I have to disagree about the jurors. As far as I can remember , these cases were all pretty clear cut - OJ and Blake certainly were, with Blake's perhaps being the MOST clear cut. HE had a damn gun in the restaurant. I think Peterson's case was pretty reasonable too. I do think that juries are frequently either biased or stupid or both - they're selected for that (and the general populace isn't that bright these days anyway). THe Jackson jury is composed of morons. Absolute morons. Have you been listening to them for the past few hours? Not a single MENSA candidate in that group. Sometimes people just ARE dumb, and sometimes you get a bunch of them together in one room. That's what happened here. As you say, the DA did not do a good job with the case, but there's enough evidence that a reasonable, non-Michael Jackson fan (I bellieve half of the jury admitted to being MJ fans before the trial began) would have found him guilty of at least one of the charges. This was just a case of stupid fans vindicating their hero and probably hoping to make a buck off it themselves.
Well..I think there has to be some reform -- not to toss the juries, but to improve the system.