Court TV Host: The judge in the Michael Jackson case is holding a pre-trial hearing today, on a number of issues, including a defense request to remove the current prosecutors. Chat about the hearing with Court TV's Diane Dimond, right now!

Court TV Host: Diane Dimond is here!

Diane Dimond: Hello everyone. Interesting day in court today.

Question from bigbadbikerboy: So what happened in court today?

Diane Dimond: Well, bigbadbikerboy, the defense offered a motion to recuse DA Tom Sneddon and his entire staff. His argument was that Sneddon was "overzealous, too emotional, too eager to get a conviction of a celebrity." The prosecutors countered with the fact that Mr. Sneddon was just being a good, committed district attorney... a district attorney who's been in office since 1982 (no one has ever run against him since then), because "people here understand his skill, hard work and particularly his integrity." The judge heard lengthy arguments from both sides, and then ruled against Team Jackson.

Question from LuvU2: Hi Diane, why are they looking to remove the prosecutors?

Diane Dimond: Defense attorney Tom Mesereau told the judge that the DA had been after Michael Jackson for ten years, had been stung by criticism that he could never get him into court until now, that he had bullied grand jury witnesses, had "made himself a witness by undertaking part of the investigation himself," had joked about Michael Jackson's situation at his original press conference, and finally had passed confidential information to ex-sheriff Jim Thomas, who is now a commentator for NBC News. For those five reasons, Mesereau said, Sneddon should be taken off the case.

Court TV Host: What did the prosecution have to say to those allegations?

Diane Dimond: Since it was all about Tom Sneddon, he sat in the back today, as Assistant DA Ron Zonan addressed the court. Taking the complaints in order, Zonan said the 1994 grand juries were never asked to indict Michael Jackson; they were investigative grand juries only. He said the supposed criticism of Mr. Sneddon was not true. The defense was unable to supply even one article criticizing Mr. Sneddon, he said. About the grand jury in 1994 and about Sneddon bullying witnesses, Zonan said there were 45 witnesses in all and the examination of only one was contentious. (They were speaking of Russell Halperen, the attorney for the boy's father. "He was a hostile witness," and Mr. Sneddon got him to recant himself.) As for Mr. Sneddon inserting himself into the investigation, thus becoming a witness, Zonan said that was baloney. "They say Tom Sneddon was investigating," he said. "We called it an 'errand'" when he went to the office of Jackson's private detective and took a picture of it. Sneddon happened to be in LA that day and thus saved a Santa Barbara deputy from taking a trip there. He also said when the DA met with Mrs. Doe, the boy's mother, in a parking lot in LA, it wasn't an investigation, he was simply giving her some victim compensation forms and picking up two pieces of evidence. As for Sneddon joking at his press conference, that visiting reporters should spend a lot of money to help the ailing Santa Barbara economy, "it was just a joke. Anyone who thinks that is a matter for recusal, well, that is a joke," Zonan said. On the charge that the DA's office had leaked information to ex-sheriff Jim Thomas (who had reported on NBC that among the items seized at Neverland was the top of Michael Jackson's mattress), Zonan said, he's an ex-county employee -- we have no control over him. "If we wanted to leak something, we could have leaked much more interesting information to him. We could have whispered about much more compelling evidence," seized from Neverland, Zonan said.

Question from Lee: Any word on the strength of the state's case?

Diane Dimond: They continue to win nearly every motion the defense brings against them. But as to the strength of their case, so much information is still sealed by the judge, I can't say for sure. It seems, however, that the prosecution team is very confident and has answers for every negative thing the defense brings up against him. However, Tom Mesereau proved today that he has some surprises in his pocket, too. He declared that "we will prove this boy's mother has repeatedly underscored her need for money" and then he revealed that she had been collecting welfare checks and depositing them in her then-boyfriend's checking account, while he was earning over $80,000 a year.

Question from LuvU2: Did MJ or family show up today, Diane?

Diane Dimond: No, he didn't. But there were four or five of his fans sitting in the back of the courtroom to support him today. This court hearing continues tomorrow, and we don't expect him then either.

Court TV Host: Were there any other issues the court dealt with today?

Diane Dimond: There were several documents that the judge ruled today would remain sealed to the public. It's so hard as a reporter to cover this trial! For example, Tom Mesereau is appealing SOMETHING to the appellate court. We think it's judge Melville's refusal to throw out the indictment. BUT WE DONT KNOW! So when the judge ruled today that those documents would stay sealed, we all just looked at each other and shrugged our shoulders, because we don't know what he's talking about.

Question from Lee: Who is Team Jackson now?

Diane Dimond: Tom Mesereau is still the lead attorney. Robert Sanger and Susan Yu were at the table today. Conspicuously absent was attorney Brian Oxman, but I called him later and he says he is still on the team. LA based attorney Steve Cochran (no relation to Johnnie) left the team earlier this month.

Question from bigbadbikerboy: Given the fact that the accuser's mother first saw the same lawyer who sued MJ before and the lawyer then sent the child to a therapist, to confess what MJ did, and then the therapist had to, by law, report it, doesn't this sound like a set up? And could the child be given a lie detector test?

Diane Dimond: First of all, the mother did not go to Larry Feldman, the first boy's lawyer. She originally contacted an attorney named William Bickerman. She told him her tale of woe about not being able to get her belongings back, and, as he told me, he felt he was out of his league dealing with someone as big as Michael Jackson. So he suggested to her that he see "a Jackson expert," Larry Feldman, Who had dealt with Jackson before. There is a misconception that Feldman sent this boy to the same psychiatrist as the first boy. That's not true. I guess the bottom line is, if you have a problem, you go to someone who knows how to deal with it. As for giving a minor a polygraph, I don't think that would happen, because it would never be allowed in court anyway.

Question from LuvU2: I understand there's close to over 100 items of evidence. Any new information about that since your last chat here?

Diane Dimond: Oh, there's lots more than 100 items of evidence. For example, tomorrow in court they'll be arguing about some 36 items taken from the home of Michael Jackson's personal assistant. Her name is Evvy Tavasky. She was the keeper of Michael Jackson's schedule and the list of guests who visited Neverland. Her calendars, records, datebooks, could be used to back up the family's story of when they were at the ranch. The defense wants some of that evidence suppressed because some of it, they say, was attorney-client work product. This judge has suppressed very little evidence in this case so far, so I wouldn't bet that the defense wins this.

Court TV Host: Was there another new lawsuit filed against Jackson?

Diane Dimond: It is a civil suit filed in federal court in New Orleans. A 38 year old man named Thomas Bartucci, Jr. charges that back in May 1984 Michael Jackson "repeatedly committed sexual battery" upon him. This is a repressed memory case. They are very hard to prove. And his tale is fantastical. He claims he was lured into a limousine, in New Orleans, and inside was Michael Jackson. He claims that for the next nine days Michael Jackson and his employees held him hostage. Bartucci says he repressed his memory of this incident until "the viewing of a Court TV news special pertaining to the current allegations." Again, these kind of cases are hard to prove; however, the state of Louisiana has seen some of these types of cases be successful.

Question from Sheba: So, Diane, when does this 'Trial of the Century" supposed to start? Anytime soon or will there be endless continuances? How is the victim healthwise and will he be the only victim to testify?

Diane Dimond: Judge Melville told the attorneys at the end of today's session that he did not want to hear the "C" word...continuation. He said again that jury selection will begin Jan. 31, 2005. As for who might testify, we don't have a witness list yet, but it will be the boy at the center of this case, his younger brother, who is alleged to have seen two of the molestation instances, and maybe, just maybe, the boy from the 1993 case. There could also be another boy who settled, for $2 million in 1994, but we just don't know. As for the health of the current accuser, I hear he's doing well, has gained back a lot of the weight he lost and now at the age of almost 15, has his eye on girlfriends. Bye everyone. We'll chat again soon!