One juror said that the mother (hispanic) snapped her finger at him (hispanic) and said, “You know, that’s how it is in our culture.” He said he thought to himself, ‘Um, no. That’s not how it is in our culture’.
So, if a person is sexually attracted to young boys, but doesn’t act on it, is that enough reason to imprison that person?
Shouldn’t they be in witless protection?
after they are taken in custardy
Not necessarily. O.J. was found not guilty but lost the civil case. The burden of proof in a civil case is lower than in a criminal case; preponderance of evidence vs reasonable doubt. Also civil juries need not be unanimous. That being said I think the accusers are facing an uphill battle and civil court and it’ll probally be settle out of court with no admission of wrongdoing.
I have to agree that it wasn’t much of a case. MJ may be guilty of molestation in other cases, but it’s extremely doubtful in this one. Those witnesses/accusers had zero credibility, and I’m more than a bit puzzled the prosecutor’s office even bothered to take it to court.
However, it was very gratifying that the defence attorneys resisted the temptation to play the race card … or did I miss that? …
The civil case is tougher for the accuser as well. A lot of the stuff that wasn’t allowed in the trial can be allowed in a civil case. If they weren’t believed with the protection of the state, what chance to they have in a no-holds barred civil suit?
I think Michael’s race (and his gender) stopped being clear cut long ago.
It’s the worst system there is…except all the others.
If that is the only fact we have, you are absolutely correct…not enough reason to imprison that person…But in Michael’s case as you know he went to bed with them, carried around porno materials and you know the rest.
I received enormous pleasure seeing all those pundits from Fox & elsewhere who had proclaimed loudly and with absolute certainty that Jackson was going to be found guilty being forced to eat their words. What made me particularly happy was seeing how pissed-off Nancy Grace – the most evil, despicable, hate-fueled harridan bitch of the entire Universe – was made by the not guilty verdict!
What joy!!
Innocently, according to the boys who actually slept there…
The jury made a point of saying that anyone can legally possess that material and it was a completely spurious matter to them.
And lest anyone think this was just a matter of reasonable doubt, let’s recall that the jurors also considered the accuser and his family to be flat-out liars. That, my friends, is innocent. Not just not guilty, but innocent.
Um, no, no it’s not. Several of the jurors have said that the believe that Jackson is most likely a child molestor. They just found the mother to be uncredible.
The jury’s duty was to rule on just this specific case. Not to find Jackson guilty of other past crimes he may have committed.
I KNOW that. I’m merely pointing out that people shouldn’t read an acquital in ANY case, not just this one, as a person being declared innocent.
Of course they should. Acquittal means innocence of the charges.
No. There’s no such thing as being found “innocent” in a court of law. Jackson was found “not guilty” on all charges.