Skip to comments.Congratulations Michael, now please, get help
Posted on 06/14/2005 7:32:32 AM PDT by Asphalt
Michael Jackson's fans were cheering and hugging each other Monday outside the courtroom where he was acquitted on all counts in his child molestation case. But it was impossible for us to get excited over the verdict. You could feel relief that this case was over and the 46-year-old "King of Pop" had gotten his day in court, but no number of "not guilty" pronouncements could erase the taint of the "lifestyle" choices that got him into trouble.
As Jackson was driven away in a funereal black vehicle, under the gaze of a now standard-issue helicopter camera, we wondered how he will respond to being freed of accusations some experts were sure he would be convicted of and even those who thought otherwise acknowledged came dangerously close to criminal behavior. Will the owner and aging lost boy of Neverland continue to insist he is pure of heart and spirit, did nothing wrong in sleeping with underage boys and faces no greater challenge than being misunderstood? Or will he respond to his brush with years in prison by facing up to his psychological problems and seeking help for them?
In saying "the healing process must begin," Jesse Jackson may have been talking about recovering from the grueling trial and its coverage. But Michael Jackson has deeper personal issues to deal with -- including, possibly, being in a state of denial. His strange appearance at the courtroom in his pajamas, his stomping on the roof of his SUV, his mystery trips to the E.R. certainly did nothing to establish his stability.
He will live with the knowledge that he owes his freedom to the prosecution's haphazard case as much as his pleas of innocence or any skillful turns by the defense to support them. This was a case, built and rebuilt over a decade by Santa Barbara County District Attorney Thomas Sneddon, undone by prosecution witnesses seemingly hired by the defense. They included a young accuser who kept changing his story; the accuser's mother, who came off as a gold digger and, in allowing him to sleep in Jackson's bed, a derelict parent, and an ex-wife of Jackson's, Debbie Rowe, who was brought in by prosecutors to testify against him but spoke of what a wonderful father he was. This despite being involved in a custody battle with him.
In the end, even as this verdict is applauded for showing you're not guilty until proven so in this country, it will, for some, confirm the notion that celebrities get their way in the justice system. Will Jackson's biggest media moment since "Thriller" recharge his career, which was on an artistic and commercial decline before the molestation charges were raised? Perhaps if he stops blaming other people for his misfortunes and starts taking responsibility for them. But if he continues living in his fantasy world, any buzz from this trial will wear off as fast as cable news can find another scandal to obsess over.
I watched the jurors being interviewed and it was like taking a train ride into idiot land with no stops. They couldn't even put two sentences together to save their butts. The reasonings for their verdict was pathetic and appalling.
His supporters are ignorant morons. I can't even stand to look at the guy's horrifying face without it sending a cold shiver through my soul. CNN noted he looked "stunned" when the verdict was reached. Gee, I wonder why? Probably because he's guilty as sin.
1 to 1 Jackson puts out an album called "VINDICATION" and a video of him 100 foot tall acting like a Superhero who destroys the "evil" Tom Sneddon while children scream "We love you Michael"!
My opinion, that most seem to disagree with, is that in this particular case Jacko is innocent. The prosecution had one of the crappiest cases ever. however, I would say that it is more than likely that in the past he has molested boys. It all sounds rather fishy.
Michael Jackson is online this morning sending a 55 gallon drum of Vasoline to Sneddon.
He's knows God is going to get him. BTW That's no umbrella it's a lightning rod.
I wonder if he knows which muscles in his face make a "stunned" look anymore ?
The reasonings for their verdict were perfectly understandable, given the behavior of the mother and the lack of evidence that MJ did anything to her kid.
Jackson molested children, but the prosecution simply didn't prove that he molested this child.
And that's really unfortunate.
I hope they meant that sarcastically or did they also congratulate OJ after he turned his ex-wife into a human facsimile of a Pez dispenser?
"I watched the jurors being interviewed and it was like taking a train ride into idiot land with no stops. They couldn't even put two sentences together to save their butts. The reasonings for their verdict was pathetic and appalling."
jury of his piers
It wasn't about the mother damn. So, you're saying that if a child has a crappy mother, the child should not be believed, therefore, no justice? What kind of bullsh*t is that????
Did you by any chance see the interview with the jury foreman on the Nancy Grace show? She was disgusted, and so was I--and by the time she was done with him, I do believe he looked a little ashamed of himself. (And well he should have.) The question she kept asking was, What on earth did he think a man in his 40s doing in bed with little boys who weren't his own all those night. He wouldn't give a straight answer--but it was obvious he thought the same thing I did--he was molesting the children. YET, he voted "not guilty" on all counts.
Maybe "our" country
is in worse shape than we think.
I mean, if these folks
are "average," how
can a country exist that's
by, for and of them?!
"The reasonings for their verdict were perfectly understandable, given the behavior of the mother and the lack of evidence that MJ did anything to her kid."
I didn't follow it that closely, but that's the information I get. Not that MJ is totally innocent, just that there wasn't enough evidence in this one case.
I'm a rebel, especially when it comes to protecting people from filth like this. I would have voted him guilty not because of the preponderance of evidence, but because of the pattern.
I saw that and I was appalled. Nancy Grace had his butt cornered and he totally couldn't take the heat. If you can't explain your verdict in depth and sound confident about it then something is wrong.
One, I don't think this jury would have convicted him even if they'd had video of him committing the crimes. Two, once a child molester, always a child molester. They can't turn it off. Releasing him is a guarantee that more boys will be molested, and that it will be more difficult to prosecute him in the future. In fact, probably impossible.
Don't know. Congrats that he escaped, reguardless of whether he was guilty.
If OJ really was framed, then he is the luckiest man in the world, and that was one heck of a frame. If he wasn't, which seemse far more than likely, then I feel very sorry for relatives of the wife.
? Don't kknow, I didn't write it.
Fox reported the same thing and I wondered if he had hoped to be convicted.
Does double jeopordy mean he can't be convicted of molesting that particular boy again, or anyone in general
I can't help but think of his own children and how much danger they are in now........let alone the weird costumes he makes them wear.
If a child has a mother with a history of bilking companies and celebrities, he likely won't be believed.
That's too bad, but mama's background had "reasonable doubt" all over it, even before she made a fool of herself under cross examination.
"but it was obvious he thought the same thing I did--he was molesting the children. YET, he voted "not guilty" on all counts."
That's how it works in America. The jury was taken by MJ's celebrity. It's entirely possible, (probable?), that some jurors will benefit financially from this decision. If you have enough money, you can do anything in America.
If this was an average joe on trial, he'd be locked away so long, he'd forget his own name.
Sad, and sick.
Another California jury , what did you expect ??
Mikie should go to Amsterdam and join NAMBLA where they turn a blind eye to child molesters . lol...
Some people are saying exactly that. It's the "person of privilege" argument: only those who come from the best, most prosperous families should ever have the right to bring a case to court. All others will be threatened, spied on, and smeared by the Pelicano thugs (same company the Clintons hired, btw). And the stupid peasants will believe it all--after all, it came from a person of privilege.
Well, guess what? It was JC Pennys' dumbass decision to settle with her! If they thought they were in the right then they shouldn't have settled. They settled so she got paid.
This post says it all.
D.J. means just this one boy. However, it's going to be very difficult--maybe impossible--to try him again given the outcome of this trial. Plus, states and communities seem to have limited financial resources, while even allegedly bankrupt "superstars" manage to continue coming up with millions to pay off lawyers--and perhaps witnesses. (One magazine has the Jackson defense team offering a "blank check" to the 1993 accuser, if he would agree not to testify at this trial.)
Maybe you meant "naive"?
Anyway, I heard that the very first vote, taken immediately after selection of the jury foreman, was a unanimous "not guilty" on all counts.
IOW, the entire jury left that courtroom convinced that Sneddon had not proven his case. Apparently they spent the last week talking through each count to make sure they hadn't overlooked anything (or to convince themselves).
There were no subversives on this jury. The prosecutor simply did a horrible job, and has allowed a pedophile to walk.
That jury foreman is as disgusting and low a degenerate as Michael Jackson. HE KNOWS that Jackson is a molester. HE KNOWS THAT and he found him not guilty. I couldn't live with myself if I let a child molester go free. What a disgusting bunch of cowardly, witless, pervert-enablers!
O.F., YES, I think so too. In fact, I've often wondered over the years if he was simply growing his own abuse victims, the kind no one can take away from him.
Average Californians, helping dumb down the reputation of the populace.
Laureen Applehead, left, and Fred Maze, both from France, hold a newspaper with a "Not Guilty" headline outside Neverland Ranch in Los Olivos, Calif., after Michael Jackson was acquitted in his child molestation case Monday, June 13, 2005. Jackson was cleared of all charges Monday after a bitter four-month trial. (AP Photo/Nick Ut)
As Nancy Grace put it, "Not guilty by reason of celebrity." You know, someone should tell Arnold that the state can save a lot of money by just not trying celebrity cases in the first place--the juries will just cut them loose, so why bother?
As far as I know, double jeopardy only applies to this particular boy. If he molested someone else, and it comes out, they should be able to try him for that.
My bet is that we'll be hearing from the kids in the next 10 years or so....
Sadly, I believe their lives have little to no hope of 'normalcy'. But with a media light in their face, they may tell on Daddy without batting an eye.
Double Jeopardy means that he can't be tried for the same crime more than once. He can certainly be tried for other crimes.
I watched the idiot woman who released the doves. For your info everyone of those doves will die because they were raised in captivity and depend on humans to feed them. Made me sick. I have an African Grey Parrot that we raised from an infant. He could no way take care of himself in the wild. Nice goin A##holes.
But I'll bet a buck or two he doesn't rename his estate "Neveragainland"...
Well, sure they did. After all, that horrid woman snapped her fingers at them. /sarcasm
In other words, MJ could be tried if the prosecutor gets wind of NEW instances in which MJ molested ANYONE, including that same boy. He just can't be tried for the same instances of molestation.
LOL! They even commented that they didn't like the way the mother dressed!
Well, Jackson has this multi-million dollar child-trap all baited and set--it WILL happen again, and chances aren't that slight that a relative of these jurors could be a future "special friend." Especially the Hispanic jurors: he seems to prefer those little boys.
And we are supposed to take this verdict seriously? People who can barely construct a coherent sentence and who focus on trivialities such as somone snapping their fingers or dressing poorly?????? People who admit that they think Jackson is a molester but find him not guilty anyway????? These jurors are obviously morons. If this is what the average American actually IS like, then the country is lost.