The Most Serious Charges Against Andrea Sneiderman Have Been Dropped

At the final pretrial hearing before Andrea Sneiderman’s murder trial was to begin, DA Mr. Robert James says that in the interest of justice, since he is “not sure” if Andrea is guilty, he moved to drop the three most serious charges including malice murder, felony murder and aggravated assault. 

Mr. Robert James told the court, “my ethical obligation is not to seek conviction but to seek justice. It would be unjust and unethical to go forward on a charge I’m not 100 percent sure of.”

Andrea’s defense counsel was elated to have the charges dropped. The judge did not immediately grant the motion for dismissal.

“I believe they’ve known all along they didn’t have a murder case,” Ms. Sneiderman’s lawyer said.

Mr. James called that a “cheap shot.”

After a brief recess, the prosecutor stood before the court and responded to the notion, alleged by the defense, that he had behaved in an unethical manner by indicting Ms. Sneiderman. “I have never indicted a case…in which the individual I was indicting was not guilty of [what I believed they were guilty of]… I’ve never tried a case in which I had doubt about a person’s guilt… it seems absurd that there was an implication of being unethical…I am doing what I think is right…”

Ms. Sneiderman is still facing four counts of perjury, seven counts of making false statements and one count of hindering the apprehension of a criminal.

According to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, each charge carries maximum sentences that range from five to ten years in prison.

Ms. Sneiderman’s attorney wondered if she could receive a fair trial, given all of the media attention. He does not see “how on earth [it’s possible given] the atmosphere that we all find ourselves in.”

Headline News (HLN) was mentioned directly. He is “dumbstruck” by the media attention.

He asked the judge for a motion to continue the case, given the “media uproar” and suggested she go to trial in six months to a year. He has “never” had to make such a request in his career.

The judge understood Mr. Clegg’s concerns but denied the motion. He might re-consider the motion if they cannot find a fair and impartial jury.

Defense attorney Mr. Clegg then asked the judge to modify the conditions of Ms. Sneiderman’s bond including removing her ankle monitor, allowing her to have contact with potential witnesses, refund $250,000, and sign a $10,000 signature bond.

The state consents to all of the stipulations except Ms. Sneiderman being allowed to have contact with potential witnesses.

The judge eventually allowed the dismissal of the murder charges but will continue to “think about” the matters relating to her bond.


36 thoughts on “The Most Serious Charges Against Andrea Sneiderman Have Been Dropped

  1. Well, who knows the “real” reason for these charges being dropped but I am sure it will be discussed and debated for some time.
    I find it ridiculous that she was not held in custody for this whole time but given her current charges I believe that she should have the ankle monitor remain and no money given to her until this case is settled. She still has serious charges against her that could result in a long prison sentence.
    Her arrogance will never be in dispute but cannot help wondering just how involved she was – telephone calls to Nemy are critical and shows she knew something!!!

  2. Dr. Randle, why do you think the prosecutor now thinks she wasn’t involved in the murder or isn’t 100% sure that she was involved? At this late date? I don’t know really that much about everything but I have felt from the beginning that she was a player in her husband’s death mainly because of all the phone calls between her and Hemy at the certain times of the murder and after the murder and because there is really solid evidence that she told her father-in-law that Rusty had been shot before she herself had been told that he had been shot. I think prosecutors might be afraid to try women for murder charges since the Casey Anthony jurors. I am so disgusted with jurors now especially since the Zimmerman jurors were not able to see that George is responsible for Trayvon’s death. But I still have some hope because of the jurors in the Jodi Arias case. I was so afraid they wouldn’t find her guilty because she had that ability to seduce people. And can the state charge Andrea Sneiderman at a later date of murder if the prosecutors change?

    • They don’t have enough solid evidence for a conviction.
      Hemy is in prison and for some legal reason he is unable to testify plus he has been diagnosed as mentally ill.
      She’s going to walk on this one.
      This is one hot mess.

      • Chris this is more then a HOT mess. They can not use Hemy as a witness as he was deemed insane. He would be the only one that would be able to really say what happened. He is so in love (or whatever) with her we would never hear the truth anyway. I think she was behind the whole thing and when her husband died she would dump Hemy and go on with her 2 mil. What a nice life she is living now. TO BAD!

    • It’s may be that they do not have as strong of a case as they thought–given that the DA said that he was “not sure” of her guilt. It seems rare for a prosecutor to be so brutally honest, especially when he knew that many people were watching. She still could do a good bit of time if convicted of the remaining charges. I think they can bring charges against her again if they feel they have the evidence but I’d be surprised if that happened.

  3. FWIW, I heard a news story (I believe on Fox) in the last few days when this rumor (now fact) was first being reported that the original DA who brought the murder charges is now working in another county. Sounds like this may be a case where the current DA is not as convinced as the previous one was. I’m sure they’ll refile charges at a later date if and when they feel they have a stronger case.

  4. HLN has been IMO ruining alot of trials as of late. Going forward, for high profile cases, the DT will use the media circus as a defense. It started with Casey A., Jodi Arias, G. Zimmerman, and now Andrea.

    The Justice system is turning into a gong show due to media scrutiny.

    I am definitely a true crime fan, but these cases need to take a breather for awhile.

    • I agree that the TV coverage fuels so many in the public. Many on HLN have their opinions and make them well known on their shows which also adds fuel to the fire.
      I continue to be appalled that cases like Castro in Ohio and even Zimmerman can be settled so quickly (whether one agrees with the outcome or not) but the Arias trial is still not completed and has been going on for months and months. Thankfully, Arizona is no longer planning on televising future trials and people like Arias will not be in the news each and every day.
      Networks such as HLN only cover those that are televised and do the same reporting as most other networks for those that are not. Without the notoriety through media coverage, these horrible people fade away – as they should.

      • I can no longer watch Dr Drew. Ms Ali has added so much fuel to the fire it is unbelievable. I never owned a slave nor was I a slave so why are we having to go back so many years ago. Ali is pitting black against white.

  5. I suspect the George Zimmerman not guilty verdict had something to do with the three serious murder charges being dropped again Andrea Sneiderman.

    After Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman jurors both said the prosecution didn’t prove their case, these prosecutors didn’t want that to happen to them.

    Juries are no longer just accepting circumstantial evidence. They want DNA and eye witnesses.

    Since the prosecutor’s only evidence against Sneiderman was circumstantial and their only witness was found guilty but mentally ill by a jury, their case hinged on the jury believing what the prosecutors said.

    In high profile cases, the entire world witnesses the prosecutors in the courtroom and defense attorneys on all the networks are critiquing their case and performance. They didn’t want to take a chance and be blamed and ridiculed like the Zimmerman prosecutors.

    If the Jodi Arias trial had not been broadcast live, she wouldn’t have sat on the stand for 18 days and talked about her sex life and played sex tapes. The defense made a murder trial a TV reality show full of sex, lies and videotapes.

    The Andrea Sneiderman trial looked like it was headed the same way until the prosecutors pulled the plug on the murder charges.

    I hope they take live feed cameras out of the courtroom as they have for the Jodi Arias hearings and that her retrial will not be on camera and that she be made to wear stripes and shackles in the sentencing re-trial since she has been found guilty of first degree murder and there is no assumption of innocence to protect.

    With trials broadcast live feed on the Internet and TV, the justice system has become entertainment for the masses rather than punishment for the criminals as it should be. As a result, the attorneys perform for the cameras rather than just do their job in prosecuting and defending the accused.

    I am not wasting my time in front of the TV or internet watching more trials. I watched Juan Martinez questioning witnesses and his opening and closing arguments in the Arias trial and the first week of the Zimmerman trial and I have no desire to watch the mini Arias trial or the Sneiderman trial. I just want to know that a jury gets it right.

    • You wrote,

      I just want to know that a jury gets it right.

      Me, too. But we’ll never know with certainty just by listening to professional journalists and commentators spouting predetermined opinions on the “proper” outcome of a trial. Then, too, “right” can be in the eye of the beholder.

      I’m going to catch flak for saying this (not that I haven’t said it before) but sometimes the facts and the law just don’t match up to produce the verdict you or I want. Not all evidence is admissible. Not all jurors correctly interpret jury instructions. Some jurors don’t like enforcing laws they don’t believe in. Some prosecutors get all full of themselves and think they can convict a ham sandwich.

    • Observer, these are well made points. The so-called ‘prosecution’ of Zimmerman is fresh in the public eye, and a repeat would not serve justice well. The farce that was the Zimmerman case prosecution, when the prosecutor was far more convincing on HLN than ever he was in the courtroom, has obviously been of benefit to Sneiderman.

  6. I know that Hemy was planning on pleading the 5th and not speaking at Andrea’s trial because he has appeals in the process. I suppose that added to the dilemma of prosecution.

    As far as cameras in the courtroom in AZ, I know that Juan’s next trial, “Chrisman” will be available through live feed and Arias’ hearing was on a feed that was televised after the fact. I will continue to watch live trials. I wish they would bring back Court TV. We, the people, have a right to watch, whether it be on tv or in person.

      • Penny, The Chrisman trial is scheduled to start on July 31st although there is a slight chance of a delay as Juan Martinez has filed a motion to delay. Apparently the defense added a witness at the last minute and Juan wasn’t sure he’d have enough time to depose that witness. There’s a hearing in that matter set up for tomorrow so we should know more then.

        I know cameras have been approved for that trial. Since the Arias trial isn’t scheduled at this time there’s no ruling on cameras yet.

        So in answer to your question, I don’t know if these trials will be televised but the Chrisman trial will be available on live feed via internet. It’s up to networks to pick and choose which ones to televise. We know that the Arias trial will be televised if cameras are approved which I fully expect they will.

        • Tracy, thanks for the heads up about the Chrisman trial. I need to do my homework on the case because I don’t want to miss any case prosecuted by my main man Juan Martinez.:-) Andrea Sneiderman jury selection just got moved to the back burner.

          • I agree Brigid, Juan is the man! An update on the Chrisman trial (Juan’s next case): A new judge was assigned today therefore the live feed is up in the air as of now. Will know more Wed. I know the previous judge approved the live feed but who knows what this next judge will do.

            Penny I think you can bank on the Arias trial being delayed.

            Dr Randle, sorry to hijack this topic.

  7. Nern, I wasn’t aware that Arizona won’t be televising future trials. Seems the taxpayer-funded circus that Judge Stephens allowed backfired.

    Penny, it’s my understanding that Hemy Neuman won’t testify because he’d plead the 5th pending an appeal of his conviction. Does anyone but his jury consider him legally insane? There are some narcissistic, sociopathic types who function just fine at work. I’d classify him in that category. How would a person suffering a psychotic break, usually accompanied by acute paranoia, move up the career path? Or even show up for work? His wife considered him a lousy family man but insane? No way.

    I’m undecided on the merits or lack of in televised trials. The Dr Conrad Murray trial in LA didn’t turn into a media circus. The judge, prosecution and defense behaved with decorum and professionalism. Judge Stephens unfortunately lacked either the expertise or assertiveness to preside in the Arias trial.

    My thinking is that the judge could allow TV cameras and/or live streaming but no network commentary. That would preserve some integrity by shutting down the Jane Velez-Mitchell, Dr. Drew, Jean Casares train & their obnoxious attorney panels until after the trial.

  8. Dr Randle, just wanted to say I appreciate how you run your blog. You clearly state your opinion, allow unedited comments, respond to questions, always with courtesy and respect.

    If readers express differing views, you allow the conversations without further intervening to argue your points. I’m convinced this is what sets you apart from a lot of blogs. It’s impressive. Thank you for giving us this forum.

  9. There is much more to this story than meets the eye. The murder charges will be refiled..Just you wait and see. Andrea Sneiderman is a cold blooded snake. She set this entire scenario up with her husband being killed by Hemy. The burden of proof on conspiracy is much lower in a court of law. The State of Georgia has Sneiderman, hook, line, and sinker. Andrea refused to take a plea deal which was offered to her because she is so narcissistic she truly believes she can skate on the rest of the charges. I have a feeling Andrea is about to get the shock of her life. How convenient Hemy’s lawyer asked a jury to find him mentally ill..So Hemy could continue to protect the love of his life. And I ask each and every single one of you, How did Hemy Neuman know at exactly 9:15 on that cold morning in November Rusty Sneiderman would be taking his son to Dunwoody prep? Ask yourself how he would know..And why would Andrea erase the text message telling Hemy he’d just left. Remember, Hemy was logged in at work moments before Rusty left his house..Andrea set a scenario up so Rusty would have to take Ian to school that morning.. Why did it take her 3 hours to get to the hospital to see about Rusty? When it was only 10-15 minutes away in heavy traffic? The truth is about to come out about Andrea. Wait and see..

    • Robyn, how would she get re-charged on murder? I agree with you about her culpability in plotting Rusty’s murder. But the prosecution dropped those charges and why do you think this was done just before trial? I think they had more than enough evidence, as you stated. I hope you’re right and she’ll be indicted again with murder charges.

    • Robyn I agree with everything you have stated and have thought the samething. Don’t think the will refile murder charges against her though. She will never get what she deserves.

Leave a Comment