Officials close to the Jackson investigation say they're looking at the decade-old molestation case to help make the new charges stick.
Jim Thomas, former sheriff of Santa Barbara, Calif., says, "Well, in the '93 case, we know that the one victim who settled for supposedly millions of dollars and chose not to testify was one, but we had another in 1993 who also claimed that he was molested."
Prosecutors never brought charges against Jackson in 1993, because the alleged victim refused to cooperate. Documents from that earlier case suggest there may have been other victims. The boy in 1993 is quoted as saying: "Michael Jackson told me that another of his young friends would kiss him ... "
Thomas says, "I would think some of the evidence gathered in the '93 case and the part that I had some supervision on may well be used."
Laurie Levenson, a Loyola Law School professor says, "One of the things the prosecutors would love to use - and, theoretically, they could use - is the 1993 investigation. But it's really a practical question: are they going to get those witnesses to cooperate?"
CBS News legal analyst and defense attorney Mickey Sherman is skeptical. He tells co-anchor Julie Chen, "People who commit this type of crime don't do it once or twice. They usually are serial violators. So that would mean that if he is guilty of this, victims would be coming out of the woodwork easily the last three, four, five years. If that doesn't happen, that's a problem."
CBS News legal analyst and former prosecutor Wendy Murphy says, "I think it's most silly to characterize the case as having become weak. I mean, the case is whatever the child testifies to and that really hasn't changed. We have heard stories about the child's family and so on. If the child testifies under oath and the jury believes him, that's enough to prove a conviction, in this case, beyond a reasonable doubt.
"I think the only reason there is a little bit of a delay because that's common in California. There may be some scheduling issues. The prosecution has an awful lot to go through, in terms of the evidence they uncovered during the search warrants. They've gotten some tips. Maybe they're looking to bump up the charges, but I don't see ... weakening of the case."
Sherman notes, "They had to know they were going to be micro-analyzed by not only us, but the entire world. You don't bring the charges unless you've got a case, and you don't announce it or arrest him if you don't have a case. ... I think they're waiting for new victims to come forward, which makes sense."
Levenson says, "I think people may be reading too much into the fact that the DAs want to take their time in bringing these charges. They've done that in other high-visibility cases, Phil Spector, Robert Blake. ... It seems to me more that they just want to get it right."
It took eight months from his arrest for murder until record producer Phil Spector was charged. And with actor Robert Blake, it took even longer; it was a year before he was officially charged with murdering his wife.
Thomas, the former sheriff, says, "I don't believe the DA and sheriff would have the judge go out and sign a search warrant and arrest warrant and said they are going to file charges to the world unless they already had a case."
While the court battle has yet to begin, the public relations battle is in full swing, as Jackson supporters denounced the charges.
Jackson's friend, Firpo Carr, says, "I'm surprised they haven't accused him of bestiality because he also has a zoo there. I mean, it gets ridiculous after awhile."
Supporters say they'll file a "Friend Of The Court" brief on Jackson's behalf.
Jackson's arraignment is Jan. 9. But don't read that another delay. Sources tell CBS News that date was chosen to accommodate the defense attorney's holiday schedule.
The lawyer for the father of the boy involved in the current case is expected to file court papers possibly as early as Friday, Dec. 5, asking for custody of his child. Currently, the boy's mother has sole custody.