I have no opinion on the Michael Jackson verdict per se, because I have not followed the testimony. I have no idea what evidence was presented in the courtroom.
However, I do have some concerns about the procedure.
I think the prosecutor may have shot himself in the foot by tying everything to molestation, because if the jury did not find enough evidence to support actual molestation, then they would have to also return a "not guilty" verdict for the other charges, because for the purpose of molestation was tacked onto them. So even if the jury did think there was adequate proof that he provided alcohol to a minor, they'd have to throw it out, if they didn't think it was proven to be "for the purposes of".
I don't know what the jury considered, but from interviews today, the fact that the mother was not credible seems to be a big factor. I hope they rejected the charges on more than that basis. If you tend to be drawn to excessive intimacy with children because you love them (as opposed to the power plays of predators), what type of child is most likely to draw your attention? The emotionally secure happy child with strong family ties and a firm sense of right and wrong? Or the mixed-up emotionally needy kid with the wacko mother?
So, it would be grossly unfair to the child if they rejected the claims solely or even mostly because of the mother. I hope there was more basis than that for their doubts.
~~Silk
No comments:
Post a Comment