home

Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS

By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Mon Jun 13, 2005 at 02:33:04 PM EST
Tags: Michael Jackson, Michael Jackson Trial (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Verdict Watch, Day 7
Monday June 13, 2005

Congratulations to Michael Jackson....Not Guilty on all counts! Kudos to Tom Mesereau and team. Shame on DA Tom Sneddon, man on a mission.

Other losers:

Sneddon Press Conference: He's not going to quarrel with the jury's verdict. He has not spoken with accuser or family. Denies that his past history with Michael Jackson had anything to do with his office's decision to file.

Regarding the juror who was going to write a book: The Court took care of that. Is this the end of his office prosecuting Michael Jackson? "No Comment." Criticism of the Judge? None. Evaluation of the defense team? No Comment.

The juror's press conference:

Which witnesses were credible? The telephone people. Kiki and Jesus. That's it.

The timeline was a concern. The mother clearly bombed with them - particularly when she snapped her fingers at them. On adult magazines: anyone could own them. The prosecution didn't prove the charge. They considered every piece of evidence as important. It wasn't one thing. It just wasn't enough. They wondered several times if the accuser's family wasn't running a scam.

Update: Some early legal analysis. Some News Analysis: here and here.
Former LA prosecutor David Conn, who prosecuted the Menendez brothers, said on Keith Olberman's show tonight that Tom Snedden should never have brought the case in the first instance.

Update: Tom Mesereau:

"Justice is done. The man's innocent. He always was."

The blank Verdict form (showing all the choices)is here (pdf.)

The Guardian on DA Tom Sneddon.

Update: More from the juror's news conference:

Jurors said they were especially put off when the mother snapped her fingers at them while on the stand. "I disliked it intensely when she snapped her fingers at us. That's when I thought `Don't snap your fingers at me, lady,' said juror No. 5, a retired widow.

Juror No. 2 indicated he felt the mother singled him out because he was a fellow Hispanic. "The mother, when she looked at me and snapped her fingers a few times and she says, 'You know how our culture is,' and winks at me, I thought, 'No, that's not the way our culture is."

Leaving Court a Free Man

larger version

Update: The "Guilt Sells" Crowd eats crow.

< Poll: Don't Arrest Medical Marijuana Users | Schapelle Corby: Message From Family >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS | 43 comments (43 topical)
    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#1)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    This just proves that a rich white man can get away with anything.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#2)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    Congratulations to anyone in this case just doesn't seem right. Jackson escaped conviction, but he can't escape himself. This boy can't escape himself either. And the boy is ruined far worse because he is a child, manipulated by adults, Jackson included. MJ held his own baby out of a high-rise window (a completely negligent act), who has security systems to warn him when anyone is coming to interrupt his boy time, who has paid off claims in the past, and on and on. He had no choice here (he simply could not have paid off this kid) and he won. The dice came up his way. That's it. There is no joy in Mudville, J, only relief that it will finally be out of the press. And sorrow for a child who will probably never live a normal life. Thanks to everyone involved, parents, media, public, celebrity, you name it. Blame his parents all you want (and they certainly bear scrutiny), his parents aren't HIM. And HIS plight was never the focus of this trial. Then again, folks like me are too close to the abuse issue and would never get on a jury. Guess I'm too experienced to have a trustworthy opinion.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#3)
    by DawesFred60 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    Oh well that is what money will do for you, but can i ask why did he pay out so much money to other families? I really do not understand this nut case.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#4)
    by Domino on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    I believe in the courts. He was found not guilty, so I believe he is not guilty.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    roscoe, i believe in the courts as well, but i also realise that juries aren't infallible. btw, the comment upthread from dadler is spot on.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    I believe in the courts based on each individual case, based on each verdict. To say you believe in anything blindly, and trust its outcome is naive. I had a foster brother stabbed to death twenty-five years ago, we all know who did it, but the courts couldn't do anything. The last jury I sat on was people with nimcompoops, people who couldn't even grasp what the case was really about. Courts and trials are like anything else. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't, sometimes luck or wealth play as much a role as truth or "evidence". In this case I say they played a large role. The kids parents were on trial, most of the time, not Jackson, and that's the way the system works. Just like with rape victims.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#7)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    And now.... Phil Specter!

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    "And sorrow for a child who will probably never live a normal life." That's his mother's fault, not Michael Jackson's.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#9)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    Breaking news: Saddam is requesting a venue change to either Santa Monica or Santa Maria.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    I have no idea whether he did what was alleged or not. The added media attention only increases my doubt of his guilt. Celebrity trials are guaranteed from the beginning to be full of biases, innuendo, and half truths - but all that is being ignored in the world for the sake of this trial stinks to me of the media choosing to focus American minds somewhere at the expense of something else. I am suspect of the mental health of anyone that would willingly mutilate their bodies without any pressing health concern forcing the issue; however, I acknowledge that the wealthy (and others) have eccentricities that do not automatically equate to pedophilia. Once again, the most troubling thing about the case is the way that so many have invested their egos in a particular side of this issue -- I've seen Gloria Allred before and she is just as much a freak show as Jackson. But the lesson to be learned here is that appearances do not equate to guilt - as with any other media case, I doubt that anyone here (except maybe Jeralyn) really knows anything about the actual evidence.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    dadler...Blagh hears ya, bud. Bill O'Reilly, in near-orgasmic anticipation of a guilty-verdict, has loudly and repeatedly affirmed his confidence in this "regular jury" (read- no irritating n!ggers to spoil the lynching), and one wonders what his reaction will be... Blaghdaddy, for one, will be closely monitoring Shrill's Fudge Factor this evening... Too many things about this case reeked...the only verdict was "not guilty" due or not due to massive fodder for "reasonable doubt...." Remember when the boy and his puta mother took the stand? Even those who wanted Jacko's head on a platter admitted that the case was considerably weakened by their performance... "But!" they hastily added... No "buts" in American jurisprudence, and we all know that, when it works properly. As Arsenio called them, "things that make you go 'hmmm'" are what American jurisprudence calls "reasonable doubt." Like it or lump it, you can't criticize this decision if you've followed any of it. You don't lock a guy up for twenty years 'cause you disapprove of his ways with willing kids and negligent parents- either they proved it, or not, and they didn't...anyone who says they did was already measuring Jacko for an orange suit before the first witness was called. And being weird, a freak or incredibly obtuse is not a crime, or I'd be locked up too...

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    why did he pay out so much money to other families? Michael Jackson was not on trial for molesting other boys. If the jury had found him guilty because they thought he molested the other boys, but they weren't sure he was guilty of the act he was charged for, they would have violated the oath they took when they were sworn in. Thankfully, the jury respected the law, obeyed the judge's instructions, and resisted the temptation to convict Jackson for prior acts.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    You really should include Larry King and Nancy Grace in your list of losers.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    I still think that MJ is a pedophile but it wasn't proved beyond a resonable doubt in this case. He'll be up again on similar charges in the future...no doubt. Watching the jury press conference, the jury seems to be a group of pretty normal people. They don't strike me a brain trust but they seem like honest, decent citizens. Good for them. I'm not a MJ fan but I don't ever want to see someone railroaded into prison.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#15)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    Jeralyn, I love you, but saying anything is anyone's fault in this trial is absurd. This trial was about anything but truth or fact-finding or adults acting as such. It was a game. That's it. The kid comes from a f**ked up family, which ain't his fault, and happens to be something I know reams about. My testimony about abuse in my mom's first divorce trial was discredited by my stepdad's attornies, who argued that I was the product of a terrible mother and mentally unstable. So maybe I'm not the best one to make unbiased comments, but my mother (a great, loving woman) made terrible choices when she was younger, that her children suffered from as well, and had my stepfather had more money she would've been destroyed, my little brother would've ended up with an abuser for the rest of his life, and all because it's a game most often, not because it's a search for truth. If you genuinely think this claim was fabricated, you should file a brief on his behalf to get him out of his parents' custody, like we all should. But we don't because we're mostly full of s**, and we're all about the payoff, the verdict, the game. This kid has been dicked over by everyone, from his family (whom I'm not defending but playing devils' advocate with), and of course Jackson, who seems incapable of understanding there are limits in life. Limits to what you can do, and what you can't do.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#16)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    Blagh, I said nothing other than don't look to the courts for truth. You look for a decision. Truth is a rare thing we usually hide from, prosecutors AND defenders. The court ruled, and we go onward. But at least the kid and his mother TOOK the stand. I know, I know, fifth amendment with Jacko, invaluable, can't be held against him, I'd never wanna dump that obviously, but you think Jackson would've done better had he been questioned? Of course not. But he's free. That's the system. A game. Just a game.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#17)
    by Domino on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    Jackson did not take the stand? So what? This trial was not for your entertainment.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    I still think he probably did it, but better a guilty man walk free than an innocent man be in prison. On that note, I am going to have a huge Michael Jackson party this weekend. Everyone will drink wine out of coke cans.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#19)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    The accuser's mother snapped her fingers at the jury? What was that all about?

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    Dadler, hope this ruined your day. Be comforted in the fact that you can still make fun of his nose. If youd like i can send you a picture of me. I would be quilty of everything if one was to judge by my disfigurements.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#21)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    i didn't say he had to or should've taken the stand, it's his right not to. i was saying that had he, it is doubtful he would've come off any better than the kid or his family. more likely, the jury would've had a fuller picture of the situation and the man on trial. but that's not what this particular trial was about, like most celebrity trials. they're about the game, the ratings, and the egos of those involved, prosecutors and defenders alike.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#22)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    sorry, last post was for roscoe domino -- and i hope that's his real name and that he plays piano in a band.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    Chris Matthews and Dan Abrams are unhappy Jackson wasn't found guilty and now are attacking the jury for saying bad things about the mother. Matthews wants the jury to say if they would let their kids go to Neverland...what a tool he is

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#24)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:00 PM EST
    The system provided a verdict. What else can be said? They declared him not guilty. They didn't declare him innocent.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#25)
    by Paralegal on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    "And sorrow for a child who will probably never live a normal life." "That's his mother's fault, not Michael Jackson's." This could all be said about Michael Jackon's parents.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    They didn't declare him innocent. Thanks for the fascisti translation. His innocence was supposed to be assumed, barring a verdict of guilty. Since that verdict never came, he is assumed innocent.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#27)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    da lurker, what on earth are you on? i've never made a crack about how Jackson looks, or that it should have any bearing on things. i'm in the entertainment business. we're ALL freaks.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#28)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Seems like an intelligent group of people came to a well deliberated verdict. The rest is all circus.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#29)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    I didn't follow the case at all, so I can't say I would be shocked either way. A repeating theme I've heard though is some surprise that he wasn't found guilty on the charge of providing alcohol to a minor.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#30)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    TS - Fascist? You do love to throw the F word around. Nothing is assumed. Many people have won a not guilty in criminal court and lost in civil.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    I think it is time that people to take a deep breath and consider....just think about...the possibility that the verdict was just. It is entirely possible that he didn't molest the kid...yes even though he had them in his bedroom. Either way, I take the jury at it's word. Namely that the case's time-line was flawed, and the witnesses were not credible. It was hard to believe that a coverup could begin before, not after, the accusser said he was even molested.This is absurd on it's face. It is certainly enough for reasonable people to have reasonable doubts. It is hard to believe that after having access to the kid for over two years, MJ would decide to molest the kid after the Baashir film, and after MJ was on notice that he was being scrutinized as a result of his comments in that film. The accusser and most of the prosecution witnesses did not have clean hands. The family were admitted grifters. Again, enough for reasonable doubt. Listen to the jury's comments and it is clear that they did their job, they put aside their personal opinions and dealt with the evidence and the charges before them and returned their verdict.A couple mentioned that they could've reached a different result if only they had better evidence or a smoking gun. One juror even said that they weren't tasked to judge whether or not he slept with boys, or had porno. So it is clear that they were not "star-struck" or otherwise incapable of finding him guilty had the prosecution met it's burden. It didn't and they returned a proper verdict under the law. They shouldn't be faulted for doing their job and not confirming popular opinion. I say bravo to them for having integrity.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#32)
    by DawesFred60 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    This is so much fun to read what people are saying, because to me it shows how this non nation will kill its self off. and after its dead we can rebuild it in the old ways,and many will not like the old ways, get what i mean enemies of real freedom? we are coming for you little people's of the world. bush is jackson and this government likes little boys of the world.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#33)
    by DawesFred60 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Yes my mother ship just landed got to go now, "I will be back" for all of you. have fun we need you!

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#34)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Fred, Whoever you are, you are at least an original voice of freedom. Nietzche (sic?) would be proud. And christ, you think YOUR mother ship just came in...i fessed up to a murdered foster brother and ugly facts about my testimony in my mom's first divorce. I feel like I shot my mother ship down.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Justice is served, and hopefully the McCarthyist hounding of Michael Jackson is finally discredited. Somehow I doubt the latter, but this has been just what I needed to brighten my day. It still astounds me how much of the press doesn't grasp that the prosecution's entire case was built around nothing but unproven accusations and meaningless evidence (like the porno; that is not a crime!).

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#36)
    by Aaron on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    I'm ambivalent concerning this case. On the one hand, I'm always skeptical of adults who can listen to a child tell detailed stories about incidents of sexual abuse, and the little weight they are often so willing to give those words coming from a child. Historically these kinds of attitudes have allowed something like one in four girls worldwide and one in six boys worldwide to have these horrors inflicted upon them. Nearly as troubling is that the adults who hold these accusations from children in such low regard are often their parents and family members, those closest to them. Personally I've known far too many women intimately who have had aspects of their lives taken from them by force as children, to ever be one of these people. I have to wonder how much discussion these jurors had in regard to this boy's testimony, and how closely they listen to him when he spoke. Also being well familiar with the criminal justice system in America I must say there is a socio-pathetic abscess between Justice for the very wealthy and for everyone else in the United States. In a capitalist country, there is no doubt that the judicial system responds quite differently to enormous resources being brought to bear. That said, and with the possibility of outright corruption aside, cases like this are at least less likely to be affected by apathy and sloth on the part of the prosecution and the defense when wealthy defendants are involved. Also in the converse, my experience with the justice system leads me to believe that there is an extremely high likelihood that the truth well-out in the US court system. I believe in the jury system, and I think that jurors have a tremendous capacity to be able to hear the truth, if they are willing to listen. Also with enormous resources on both sides, it becomes even less likely that any one side will be able to obfuscate the facts sufficiently to swing jurors away from the law, and the dispensation of justice. I adamantly hope that no child was ever harmed by Michael Jackson, and that true justice has been done this day.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    I don't like "trial by TV". I like "lynching by TV" even less. I wish there was some way to embargo news on sensational trials like the UK does. And I really wish Nancy Grace would Just Go Away.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    You do love to throw the F word around.
    Your statement was a coy way of saying that the accused are considered guilty unless vindicated by a trial. That is exactly the system faced by "criminals" in fascist and/or other totalitarian regimes worldwide. The standards of proof in civil court are a joke, but this thread isn't about civil court PPJ so don't wander off topic.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#39)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    There was reasonable doubt, the jury did the right thing. Any mother who leaves a child with an adult male for sleepover parties needs her head examined, any mother who goes to a lawyer before the police when their child claims abuse is no parent at all, they are a pimp. I smelled shakedown from the beginning, nothing thats come forward since changed my mind. Michael, get some help bro. The circus is over, now onto Aruba full time!

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#40)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    One last thing, if Michael was Mike Doe w/ no money, he'd be on a bus to San Quenten right now, no doubt. But pimping mothers wouldn't leave their kid with Mike Doe.

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    The worst reporter --Mrs. Punkindhed Maureen Orth -of course she has him as guilty and just cannot get over being wrong

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#42)
    by expertlaw on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    I don't believe that the outcome would have been different had this been a "normal" defendant. The ultimate weakness of the case was that, in what amounts to a swearing contest, the prosecutor's key witnesses were not credible. The lurid accusations of past acts, bizarre alleged financial motives, unbelievable proposed timeline, etc., probably wouldn't have been part of a normal prosecution; and when you boil this case down to its remaining essence, it wasn't particularly strong. (Which, presumably, is why the prosecution spent so much time throwing mud instead of relying upon the testimony of its key witnesses.)

    Re: Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS (none / 0) (#43)
    by DawesFred60 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:02 PM EST
    By the way, if this had been a little girl he would be doing 18 years, but because he is who he is a black guy and because people have fear of being called a racists he walked, sad,world. the empire will fall and people will pay for its own evil.

    Michael Jackson Verdict: NOT GUILTY ALL COUNTS | 43 comments (43 topical)