Mixed feelings

I think he's a nut and I think he's obviously a danger to children. Any parent who would let a child spend the night at this mans home after all this should lose parental rights. One of the more amazing things to come out of this are the attitudes of people who are so caught up in Jacksons celebrity that they refuse to see that there is definitely something wrong with him. It would seem to me that regardless of this verdict they would have to suspect in some tiny crevice of their brain that he just might have major issues. Not enough evidence or the right kind may be considered reasonable doubt but it doesnt mean there is no doubt at all and it doesnt mean that doubting him isnt justified.

I do have alot of mixed feelings on this one.On one hand I know he is way weird,but on the other I am not sure I perceive him to be a pedophile.I think in his mind he is still a kid and somehow tries to live out his lost childhood through these children.I am really not sure what to think.Update:I am not justifying the lewdness around the children,no adult should have children,other than his own, sleeping in bed with him/her.Parents need to be alot smarter too,when turning their kids loose.I guess what I am trying to say is he is not totally innocent,and there should be no excuses made for him if he is mollesting kids,but I am not totally sure what these kids were trained to say and what actually happened.Maybe I am wrong,I don't know.***I do think it favors the defense when 6 of the jurors say they are fans of Michael's music and one said Jackson was a musical genius.Then you have a juror say that he does not doubt Michael mollested some kids,but didn't feel he was guilty of this parti... Read more

I really wish I could say my mind was made up. I wish I could sit here and fume and say The bastard is guilty! or Justice was done, he's innocent. But I can't. If Bob the electrician sleeps with a boy that isn't his son for 300 straight days, I would think it's weird. The problem I have is that I can't apply normal thinking or logic to Michael Jackson. He doesn't do ANYTHING normal. Do you really think someone would let monkeys wash their windows? Well, he did. Do you really think someone would have a medical procedure done to lighten his skin. Well, he apparently did. Do you really think someone would hire the Seven Dwarves from Disneyland to come to his house just for the hell of it? Well, he did, and to top it off there weren't any kids there. It was just him hanging out. Do you really think he could sleep in a bed with a 13 year old boy for 300 days without it being sexual? Well....

Mixed feelings on my part for sure. For a start, I dislike that part of myself that's as into this crap as everyone else is. It bothers me that the corporate media focuses again on what's essentially a non-issue while neglecting to the point of exclusion all those other issues that really do effect our lives. Of course, if it wasn't Michael Jackson, it'd be Scott Peterson, or Robert Blake, or...on and on ad nauseum (sorry, I digress). That Jackson is a freak is a given. Look, I like kids as much as anyone, but after talking to them for about a minute or 2 (How's school? Ok...uh, what sports are you into?) I'm ready to send them off to watch TV and resume my conversation with an adult with whom I share some commonalities. Jackson is older than I am, but spends the bulk of his spare time with children and adolescents. Right away, my internal warning bells go off. I always thought his interest in kids was sexual, but I never felt he ever did any actual molestation, as I always had him peg... Read more

GoneAway, I'm disgusted too. And as a Californian, embarrased.

I am not certain if the jurors were paid off, or if it was really true that there wasn't enough evidence. According to a couple of the jurors this morning, they said they had a problem with the boy's mother (I don't blame them) it almost sounded like they didn't want her to win, just because they didn't like her. One of them even admitted he wanted to say guilty because it's not normal for a grown man to have children in his bed for just watching movies and eating popcorn. But that they just didn't have enough evidence and there was a credibility issue with the mother. Why is it the boy from 1993 couldn't be a witness, was that part of the pay-off deal? I just hope that future parents of the children, stop bringing their kids to Michael Jackson. Why take a chance? It's stupid. I knew deep down in my heart all along that he would not be found guilty, no matter what. Just the fact he was not guilty on all charges raises suspicions to me, because in any ordinary case, I think that the per... Read more

Very mixed feelings. If you've ever served on a criminal jury, you can understand this, the burden of proof has to be so overwhelming to overcome the natural empathy people feel for each other. Prosecutors attempt to demonize the defendant (usually to a non-credible level) while the defense's most effective tactic (with a pathetic, screwed up individual like Jackson) is, look at him. He's pathetic. Maybe he did something but they haven't proved it. Will prison help this? The media attention, the fans, the screaming crowds humanized Jackson. So the jurors, twelve (usually ordinary) people set the level of the burden of proof. Some defendants blow it and irritate the majority of jurors or are so hardened that it's obvious. In this case, it sounds like the prosecution's star witness made most of the jurors' skin crawl. I keep coming back to: I don't care, I can't make myself care about this case. Any parent who entrusts their child to this guy, whether previously or in the fu... Read more