I agree with just about everything in this article...thank you for pointing it out. I also think there is an element of dislike/distrust for the prosecutor Thomas Sneddon who seems to have a vendetta against Jackson.
I've heard it said that the strength of our legal system is the principle that we would rather let ten guilty people go free then convict one innocent person. I've dealt with the result of this case by telling me that Jackson is one of the ten.
I have found the focus on Tom Sneddon to be interesting. The facts are, whether or not Sneddon was "after" MJ, MJ set the stage for this by his behavior. None of his "yes-men" took him somewhere, gave him a good shaking, and said "you really need to stop this."
"None of his "yes-men" took him somewhere, gave him a good shaking, and said "you really need to stop this." I get the feeling that some have, and were promptly fired...the others learned fast.
I've heard it said that the strength of our legal system is the principle that we would rather let ten guilty people go free then convict one innocent person. I've dealt with the result of this case by telling me that Jackson is one of the ten.
Perhaps in high profile cases like the Michael Jackson trial, where the defense is adequate. I don't really have any idea what happened, beyond that MJ is a first-class weirdo; if the jury was in the same position, that really should be considered reasonable doubt.
More routine cases are different. Juries do not take the concept of reasonable doubt seriously, and at the murder trial where my wife was on the jury, the defense attorney didn't even bring it up. When they all went back for deliberations, they agreed that they really had no idea what had happened, and that the only witness who seemed to be telling the truth the entire time was the medical examiner. Even with that, my wife was only able to talk them down to a second-degree conviction.
I don't believe that's one of the celebrities I've been compared to, no... I'll have to look around for a picture of her and see whether I can recognize the resemblance.
I'm guessing you chanced on me through woofiegrrl?
Comments 19
I've heard it said that the strength of our legal system is the principle that we would rather let ten guilty people go free then convict one innocent person. I've dealt with the result of this case by telling me that Jackson is one of the ten.
Reply
I have dealt with the decision the same way.
Reply
I get the feeling that some have, and were promptly fired...the others learned fast.
Reply
Perhaps in high profile cases like the Michael Jackson trial, where the defense is adequate. I don't really have any idea what happened, beyond that MJ is a first-class weirdo; if the jury was in the same position, that really should be considered reasonable doubt.
More routine cases are different. Juries do not take the concept of reasonable doubt seriously, and at the murder trial where my wife was on the jury, the defense attorney didn't even bring it up. When they all went back for deliberations, they agreed that they really had no idea what had happened, and that the only witness who seemed to be telling the truth the entire time was the medical examiner. Even with that, my wife was only able to talk them down to a second-degree conviction.
Reply
Reply
Adding back!
Reply
Reply
I'm guessing you chanced on me through woofiegrrl?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment