Do you think Michael Jackson will be found guilty?

[pbhalerao]

All this reminds me of a joke I had read some time back:

Q. Why did Michael Jackson and Lisa-Marie Prisley divorce?

A. Both had different ideas on having children.

[Supreme2k]

Our prisons are filled with people who feel the same way ... that what they did was justified in some way.

ie. innocent men.

Having been a part of the criminal "justice" system for many yeears, I can safely say that many people are in prison because the jury believed that they were guilty simply from the charges against them. ("I knew he was guilty when he walked in! You can't let a rapist go free!")

[bazooka]

Lock him away and destroy the key

[AlecWest]

Our prisons are filled with people who feel the same way ... that what they did was justified in some way.

Having been a part of the criminal "justice" system for many yeears, I can safely say that many people are in prison because the jury believed that they were guilty simply from the charges against them. ("I knew he was guilty when he walked in! You can't let a rapist go free!")

I don't think 12 men/women are that simple-minded ... though I suppose there are exceptions. I was a juror on a murder trial. And from my experience there, I can tell you that every juror agonized over their decision and didn't simply rely on appearances or "feelings" to render their verdict. We pored over facts entered into evidence, testimony, and argued among ourselves until we finally reached a consensus.

P.S. BTW, we found the guy guilty. However, while he was guilty of premeditated murder (1st degree), the prosecutor let him cop a 2nd degree plea if he ratted out on his partners and showed cops where they'd buried the body. It was really grim. They showed us 8x10 color glossy photos of the body after it was dug up (after 6 months underground). They weren't pretty photos. One lady had to excuse herself to the bathroom to vomit.

[Supreme2k]

I don't think 12 men/women are that simple-minded ... though I suppose there are exceptions.

Actually, the sensible ones are the exception

I was a juror on a murder trial. And from my experience there, I can tell you that every juror agonized over their decision and didn't simply rely on appearances or "feelings" to render their verdict. We pored over facts entered into evidence, testimony, and argued among ourselves until we finally reached a consensus.

I'm talking about experience from over 150 criminal trials ( from shoplifting to manslaughter), including after trial interviews of jurors ("how did you vote and why?")
Sadly, an answer like "I just knew he was guilty!" is legit and offers no recourse. While I don't doubt that you agonized over your decision and everything involved, most of the time it's a couple of holdouts that do the most (sensible) arguing. The film "12 Angry Men" was not a dramatization. It was (realistically) a documentary, especially so today.

[AlecWest]

The film "12 Angry Men" was not a dramatization. It was (realistically) a documentary, especially so today.

The film was simply a drama based on a play, revered for its intensity rather than realism. The playwright (Sidney Lumet) wrote it for "political" reasons according to Nora Sayre's "Running Time: Films of the Cold War." Or, as Professor Catherine Lavender (CUNY) said of the film:

In the context of the Cold War, Lumet's plea for consensus provides a valuable insight into ways in which both conservative and liberal Americans made connections between internal dissent and external threats. If the American public, as represented by the nameless jury members, could not reach a consensus on domestic disputes, then external enemies--for example the Soviet Union--could conquer a divided nation.

It would be a mistake to think of that film as a movie about our legal system. It was political commentary, just as L. Frank Baum's "The Wizard of Oz" was political commentary as opposed to a children's tale.

[zzyzzx]

P.S. BTW, we found the guy guilty. However, while he was guilty of premeditated murder (1st degree), the prosecutor let him cop a 2nd degree plea if he ratted out on his partners and showed cops where they'd buried the body. It was really grim. They showed us 8x10 color glossy photos of the body after it was dug up (after 6 months underground). They weren't pretty photos. One lady had to excuse herself to the bathroom to vomit.

How do the pics you saw compare to http://www.corpsesforsale.com ?

[Supreme2k]

It would be a mistake to think of that film as a movie about our legal system. It was political commentary, just as L. Frank Baum's "The Wizard of Oz" was political commentary as opposed to a children's tale.

But TWOO would have to be interpreted that way, while 12AM directly broached the exact subject.
It was more of a "documentary" about how jurors often act. I have interviewed enough jurors post-trial to know that they often base their decisions on things that weren't in evidence, or on what juror #5 said.

[burnman99]

I think he'll be found guilty of lesser charges (Giving Booze/Porn to a minor) but not guilty of being a pedophile. Any parents who knowingly let their kids go play at his house should be taken behind a barn and beaten IMHO though, the dude just ain't right even if he isn't a child molester.

Later

Rog

[pbhalerao]

Well, he is 'not guilty' on all counts. So let us get on with our lives.

[ZAPPER]

,and justice for money.

[Craig Tucker]

no

[ZAPPER]

no

20/20 Hindsight?

[bugster]

Do you think Michael Jackson will be found guilty?

No

[stiltman]

He will be found guilty

Looks like another beat the rap using money

[MackemX]

am I too late to say no?

[zzyzzx]

am I too late to say no?

If I were a mod I would have disabled voting in the poll after the news.

[MackemX]

if I were zzyzzx I would have put the poll to end after 13 days :P