Michael Jackson Jury Reaches Verdict

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:36 pm

Sheriff's deputies and court officials said the verdict was to be read after attorneys and Jackson reached the courthouse. The singer was told earlier that he would have about an hour to arrive from his Neverland ranch.

Verdict coming.....

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:42 pm

Should be read at 2:45 (4 minutes from this post).....

mquast53000 · Post by **mquast53000** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:08 pm

I don’t have a TV in front of me, so what are they waiting for? Are they in the courtroom right now receiving the verdict?

GOKATS · Post by **GOKATS** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:10 pm

Have CNN on- the judge is lokoing at the verdict slips now- should be read momentarily.

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:17 pm

Not guilty over and over

You and I would be in jail!

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:19 pm

Not Guilty on all counts....

GOKATS · Post by **GOKATS** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:19 pm

Not guilty on all 10 counts- what a Sham!

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:21 pm

Justice for the rich.

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:21 pm

I feel so good about this I could send my son to stay at the Neverland ranch.....

NOT.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:29 pm

In defense of the jury, the prosecution really didn't seem to have much to work with. It was way too easy for the defense to paint the accusers as money-grubbing legal grifters due to their long documented history as money-grubbing legal grifters.

MJ makes my skin crawl, but I think most of us would have had a hard time convicting him of crimes based on the character of the accusers (meaning the mother). It just begs too many questions about the honesty of the testimony.

Don't get me wrong, I was cheering for the freak show to be some bad man's girlfriend, but I had long since assumed this trial wasn't going to make that happen.

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:33 pm

Well, there's no question he's......BAD.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:37 pm

You suppose he belted out a "HE he!" and ripped off a moonwalk when the verdict was read?

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:38 pm

Now he can go home and BEAT IT.....

mquast53000 · Post by **mquast53000** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:38 pm

Sexual assault crimes are among the hardest to prove guilt. That is why so many rape victims never press charges. You have to relieve a horrible moment in your life and the defense will dig deep into your sexual and personal history and in the end there is seldom a conviction. With the difficulty of getting a conviction on sexual assault and then a person charged with hundreds of millions of dollars, the defendant was innocent the moment they committed the crime.

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:39 pm

He really needs to take a long look at the Man In The Mirror.....

Ok, that's the last one.

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:47 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:In defense of the jury, the prosecution really didn't seem to have much to work with. It was way too easy for the defense to paint the accusers as money-grubbing legal grifters due to their long documented history as money-grubbing legal grifters.

MJ makes my skin crawl, but I think most of us would have had a hard time convicting him of crimes based on the character of the accusers (meaning the mother). It just begs too many questions about the honesty of the testimony.

Don't get me wrong, I was cheering for the freak show to be some bad man's girlfriend, but I had long since assumed this trial wasn't going to make that happen.

BAC I would respond by saying that if you or I or anyone else on this boards family were the family in question, by the time Jackson's Attorney got done with us you me or anyone else would end up looking like the skum of the earth! Unlimited resources and celebrities allows attorneys to dig up any amount of dirt, and turn even the small piece and turn it into a death penalty in the court of public opinion.

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:53 pm

The one and only jury that I have actually been seated on, was a child abuse case, where a
non custodian father was accused of beating and emotional abuse his 5 year old son for
pooping his pants. This happened on a week end visit. The father was a young
professional and the Mom was a struggling single Mom. The father lied on the record,
and was caught in a lie on the stand. The son, story was never varied as he testified to on
the stand . Furthermore police, social workers, his mom, and school councilors all
testified to the story he told them, and they were all consistent. Furthermore, a
emergency room doctor testified that the kids story was consistent with the injuries he
found. Yet when we got into the jury room it was 6 guilty and six 6 innocent first
ballot. The argument for the innocent crowd was that it was that who's story were they
going to believe, this upstanding professional, or this long hair 6 year old (the kid was
older by this time), and that was "reasonable doubt" There was only two people in that
jury room who refused to role-over into the reasonable doubt camp, myself and a 60 year
old grandmother of 12. It took 10 hours to get through to some fellow jurors that the
father lied on the stand, and to get around some people not wanting to see this "nice"
father labeled an abuser for the rest of his life. We found the guy guilt on the major
charge, but essentially horse traded on some of the minor charges. It was totally eye
opening how people just do not want to see the worse in people, and how difficult it is,
when people have to make the difficult , tough decision to make it when the correct
choice will have long lasting effect on an individual.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:54 pm

mslacat wrote:BAC I would respond by saying that if you or I or anyone else on this boards family were the family in question, by the time Jackson's Attorney got done with us you me or anyone else would end up looking like the skum of the earth! Unlimited resources and celebrities allows attorneys to dig up any amount of dirt, and turn even the small piece and turn it into a death penalty in the court of public opinion.

I agree, but this family's history was way too easy to spin that direction. They had evidence of her suing others in the past (JC Penney, I think), and caught her in several instances of lying and acting unethically. Of any potential accuser, this family just happened to be a really easy one for the defense to discredit.

On the flipside, if MJ would not have been a celebrity, there is a chance this case would have never been prosecuted with this set of facts. It seems that this case is somewhat personal to the D.A. (I think he tried to take MJ to trial once before, but MJ paid off the family before that could happen).

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:02 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
mslacat wrote:BAC I would respond by saying that if you or I or anyone else on this boards family were the family in question, by the time Jackson's Attorney got done with us you me or anyone else would end up looking like the skum of the earth! Unlimited resources and celebrities allows attorneys to dig up any amount of dirt, and turn even the small piece and turn it into a death penalty in the court of public opinion.
I agree, but this family's history was way too easy to spin that direction. They had evidence of her suing others in the past (JC Penney, I think), and caught her in several instances of lying and acting unethically. Of any potential accuser, this family just happened to be a really easy one for the defense to discredit.

On the flipside, if MJ would not have been a celebrity, there is a chance this case would have never been prosecuted with this set of facts. It seems that this case is somewhat personal to the D.A. (I think he tried to take MJ to trial once before, but MJ paid off the family before that could happen).

From everything I have heard this case was as strong a this type of case gets. I heard this just today.

I refuse to allow the the failings or crimes of the parents to allow a young kid to be abused. The parents may have been shady, but that should not allow a very rich person to abuse abuse the child and then blame it on the parents. Charge the parents, Jail the parents, make them drink "New Coke" all day long, but we as a society must protect our children!!!

Post by **SonomaCat** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:12 pm

Well, all I can say is "Apparently not," as the jury found that the evidence wasn't strong enough. They probably are much more objective and studied the evidence much more thoroughly than the commentators we have both been getting our information from.

Like I said, I don't like MJ, and I suspect he probably has done some bad things, but my views are simply a small part of "public opinion." I have to trust the court system to come up with answers that are more correct than our distant opinions and feelings dictate.