Posted on 06/14/2005 1:53:54 AM PDT by Mo1
SANTA MARIA, Calif. -- One of the jurors who acquitted Michael Jackson on all counts said he believes the pop star is "probably" a molester, but the prosecution didn't prove it.
In an interview on CNN, juror Raymond Hultman questioned the way Jackson has shared his bedroom and bed with young boys. Hultman said "that doesn't make sense" to him.
But, he said, that didn't make Jackson guilty of the charges presented in this case.
Jackson is back home at his Neverland ranch after being found not guilty on all 10 counts in his molestation and conspiracy trial.
Jackson looked straight ahead as the not guilty verdict was read, vindicating the pop star who insisted he was the victim of mother-and-son con artists and a prosecutor with a vendetta. The singer dabbed at his eyes while hearing the court clerk announce his acquittal on all counts.
One of Jackson's lawyers burst into tears as the verdict was announced. He later got hugs from her and from head lawyer Thomas Mesereau.
Jurors also acquitted Jackson of conspiring to imprison his accuser and the boy's family at his storybook estate. It was a total legal victory for Jackson and his defense team.
Screams of joy rang out among a throng of fans outside the courthouse as the not guilty verdict was read on the final charge. Jackson had been facing a possible sentence of more than 18 years in prison.
The jury heard some 14 weeks of testimony, then deliberated for more than 30 hours.
Jackson appeared stone-faced as he began to walk out of the courthouse, flanked by sisters LaToya and Janet. His brother, Jermaine, could be seen smiling while waiting for him to exit.
Jackson held a hand out in front of him in a mini-wave while being escorted to his vehicle by security guards
As the screams from supporters grew louder, Jackson touched his heart twice and waved again before blowing a kiss to the crowd. He was then put into his black SUV before his caravan drove away -- chased by some fans.
"This proves that justice can prevail in America," one fan said.
"We love you Michael!" shouted Tara Bardella, 19, who was in the crowd outside the courthouse.
Cheers of "innocent" erupted outside the courthouse after the verdicts were read. More than 300 anxious fans and onlookers had waited for the verdicts outside the courthouse in Santa Maria. They chanted "innocent" in unison as they pressed against a chain link fence that served as a barrier.
Some waved signs that read "Keep Michael Free" and stood atop stepladders to get a better look.
Jurors in the Jackson trial are hoping it's from here to obscurity for them.
After the innocent verdicts were announced, the judge read a statement from the jury that said: "We the jury feel the weight of the world's eyes upon us." The jurors asked to be allowed to return to "our private lives as anonymously as we came."
The jurors did meet with reporters after the trial. One juror said the process of reaching a verdict was simple -- they all "just looked at the evidence and pretty much agreed" that Michael Jackson was innocent.
The jurors who acquitted the singer on all counts said they made it a point from the beginning to look at Jackson as an ordinary person, not a star. They said from there, it was easier to deal with the case.
They said the intense media glare on the case didn't make them uncomfortable. What did make one juror uncomfortable was the mother of Jackson's accuser.
Juror No. 5 said she remembered the woman snapping her fingers at the jury. The juror said she thought to herself, "Don't snap your fingers at me, lady."
Another juror said she wonders why the accuser was allowed to stay with Jackson so long -- saying no mother "in her right mind" would let her child just go off and sleep with someone, Michael Jackson or anyone else.
Jackson, 46, had been charged with conspiracy to commit child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion, three counts of committing lewd acts upon a child, one count of attempted lewd acts upon a child, and four counts of administering intoxicating agents to assist in the commission of a felony.
Mesereau said justice was done in the case.
"The man's innocent. He always was," Mesereau said in a statement on a Jackson Web site.
I never thought of that before ... but I think you are correct
I have never understood the cult like actions of people towards celebrities
I had never read that short story but have read Anderson years ago. Thanks, it was compelling.
I hate to say it, but the jury apparently did what they were supposed to, based on a reasonable doubt. I think MJ's guilty, but I was not on that panel. Therefore, my opinion means naught.
From what I've heard of their "reasoning" I have to agree. There seems to be no one on the jury who had an ounce of common sense. They were determined to let Jackson go free.
If you found your young son sleeping in the same bed with an adult man, what would you assume was going on?
Nevermind, it's Michael Jackson, and he is just showing them how much he loves them with warm milk and cookies after wards.
His defenders paint a picture of a persecuted Saint.
Great story. Thanks for the link.
Umm its still wrong, MJ should have slept in one of the other ten thousand rooms in that side show called neverland. As an Adult you dont sleep in bed with kids who are not your own..
I think Jackson is an idiot for phrasing this in such a way that it sounds like he's spooning ten-year-olds.
No hes not an idiot hes sick. Is he a pedophile? I would think so but it seems it has not been pr oven. Is he mentally Ill you bet...
I have the same system you do. The man clearly molested this little boy and others.
Just because the mother is unlikeable does not mean Jackson did not hurt these children.
I cannot understand why so many people on this thread think justice was served in this case. I wonder how many of the same think O.J. is innocent for the same reasons.
My other point is, just because a jury voted unanimously for something does not mean it is a just verdict. "The jury listened to all the evidence, blah, blah, blah...." well sometimes lack of intelligence and reasoning skills, and over-emotionality, pandered to by racial guilt or vengeance, leads to injust verdicts.
As I believe was the case here. And Robert Blake. And O.J.
Me sleeping in the same bed with my own son is a lot different than than an unrelated man getting my boy in the same bed to sleep with him. And actually, either my boy or I would probabbly choose a floor to sleep on rather than the same bed at this point in our lives.
I'm not sure how anyone could justify a 40 year old man in the same bed with a 13 year old kid is simply wrong on its face. Qualifies as "lewd behavior with a child" in my book. Felony? Ho. That gets reserved for an actual proven sexual assault or sex act. This jury should have at least sent MJ a message - "While you're on this planet, buddy, stay out of the same bed that an unrelated kid is sleeping in".
IMHO, this rises to an equivalent level of, say, Pee Wee Herman, pleasuring himself in a movie theater showing gay porn, two homos engaged in a consensual sex act in a park restroom, or the guy exposing himself in a grocery store. Not a felony, but against the standards and mores of our society, and a misdemeanor.
It would be great if he gets busted in Bangkok. He wouldnt get off if caught. He would have to do real time, in a real prison!
The same thing happened with OJ.
The prosecutors spent way too much time on DNA evidence that was way over the heads of these minimally-intelligent people on the jury. And the domestic violence angle did not fly either.
If they had stuck to simple blood evidence-- blood in the Bronco, blood drops in the hall BEFORE the vials were collected, OJ's blood at the crime scene, etc, they would have had a better chance. Of course the worse blunder in criminal history was the glove, because the jury was too stupid to figure out that blood would make the glove shrink, number one, and that trying to put a tight fitting glove over latex is impossible. There were enormous mistakes in that trial, but the worst mistake was the location of the trial and that miserable jury pool.
It seems you cannot win with celebrity-struck dunderheads anyway. It is pathetic.
I'll stand corrected on that if I'm wrong, but that's how someone explained it to me this morning.
No, it's warm milk and cookies first. That's part of the seduction.
For the afterwards he throws $100 bills at them.
Not quite accurate. Of course there have been thousands of inaccurate statements regarding this case and California.
I can quickly think of one celebrity, and no doubt there are more.
In 1990, Christian Brando shot and killed the lover of Brando's daughter in in Beverly Hills. Christian Brando was eventually found guilty of voluntary manslaughter and sentenced to 10 years.
You'll get no defense of Jackson from me. However, as I understand it, the definition of "lewd act" requires some sort of inappropriate physical contact. "Just sleeping" doesn't qualify. Juries are not allowed to redefine crimes to send a message.
I happen not to have a son, but if I did MJ wouldn't get anywhere near him.
I think we'll agree to disagree on this point, but I'll point out that I think there's a difference between inviting someone to your bed and simply crashing with them after a late night.
Both are inappropriate..
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.