I foresaw that Michael Jackson could not be convicted on the molestation counts; the onetime case in a possible Jordy Chandler charge (the 1993 incident) would have been a lot stronger. In this instance, the possibility that gold-digging was going on was too potent for a jury to ignore.
I am highly surprised that the lesser counts of intoxicating a minor returned a not-guilty, however. There were numerous people who saw the kids stumbling around drunk, and the lurid accounts of the "Jesus juice" would seem to defy the determination of the jury on this matter. Were they a bit star struck by a really good defense lawyer and a big star? I really think that this one, from the evidence that came out in public, should have stuck, in my non-lawyerly opinion.
Nonetheless, that would be a fairly minor offense to be convicted of. Michael Jackson has got to be a happy guy today. Perhaps he will look a lot less frightened and wan in the days ahead.
Monday, June 13, 2005
A very, very surprising result
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Now that I'm working in the DA's Office, I get the advantage of hearing senior ADAs gossip (LOL!), and one of them made a very convincing case for Jackson's *innocense*, paradoxically, because, she argued pedophilia is a disease, and as a disease it is not constrained to one or two cases. Even Jackson wouldn't have enough money to buy off all the kids he would have molested had he been a real pedophile. So it's quite surprising that no throngs of victims, real or imaginary, came forward to claim their share of 15 minutes and dough.
I'm not expecting him to appear as a changed man. I'm not trying to be horrible here, but that guy has PROBLEMS....even without the charges of pedophilia. He gives me the creeps...which is a shame...because I loved him tons when I was a kid.
Post a Comment