- #1
False Prophet
- 85
- 0
I did a search for "Michael" and "Jackson" and "Michael Jackson" but I didn't see a thread but if this is redundant please give me a link because I suck at finding things. It was a tossup between social sciences and politics and world affairs so I put it here.
But I need to vent. I haven't posted here since forever but maybe I'll get feedback..
After the verdict was read almost everyone I heard a comment from was upset, because that "sick" guy got to walk and he should be deported, etc. because he's so guilty, this is like O.J., and only in America etc. etc. but really what do they know? They did not see the evidence, or hear the testimony first hand. They have only their perceptions founded on something outside the courtroom, most likely skewed media. Watching lame reenactments on E!, viewing drawings, reading transcripts etc. are not true forms of viewing a case, especially as unbiased. To say an incorrect verdict was rendered not only accuses Michael Jackson of all counts, but also accuses the jury of purjury. I say to these people, maybe YOU should have been prosecutor. The jurors made their statements.
I never said whether or not Jackson was guilty (until today) but when asked what I thought, "If I had to guess, I'd say not guilty because I grew up with his music and dude's got some moves," but never acted like i knew for sure like others did. So this is not meant as "I told you so" at all, just that my faith in the justice system of USA is not lost due to THIS trial.
But I need to vent. I haven't posted here since forever but maybe I'll get feedback..
After the verdict was read almost everyone I heard a comment from was upset, because that "sick" guy got to walk and he should be deported, etc. because he's so guilty, this is like O.J., and only in America etc. etc. but really what do they know? They did not see the evidence, or hear the testimony first hand. They have only their perceptions founded on something outside the courtroom, most likely skewed media. Watching lame reenactments on E!, viewing drawings, reading transcripts etc. are not true forms of viewing a case, especially as unbiased. To say an incorrect verdict was rendered not only accuses Michael Jackson of all counts, but also accuses the jury of purjury. I say to these people, maybe YOU should have been prosecutor. The jurors made their statements.
I never said whether or not Jackson was guilty (until today) but when asked what I thought, "If I had to guess, I'd say not guilty because I grew up with his music and dude's got some moves," but never acted like i knew for sure like others did. So this is not meant as "I told you so" at all, just that my faith in the justice system of USA is not lost due to THIS trial.