Encino home, and even Michael Jacksons body search, interviews with over 200 men, women, boys and girls, and even traveling out of the country to interview witnesses, did not produce any evidence to support a criminal indictment for child molestation. (pgs 137-138)