What we have learned today:

[smartvoter]

If you are merely charged with a crime, you are screwed, because there are many people who associate that charge with guilt and they won't respect your right to the assumption of innocence EVEN IF you are acquitted by a jury of your peers.

[Bluebear]

1. Very "progressive"! n/t

[Kraklen]

2. Especially if you're funny looking. nt

[wakeme2008]

3. that is why the jury note and IMHO

way they took as long as they did.... So ppl could not say they did not look at the information,,, like the OJ jury was blame for...

[BlueEyedSon]

4. And: if you are a millionaire celebrity, you can beat ANY legal charge!

[Tempest]

6. Being able to afford competent lawyers has it's advantages

Makes you feel sorry for the poor people who get falsely accused.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

7. No..but you can afford a competent attorney

BTW, two words..Martha Stewart

[ComerPerro]

11. Oh, but we already knew that

[Atman]

5. Two words...

Prior history.

[OneBlueSky]

25. the only prior history I know about is . . .

paying off that kid in the early 90s so he wouldn't have to go through the kind of spectacle he just endured . . .

[dogday]

8. If you look weird, you are guilty....

Can't judge a book by it's cover, but they do it all the time....

[uppityperson]

9. People get frustrated with media coverage and say they don't care

I learned that people get confused between frustration with the media coverage and the actual trial and results. I also learned that I don't express this well, that saying I don't care about the MJ trial results means to me that I don't care about the coverage, but any trial is important.

It goes along with the fact that if you are a millionaire celebrity you get lots of coverage. If you are a normal person, no tv/media coverage, no one talks about what's going on with your trial, etc.

[smartvoter]

15. 100% agree, uppity. nt

[Warpy]

10. never more so than when the BAY BEES are being protected

I'm pretty sickened by the people who just "know" that he's guilty as sin of raping male children.

Give it a rest, folks, the jury didn't agree with you, the case was weak and deeply flawed, the DA admitted it was a vendetta, and your own kids aren't in danger because one would hope you have better judgment than his bedmates' parents did.

I think the pickings for future sleepovers will be very thin after this case. I doubt any parent would want it known that s/he approved of it.

[ComerPerro]

12. What I learned from the trial: Don't settle out of court

because, if someone looking for money accuses you of the same thing down the road, people will assume you settled because you were guilty, not because you were just trying to save face.

[housewolf]

13. Another thing we've learned today...

That even WE believe that what the MSM tells us has more validity than what a jury, sitting in the courtroom and deliberating for days, decides.

In other words, for many who are convinced that the jury got it wrong, pre-conceptions based on information received from MSM storoies is more true and valid than the jury's decision.

[smartvoter]

24. And we, of all people, should know better than to trust MSM accounts. nt

[wallwriter]

14. This is the guy who says on camera

that sharing your bed with a child is a beautiful thing.

Ew.

[Debi]

18. Yes Ewwww, but not illegal. n/t

Why did the parents agree to let their children sleep in bed with him?

[wallwriter]

20. They had grand plans for the civil suit?

[Debi]

21. Who says they won't still go forward? Try to milk it with the people

who believe that Not Guilty means...Okay, guilty but we were getting tired of haning out in the jury room for hours on end and were sick of carry-out.

Maybe Mom will still get a couple of mil in a civil suit settlement not that it will help the kid she's fucked up for life!

[Igel]

16. Jackson has peers?

Who knew.

(But really, I'm kidding.)

I agree with what you wrote. But I'd like to point out that it's usually true: We assume people are guilty because they're charged, and feel cheated out of a victory when they're acquitted.

It doesn't matter if it's Jackson or some corporate bigshot accused of ripping off millions of retired widows. They're tried. The DA probably does the best he can. The defense attorney(s) probably do the best they can. Then they're found guilty or acquitted.

End of story.

[mcscajun]

17. We've learned that people are willing to have someone convicted

because they KNOW he's guilty, even if the prosecution cannot make its case.

That it's not just freepers who believe that some celebrities "get off" because they're wealthy, and that no one could ever be "targeting" them or trying to scam some bucks by making stuff up.

Mind you, I make no judgment on MJ here: he may indeed be everything he was accused of being, or not. That's not my point. This is:

Are some here at DU unwilling to accept that the most important word in the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" is "proven"? We can believe, feel, or think someone is guilty, we might even KNOW someone is guilty, but unless it can be proven, that person MUST be acquitted. It's the strongest protection in the world against being falsely accused and/or wrongly convicted, and we should applaud it no matter who is in the defendent's chair or how we feel about that person.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

19. It's funny how are constitutional rights go away on certain topics.

For example, former pedophiles can't live in Miami? Well that's fine, because they're gross and I don't want them by MY kids.

Michael Jackson is weird and the media says he's a pervert. Must be true.


THat's the great thing about the constitution folks...supposedly you're entitled to a judgement based on evidence or laws based on our rights, not public opinion.


Public Opinion at one time said Bush was right. Doesn't make it so.

[mcscajun]

22. Ain't it the truth? n/t

.

[stickdog]

23. The Stranger didn't even cry at his mother's funeral.

Guilty as charged.