By supporting him, you are.
Get me banned if you must stiffle my opinion.
And frankly, I have nothing to be ashamed of; I'm not the one thinking it's all hunky dorey that a pedophile is on the loose to night.
Thankfully, I did not really watch this one that close.
Did anyone here actually think a California Jury could find someone guilty of such a serious offense? The jury is probably smoking a joint with Jackson now.
I wonder if anyone can have a differing opinion than you without your resorting to the most childish and offensive tactics.
In any case, I'm finished discussing this with you.
I guess MJ will have to cozy up to his porn magazines tonight. I just hope he is NEVER allowed to be alone with a child again.
I used to work for a judge who spent a lot of time in the superior court system here in GA - about 20 years.
He says that when he started on the bench, child molestation allegations were few and far between, and they were almost always true and the alleged perps found guilty. But in the last 5 years he spent on the trial court bench (about 10 years ago), he started seeing child molestation allegations brought into EVERY divorce trial. Now the courts are seeing not only false allegations brought by bitter ex-wives and ex-girlfriends (and even in a couple of cases by the ex-HUSBAND against the ex-wife), but also extortion schemes and revenge allegations by disgruntled friends/neighbors/etc.
It is not beyond the realm of probability for a grifter or grifters to latch onto somebody as obviously certifiably WEIRD as Jackson. And some prosecutors are still in the old-fashioned 15-years-ago mode that, if a child alleges molestation, it must be true.
Jackson looks like a molester to me. But my private opinion doesn't amount to a conviction in a court of law. The prosecutor has to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
I didn't follow this case too closely, but it may be that the prosecutor just didn't manage to do that, plus he was handicapped by the grifter background of the complaining witness's mom. The jury is authorized to disbelieve ALL her testimony if she is shown to have lied on some particular, they may have believed that she put her son up to it. And, of course, that does happen.
Howlin, I understand your concern that a pedophile may have dodged a bullet here. But the legal safeguards are not just there to protect the guilty - they also protect you and me if somebody with a grudge decides to run to the DA with a cooked up story and a coached child. If we start cutting corners because we "know" somebody is guilty, that's a recipe for disaster because it will put the unpopular and the different into prison or the electric chair for sure.