Posted on 06/13/2005 12:36:01 PM PDT by Dog
Just breaking...
"But when juror after juror comes out and says they were ticked off by the victim's mother... and it influenced their not guilty verdict."
I agree that if that is the ONLY reason they found MJ not guilty it's not excuseable.
But again...it wouldn't have been an issue if the DA's office had made double sure in their wittness prep that she wouldn't pull something like that.
I feel sure that if you caught Mr. Sneddon in a moment of truthfulness...he'd admit that the mom snapping her fingers at the jury was a bad move on her part as well.
1. Michael Jackson is a freak and a wierdo. His face proves he is mentally ill and his admitted actions prove he is a pervert. Personally, I do not doubt that he is a practicing pedophile.
2. Having said that...in a criminal case it is hard to get a conviction when essentially your whole case rests on the sworn testimony of outlandish liars and scam artists. It just seems like you would have a tough time returning a guilty verdict if you had strong doubts about the credibility of the star witness (you know, ...beyond a reasonable doubt and all that stuff).
3. Having said that ....this jury seemed like a poster child for California vapidity. All that mumbo jumbo about "bonding" and providing a "support system" for each other, but no meaningful reference to the weight given to any of the evidence. I got the feeling that some of them may have thought it would be a real honor to have Jacko's hand in one's jammies. The case was over before the last juror was seated, IMO.
4. On the other hand, an honest-to-God smart jury may have returned the same verdict (see 2 above.)
The bottom line is that I have to just shake my head in amazement that this goofy blankety-blank actually has fans and admirers---millions of them, apparently. It's the same feeling you get when you consider how many people voted for algore. There's just no end to the nutcases out there.
My response was specifically directed to the poster who said that Jackson got off scot free. There was nothing free about this trial for Jackson.
Not so. The youth minister, who had nothing to gain, testified he was molested and Mesereau couldn't touch him on cross.
The question is whether he'll stop sleeping with little boys.
This case was lost because of the mother. Which in my opinion, unfair. The mother was not on trial, MJ was. Even the jurors themselves admitted guilt on the part of MJ by questioning a mother letting their child spend the night at Neverland with MJ. The sad thing is: this jury could not add 2 and 2 together. If this is what degrees brings us today in the school system; degrees are not worth the paper they are printed with.
"BTW, do you think a 40-something man who admits to taking little boys to bed regularly to serve them "some cookies...a little hot milk...." is actually being truthful?"
I think it was almsot too truthful for his own good. That right there should have hung him in this case.
"BTW, do you think a 40-something man who admits to taking little boys to bed regularly to serve them "some cookies...a little hot milk...." is actually being truthful?"
I think it was almost too truthful for his own good. That right there should have hung him in this case.
This jury was afraid to convict a worldwide celebrity. Plain and simple.
None of them seemed to have any backbone. Marcia Clark was on TV saying that even though they think that celebrity played no part in their decision, it did.
I think there was a sheep mentality going on with this jury. There may have been several who had doubts about convicting, but they were too timid to speak up. I would have liked to have heard from the jurors who didn't speak up.
Were they not able to prove he gave alcohol to minors?
Makes one wonder about the men that see nothing wrong with what MJ did.
I never heard about the youth minister. I'm luck I know as much about the case as I do considering where I'm at! LOL! Ok that makes two.
Out of how many?
The most horrifying thing of all is that there will be people lined up waiting to bring their children to the ranch.
I thought you were judged at the pearly gates of heaven?
"Marcia Clark was on TV saying that even though they think that celebrity played no part in their decision, it did."
Glad to see that Marcia Clark recognized denial correctly in this case.
Agreed, the jury was full of morons.
But the jury all said basically that everybody's lying except Michael.
Mez put up a message on the web site saying Jackson had been found INNOCENT.
Of course, he was not.
I would suspect that judges would be likely to fall into the same mindset as many police officers -- since they spend all day, every day, seeing the dregs of humanity, they can get a skewed and pessimistic view about humanity on the whole, and can start thinking that just about everyone must be a scumbag. Am I right? I know several police officers personally, but no judges, so I'm speculating here.
Backing away(actually CYA) from saying that jury took a straw vote when they entered the jury room.
There maybe a repeat later on tonight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.