Saturday, June 04, 2005


Yeah that's right.

I'm flipping.

Michael Jackson should not be found guilty of molestation.

Not because he didn't - I am not totally convinced he is innocent. But that is just it, I'm not convinced he did either. In a system where reasonable doubt is the benchmark by which justice is measured against, he cannot be found guilty of molestation charges.

Of course I say this without knowledge of any number of details that did not come to light due to the partial publication ban. But from the news reports this is the feeling I have.

Enough doubt has been placed upon the Arvizo family's intentions to undermine my confidence in Jackson's alleged actions against young Gavin.

The entire trial has become a war of integrity. Jackson would not be in this position if he had fostered a better image in the first place, and if after the first time he was accused of wrong doings he had done the wise thing and KEPT HIS FUCKING DISTANCE from young boys. He is certainly guilty of severe foolhardiness on that count. Guilty or innocent, his naivete with regards to how the world views him is an issue he has GOT to address. He has got to get some 'no' men in his camp.
On the other side of the table, Gavin's Mother is practically without a doubt a charlatan of some degree. If her son has actually been abused, then it is her fault if justice is not served. It's a classic case of wolf calling.

But barring some significant un-revealed detail that tips the balance, the jury cannot convict Michael. Certainly not on the molestation account. Perhaps on the conspiracy charges - the specific details of that have been ignored to some degree or another (let's face it, in a 'bleeds it leads' news environment, molestation wins over flying someone to Brazil) - he could be found guilty. It's hard to judge that one. If anything, the misdemeanor of giving alcohol to a minor sounds like a liklihood. Not only does it allow the jury to do something, but of all of the charges it sounds like the one which he is at the least guilty of by negligence, if not complicity or even direct action.

What surpises me the most is that the jury did not return practically immediately. I would have expected that the process would have involved a straw vote off the top wherein a 'not guilty' would have been levelled on virtually all charges. Perhaps they are deliberating on whether he deserves a slap on the wrist for the Jesus Juice.

The unfortunate thing is that if found innocent that Michael will be free to do as he pleases. What he needs is a good shake. He may not be deserving of jail time, but he needs disciplining. He needs someone to sit him down and explain to him that no matter how many records he has sold, no matter how many Beatles songs he buys, no matter how elitely famous his is, he is just another dude on the big blue marble, no less fallible than the rest of us. And no matter how hard he proclaims that 'people just don't understand' the sad fact is that it is he who just doesn't understand.

No comments: