...they are celebrities?
Actualy, more specifically...they are allowed to walk, because it is pay back time. In these recent high-profile cases, like O.J. Simpson, Robert Blake, and now Michael Jackson...the defense has been able to show reasonable doubt. But if it were you and me, we would probably have been found guilty. The reasonable doubt thing, gets more carefully considered.
But the jurists err on the extreme side of caution, and perhaps *then* some, by letting them go because they have provided so many people with joy for what they have done, professionally, through the years. Therefore they are willing, in a sense to forgive their one mistake, for their years of service to the American people and to the world.
In the case of Michael Jackson, I am looking for him to get off for similar emotional reasons. The jury all knows already that he is a pedophile. But they will over look it because they will figure that they can let him go, reasonably, without it looking too much like favoritism, because arguments such as: the 1993 case involving Michael was high profile and everyone should have learned from this that Michael is a questionable person and that parents should keep their kids away from him. And if they didn't do so, it was *their* fault, as much as Michaels fault.
The jury knows that if Michael gets sent to prison he could possibly kill himself or be killed by someone who hates pedophiles and/or seeks publicity in the same way that Carver dude killed Jeffrey Dahmer in prison. So, the jurists, not wanting this on their conscious *and* knowing that Michael has brought such happiness to the young fans of his for so many years...they will let him go.
It might not be fair to the rest of us. But when you consider trade-offs...the fact that he has given so much to society as a whole...I can see why celebrities get off the hook, and I guess I am not all that bothered by it, because of that.
Actualy, more specifically...they are allowed to walk, because it is pay back time. In these recent high-profile cases, like O.J. Simpson, Robert Blake, and now Michael Jackson...the defense has been able to show reasonable doubt. But if it were you and me, we would probably have been found guilty. The reasonable doubt thing, gets more carefully considered.
But the jurists err on the extreme side of caution, and perhaps *then* some, by letting them go because they have provided so many people with joy for what they have done, professionally, through the years. Therefore they are willing, in a sense to forgive their one mistake, for their years of service to the American people and to the world.
In the case of Michael Jackson, I am looking for him to get off for similar emotional reasons. The jury all knows already that he is a pedophile. But they will over look it because they will figure that they can let him go, reasonably, without it looking too much like favoritism, because arguments such as: the 1993 case involving Michael was high profile and everyone should have learned from this that Michael is a questionable person and that parents should keep their kids away from him. And if they didn't do so, it was *their* fault, as much as Michaels fault.
The jury knows that if Michael gets sent to prison he could possibly kill himself or be killed by someone who hates pedophiles and/or seeks publicity in the same way that Carver dude killed Jeffrey Dahmer in prison. So, the jurists, not wanting this on their conscious *and* knowing that Michael has brought such happiness to the young fans of his for so many years...they will let him go.
It might not be fair to the rest of us. But when you consider trade-offs...the fact that he has given so much to society as a whole...I can see why celebrities get off the hook, and I guess I am not all that bothered by it, because of that.
