Today on Blogcritics
Home » Michael Jackson After the Verdict: Monumental Self-Regard and Indirect Reassurances

Michael Jackson After the Verdict: Monumental Self-Regard and Indirect Reassurances

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Once the dramatic moment passed when the jury announced that Michael Jackson was not guilty of the charges against him, the curious — I among them — have been waiting to see what clues he and his would be give as to his future.

What tone would MJ take on this, the first day of the rest of his life? to quote a phrase from the era when he stood astride the world of entertainment. We now have a couple of clues, one semi-positive, one appalling.

First the positive, downgraded to a notch because the words came from Jackson’s attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr., rather than from Jackson himself: On NBC’s Today Show this morning Mesereau stated that Jackson will not sleep with boys anymore. “He’s not going to do that anymore because of the false charges that were brought here. He’s not going to make himself vulnerable to this anymore.”

In a follow-up interview with AP, Mesereau added he is convinced Jackson “has never molested any child,” and he he believes that Jackson will continue to be “a convenient target for people who want to extract money or build careers at his expense.” As a result, the attorney said, Jackson will have to change his lifestyle and “not easily allow people to enter his life.”

That’s a reassuring (if totally Jacko-centric) statement, but would have been better coming directly from the subject himself. If Jackson wants to begin resurrecting his image, if he has any hopes of rebuilding a career in the United States, he has to accept responsibility for — at minimum — stupendously poor judgment and state that he has learned from his mistakes and will not repeat them.

Jury foreman Paul Rodriguez agrees that changes in behavior are critical. “We would hope first of all that he doesn’t sleep with children anymore and that he learns that they have to stay with their families or stay in the guest rooms or the houses or whatever they’re called down there. And he just has to be careful how he conducts himself around children.”

But the positives Mesereau accomplished, attenuated though they may have been, were more than negated by the triumphalism of Jackson’s first official statement after the trial, a celebratory video on his website (loading very slowly).

After a dramatic opening fanfare flourish, a screeen emblazoned with “Innocent” and a hand flashing a victory sign, the video segues into a montage of quotes proclaiming Jackson’s innocence and predicting his acquittal, interspersed with a calendar of historic events including “Martin Luther King is born,” “The Berlin Wall falls,” “Nelson Mandela is freed,” and then, most importantly of all, “June 13, 2005, Remember this date for it is a part of HIStory.”

I’ll be sure to do that because it is now clear to me that mankind — and its HIStory — was created specifically as a backdrop for the solipsistic sublimity that is Michael Jackson: not a hint of humility, a whiff of chastening, a zephyr of introspection, or an eddy of remorse.

Perhaps the tiger cannot change its stripes. The readers of MSNBC don’t seem to think so: currently they respond 65% in the negative to the question “Will Michael Jackson actually change his ways?”

Perhaps Jackson doesn’t care about his public image, want or need a career, or feel the need to reconnect with the world. That’s his business, but it is a sad and debased business for the man who was once the King of Pop and who was just given a third (or is it fourth) chance to start over again.

Powered by

About Eric Olsen

  • DrPat

    mankind — and its HIStory — was created specifically as a backdrop for the solipsistic sublimity that is Michael Jackson

    This is a side-effect of celebrity, that the famous person sees himself as the center, the culmination of history, the greatest thing instead of simply the latest thing.

    When the fickle attention of the masses moves on (as this will), the fame-addict is left gasping in withdrawal. Michael Jackson has this dependency, and it (more than any sexual proclivities, life-style choices or plastic surgeries) will inevitably lead him back into the court of public opinion again.

  • Nick

    And how arrogant to ask an innocent man to change his ways to become more politically correct and to act the way people want to see him act. He is innocent. Let him be and let him make his own choices. I can’t even understand why would anybody care about the choices he makes for his personnal life. The man has been vindicated for heaven’s sake ! LET HIM BE !

  • Eric Olsen

    He is quite clearly not “innocent.” He is “not guilty within a reasonable doubt” of the charges brought against him.

  • JR

    Any narcissistic twit who floats a fifty-foot statue of himself down the Thames needs to change his ways.

    If this bozo is going to compare himself to Martin Luther King, Jr., I gotta ask: Where’s James Earl Ray when you need him?

  • nick

    oh thanks Eric for reminding me what the fine line between both terms is. I know that’s the only thing you poor sods have had to say all day ! But my point is still a valid one.

  • ComeOn

    People you need to remember this: There is *no* physical evidence of the alleged abuse at all. This leaves the word of the accusers vs. MJ’s word.

    What has happened here is simply that MJ’s accusers are not credible beyond doubt. It’s pretty hard not to judge people about their word when their word is all that is offered in accusation of another individual. Past acts and character are the central theme here because there isn’t anything else to decide on.

  • Josia

    Oh what’s the point? It’s all HIStory now – beautiful copy & title ERic

  • Eric Olsen

    thanks J, you are always so kind!

    And ComeOn, you are correct

    Nick, the point is relevant

  • Eric Olsen

    I have to admit to being taken aback — even now! — by the video on his site

  • Natalie Davis

    But why? A jury of his peers found him not guilty. Being a pop star, of course his focus is going to be himself and of course he has delusions of grandeur. Nothing new. Beyond that, like it or not, he is free man and has nothing to prove to anyone. He owes explanations to no one. I agree that he ought to keep kids at arm’s length to avoid future trouble (and for hosts of other, more important reasons), but much of the post-verdict crap insists that MJ ought to start acting more “normal.” That is just sick. And it’s sadly typical of this conform-or-die culture.

  • Eric Olsen

    my point is that if he wants to reconnect with an audience, he will have to acknowledge his “mistakes” and vow not to repeat them. If he doesn’t care, he doesn’t care.

  • debbie

    to think some people out there are so money hungry that they have to accuse a person like michael jackson of abuse and among other things is down right pathetic. leave the poor bloke alone i say,only mj knows the truth and we can’t judge him from what the media has portrayed him to be.just take a look at him when he arrived at court and when he left he looked as if he couldn’t take any more i feel sorry for him he has giving the public enormous satisfaction from his career and there are people out there critising him even before the verdict people judged him before proven guilty or not guilty well i hope he gets well and does a come back

  • Nancy

    I keep hearing the phrase, “not guilty doesn’t mean he didn’t do it….” and various permutations of same. Well, under US law as it now stands, yes it DOES mean the jury felt he didn’t do it. In fact, one of the jurors came right out and said, “perhaps he did [molest boys] in the past, but not this time.” In Scotland, Not Proved would imply he was guilty but they couldn’t prove it; but we don’t have that here. I’m no MJ fan, but I think it would be awful to have people go thru trials and be judged ‘not guilty’ and everybody takes it to mean they did it anyway. Why bother to have a trial, then? A n.g. verdict is supposed to mean it’s over, finished, go home & get on w/life if you can.

  • Nancy

    Any lawyers out there want to comment? Set me straight or bear me out?

  • Eric Olsen

    not guilty does not mean innocent, ie, he didn’t do it, it just means the prosecution didn’t prove he did it beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s the way our system works: by putting the burden of proof on the prosecution, it leaves ambiguity on the other end.

  • Natalie Davis

    If he is truly not guilty — and by law, that’s what he is — then what are his “mistakes?” Seems his “mistake” is being a so-called “freak” who refuses to conform to your society’s dictates. From the reactions I’ve seen, one might assume his nonconformity is a far worse crime than any of those for which MJ was acquitted. How twisted is that?

    In any case, MJ’s lawyer says there will be no more sleepovers. That’s good news, right? That ought to satisfy the lot of you. And MJ, even from the midst of his own fantasyland, knows that the cold, hard stare of a world waiting for him to fuck up will follow him all the rest of his days — meaning those who wanted him imprisoned get their wish in a way.

    As for the knock against MJ for letting Mesereau make the statement, give a guy a break! He looked totallty depleted after four months of this very public trial and about a year and a half of turmoil since Sneddon and the gang stormed Neverland. MJ is frail to begin with — can’t he have some time to recuperate? Oh, right, only the “normal” deserve rest after a long, debilitating ordeal.

  • Nancy

    I gotta say, if it were me standing trial, they’d have to bring me into court for the verdict either coked to the gills so I would be too far gone to fall apart from hysteria (relief or grief, whichever was appropriate for the verdict), or in a straitjacket. I just could not under any circumstances stand there expressionless without major drugs…or something. Either he has preternatural control, or he was mercifully out of it. Not judging, just commenting on what a wreck I’d be at that point.

  • Eric Olsen

    I did give him credit for what Mesereau said, that’s fine, but the video on the site couldn’t have been much worse.

  • Eric Berlin

    Wouldn’t be cocaine be bad for an ultra-stress situation (separate from being bad in general, of course)?

    I’d likely have a bottle of Jack in one pocket and bottle of DRAIN-O in the other.

  • Eric Olsen

    I think cocaine would be REALLY bad for a high-stress situation

  • he did it

    Now, lets see….you have a poor 13 year old nobody with a mom who’s been physically/verbally abused by her spouse for 15 years from the ghetto’s of LA taking on arguably the biggest superstar in the history of the universe…..uh, no-brainer what the verdict would be.
    Without a high-res video of MJ with his hand down the pants of Gavin “beating it” showing the jury “he’s bad”, well of coarse he’s going to walk.
    Juror #1 admitted that he thought MJ had molested young boys, but that there wasn’t enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt in this case. Some of the other jurors also said how they didn’t like the eccentric way that Janet Arviso spoke and shook her finger at them in court. Those are the reasons for the verdict!
    George Lopez was quoted saying “If I ever decide to be criminal, I’ll just move to Santa Maria.”
    So get off your high horse all you MJ fans!…..just because he’s not behind bars DOES NOT mean that he isn’t a molester.

  • NP

    There are all headlines but none on the
    whereabouts and the reaction of the
    losers Janet and Gavin Arvizo.
    Anyone approached them for their reaction ?

  • Eric Olsen

    good question

  • he did it

    No matter what the verdict is ….
    MICHAEL JACKoffyourSON is a loser

  • Nancy

    Haven’t seen or heard a peep. They seem to have slipped quietly out the back. For once, showing good judgement.

  • nick

    hum I was under the impression that it was actually the STATE OF CALIFORNIA against MJ and not “THE ARVIZOS” against MJ.

    Nice try he did it but you should go back to your copy and do a bit more thinking.

  • he did it

    question for nice-try nick:
    would YOU let your adolescent son spend the night unsupervised with MJ in bed together?

    there can only be 2 answers here.
    if you say yes, you are as stupid as all of you posts prove you to be.
    if you say no, then you also beleive that he is not “innocent” of these charges.

    so which is it?

  • nick

    That is not the issue here. MJ has not been charged with sharing his bed with adolescents, because the last time I checked it was not a crime.

    So I may be stupid but the one who confuses the issues here (on purpose I suspect) is not me.

    I do not know the man and for that reason I would not let him sleep with my kids.

    I find your conclusion of “if you say no, then you also beleive that he is not “innocent” of these charges” very laughable : I would not let my children sleep with you either but it does not mean that I think you are a pedo.

    Look I find your reasoning, or lack there of, so appalling that I even wonder why I bothered replying to you…

  • he did it

    So if you knew him you would let him sleep with your kids?….talk about appalling.

  • Natalie Davis

    Did you read what he wrote? He said NO. He added that even though he doesn’t suspect you of being a molester, he wouldn’t let his kid sleep with you either. Read what people actually say before you go off half-cocked: That would be my advice.

  • u

    MICHAEL JACK(offyour)SON

  • he did it

    Natalie…next time I want “advice” I won’t be asking you. He didn’t say NO without saying that ‘because he didn’t know the man and for that reason’

    that sounds as if there could be an exception – if you would just “read what people actually say”….jeeze

  • Dan

    “June 13, 2005, Remember this date for it is a part of HIStory.”

    Maybe this is a turning point. Maybe by his refusal to conform to societies dictates, MJ has courageously opened the door for others to disregard societies silly taboo’s.

    Perhaps the presumption of innocence will be extended to hetero’s as well. Middle aged men might finally feel comfortable having sleepovers with underage girls they wish to share their wine and pornography collections with.

  • u

    Well said Dan.
    Because there are a few around here that seem to think anything goes, all morals are out the door as long as it isn’t against the law. AND if anyone says that something may have happened, just get a top-notched high-profile lawyer, dig up some dirt and make them out to be a liar. Because if a poor person makes a claim against a rich person, the only motivation is for money.

  • Eric Olsen

    good points

  • Janice

    This should be read for the ones who sees children with eyes of innocence and not with sexual desire.
    Michael Jackson didn’t molest this kid and didn’t molest the one in 1993.
    Why? Lets use common sense on this matter. The fact of an adult sharing bed with a child, a teenage or a baby does not mean that this adult would see them with sexual desire, the fact is that society, specially in America is too sick, and the image of children is misunderstood, Michael Jackson is one of the few who sees children with love, not lust. The problem for MJ is that he is living in Neverland where his own world was built on this rule, and the real society is wrong, I mean look how everybody accepts war as nothing. MJ is innocent but people will condemn him any way, the media has created a pedophilic projection and only smart people will see objectively, and this where I am writing is a reflection of the sick society, where I’m one of the few who can think without being infected. Pedophile exists I can’t change that, but also exists people who prefabricate this kind of accusation with eyes on money, and this is what happened to Michael Jackson.
    Pedophile don´t ussually sleep in the same bed with a child and says it openly. If a pedophile share his bed with his victim would convince the child not to say it to anyone, a pedophile would hide it. And in this case, this pedophile would not only abuse the kid, but will also commit the complete sex act, he would rape him. I hope I made a difference on some peoples mind, and remember this, the fact that someone accuse somebody of something does not mean it’s true, and more when that person goes to trial and is find not guilty.

  • SDPD

    You tell ’em janice….You’ve either been living under a rock or playing way too much bingo. You would’ve also made great juror in Santa Maria.

    Someone tell me why do all the mares have their blinders on?

  • chaco

    Hear that Michael? Eric Olsen said that you need to revamp your image. You should listen to him. He writes a lot of blogs and stuff. Not only that but he is one of the “Top Bloggers” on his blog site! He could really put your carreer on track!

  • Les Izmore

    Chaco, Representatives from many Public
    Relations firms all over the country
    have been every one of the national news
    channels talking about how MJ needs to
    re-define his public image to something
    less creepy. A grown man who likes to
    sleep with little boys and thinks he is
    Peter fucking Pan is more than a little
    odd. You don’t find his behavior just a
    little strange? Or is this something you
    would personally condone & find normal?

    The fact that youre reading Eric Olsen’s
    Blog/Website speaks volumes. Are you a
    little jealous you don’t have a widely
    read (over 100,000 readers daily)blog?

  • swingingpuss

    Your comment doesn’t become any stronger by using obscenities. Eric has no personal axe to grind against Michael and he truly appreciates MJ as a musician, as you can see from other posts.

  • Les Izmore

    Why not try to address the facts instead
    of acting like a Jr.High school kid?
    Public relations have been saying all of
    the same things that Eric Olsen and many
    others here have said about MJ regarding
    his public image.Do you have any sort of
    an intelligent reply to that? I didn’t
    think so.

    Your projection of your repressed homo
    sexual tendencies onto another person
    coupled with your obvious obsession with
    Michael who isn’t exactly “a man’s man”
    by any means,sure leaves one to wonder
    about what it is that causes all of your
    anger to flare up so easily, Flaco.

  • Natalie Davis

    There’s that disgusting word “normal” again. Ugh.

    I’m all for MJ giving up sleepovers. That’s good advice, whatever its source. The rest is crap, though. Let MJ live his life as he pleases (sans sleepovers); you live yours as you please.

  • Chaco

    Read your own angry, homophobic posts tough guy.

    The facts are that the family accusing him had a history of trying to get money from celebs.
    Other kids that the prosecution accused him of molesting were called to the stand and denied that anything went on.
    Evidence such as pornographic material that hadn’t even been published at the time of alleged incidents was dismissed.
    The prosecution spent a whole lot of time and taxpayer money to give it their best shot and in the end it came down to “yeah but he’s wierd”.
    Does it bother you that you consider yourself normal and are a total loser and this wierdo is such a success? You seem pretty obsessed with this topic yourself Mr. man’s man. Shouldn’t you be on the tough guy forum?

  • he did it

    nice little slant you got going there Chaco, but next time why don’t you at least give the whole story.
    The FACTS are the FATHER has the history of trying to get $ from celebs. Gavin nor is mother never asked for a dime (proved in court).
    The FACTS are that there was other kid called to the stand (MAIDS SON – YOUTH PASTOR)that testified he was molested and came across very credible, the defense couldn’t contradict his tesimony and just got him off the stand ASAP hoping the jury would forget.
    The FACTS are that there was plenty of porn that was predated that had the Arviso brothers fingerprints on the pages (proved in court).
    This was a 50-50 case with strong points on both sides that had as much “reasonable guilt” as reasonable doubt. The way the laws are written – it’s better to let 100 guilty go free, then to have 1 innocent person found guilty.
    Some of the Jurors said “He’s a normal guy” and some others said “I think he has molested young boys, but there was not ENOUGH proof for this case”.

  • td

    As much as I wish the jury had had the conviction to find him guilty solely on the basis that it is reasonable to think that he is a serial pedophile, and he spent countless nights alone with the boy, alas, what’s done is done.

    The good news is the Jackson will never escape the stigma of being Jacko. Jacko, who’s self-dellusion led himself too turn his own face into a holloween mask. Jacko, who’s never had a legit heterosexual relationship.

    Jacko, who has treated a series of prepubesant boys as if they were is girlfriends. And this goes beyond letting them sleep in his bed. Sure the ‘I let them sleep there as a treat’ defence might work if it was a one or two night thing. But when it’s weeks on end, and he is calling up the family and begging to visit their children then it’s no longer about a ‘treat’ for the child. It’s all about obsession.

    From now on, he can no longer escape his freakness.

    I now this is going to provoke his supprtoers to respond with ‘he’s innocent, just leave him alone. He’s just a normal guy…’, blah blah blah

    It’s too late. As much as you want the gerenal public to few spending a decade sleeping with boys instead of having sex with grown women as just a normal activity for a heterosexual male with millions of dollars….That’s not going to happen.

    You can spout all you want about his charities, but then we think of the images of him arriving each day at court in a brand new designer suit and you know that the money goes to his own needs first, before it ever goes to kids.

    You can blame the media for portraying him in a negative light, which is probably true in many cases. But it wasn’t always that way. Once upon a time the media loved MJ. He was the ‘King of Pop’ and one of the most highly praised by the media. But they have gone full 180 degree’s on him, and it’s not because they had a master plan, or a grand conspiracy. They turned because MJ began acting in a way that went far beyond the limits of acceptable exentricity.

    So keep up the fight fans. Keep pushing your futile ‘we’re not crazy, everybody else is’ defense. The rest of us will continue to view MJ as Jacko, and sleep quite soundly at night doing so.

  • nick

    Proved in Court was the fact that the Arvizo mother is a delusional creature who though tshe would be sent off Neverland in a hot air baloon.

    The youth pastor was appalling. During cross examination he was just weeping ans saying. “Can’t remember, long time ago. Can’t remember. Dunno. Er…” and weeping again. The observers like to say he was credible but that is only compared to the other prosecutions’ witnesses ! In the end he said he was “tickled” and then wept and avoided answering questions by saying “Dunno, can’t remember”. Thank God it takes more than that to actually convict a man to prison.

    Proved in court was also the facts that the little Arvizo lambs found the porn magazines and took them away to go wack off in their quarters.

  • nick

    alright td. Many people also sleep well at night after having let their leaders bomb Iraq. They feel quite OK with it. You can join the kingdom of the blind ignorants. There is room for you there.

  • Eric Olsen

    I have zero problem with the knowlege that I supported the invasion of Iraq

  • td

    How does believing that MJ sleeping with boys instead of women all of a sudden make me an ignorant war monger?

    And why stop there. If you want to start name calling then why not say that my opinion on MJ probably means i’m also a Nazi, a crack dealer and a canibal.

    As far as the testimony, I read the transcripts and I found it very compelling evidence. It’s not perfect, but if you believe that a completely honest person should be able to get up on the stand and give flawless testimony then why didn’t MJ testify? If he was so completely innocent then his testimony would have been perfect and it would have vindicated him, right?

  • Mihos

    Innocent until Proven Guilty.
    Eric are you attempting to claim victory in the sleezy smear campaign blogshpere you perpetuated? Because you did win. In your court of public opinion you waged a case that could not be defeated. Fantastic projections attract sticky bloggers like fly paper.
    Now Jackson has been vindicated and we have all been assaulted by the repeats of all the salacious tabloid fodder and the opinions of pundits and bloggers of bias and yet you continue your personal vilification.
    I find your prejudice fascinating.
    That uppity white nigger really should know his place. Teach him. Teach him what a marginal subhuman pickaninny he really is. If his uppity arrogance still shines through, beat him down with a one two to the blotched groin danger zone.Every body will believe a nigger finger fucked a cute little white kid. Just repeat it over and over again until Elvis and the Beatles regain their rightful titles and white is back on top dry humping an opinon again.
    THis blog should could be titles Blogcritics, a superior cabal of race baiting hegemonists with deep seated issues that amount to a collective whole. Remember kiddies two half asses makes a whole. And that’s what the entitled white man’s opinion is good for- expunging disinformation and smearing it around on he walls of the bloggery realm.

  • HW Saxton

    Mihos,Your rant is completely and wholly
    racist unto itself. Fucking Disgusting.

    A lot of people do not like MJ for many
    and various reasons. His race and or his
    color(or lack thereof)have nothing to do
    with the disdain that many people I know
    feel for him.

    If you did not harbor such obvious deep
    seated racist thoughts yourself then I
    do not think that you would go about and
    try to put this shit on other people.It
    is called “Projection”. Check it out.

    You would know for a fact that Racism in any form is not tolerated around here
    at BC if you’ve been around a while.

    You seem to have a very profound dislike
    for caucasians care to elaborate why ?

  • Eric Olsen

    Mihos, what I find more interesting still is your own wildly divergent presentations of yourself, ranging from erudite and reasonable to foaming deranged race-baiter. One might almost conclude a split personality or some kind of chemical imbalance

  • Mihos

    “You seem to have a very profound dislike
    for caucasians care to elaborate why ?”

    I have a profound dislike for hegemony and it has no colour. Because colonialism and cultural imperialism is of such profound importance to your collective superiority and entitlements it enables justification of inbalances in the scales. Indigenous people are hunted down and murdered for the betterment of pioneers. They come in all colours.
    Indigenous people are enslaved and sold by enterprising cultural imperialists.
    Their mixed descendents survive the worst of American nightmares for generation after generation and when the first family of America the Jacksons finally make their way into the world they are made into vapid entertainers for the enjoyment of people who should know better.
    THey are marketed as products.
    The Jacksons change brand names and never recover. But one Jackson transforms himself into a shape shifting dimension challenged musical seer- a modern berdache shaman.
    And the entitled and the poor alike embrace this puff of stardust for a long while until revelation of revelations beams in from tabloid media centers the world over.
    Jackson is an ass raping pedarest.
    And the people who judged and acted as jurors in the media’s own slanted court of public opinion – they are all or mostly of the powerful class of descendants of the pioneers and cultural imperialists whose often entitled lifes of consumption and drudgery in the work force has sometimes been entertained by antics of minstrels and songsmiths- but they are not themselves warriors of the musical form.
    They are not savages for sale or at work in the bottom of a gold mine that sing to find the endurance to work to eat to sing.
    There is no empathy across the classes nothing palpable anyway.
    I don’t dislike caucasians. There are plenty all around me and sharing my every day and breath. I love them they are my family. But the salty snobs that snigger off these awful thoughts about a person’s prediliction to be a child molester based on their appearance poke at a sensitive spot in my brain. People who complain about Jackson’s appearance because they prefer him to stay in the ethnic identity they are comfortable with stab at yet another.
    And then I remember- oh that’s right. Most people in the blogshpere are white men and white men have a way of simplifying the world to suit their myopia when it suits them. what is a white man? A white man is a dude of any ethnicity whose obsession with wearing brand new tight underwear as an adolescent kept his baLLS too high in temperature resulting in super stupor opinion powers.
    A white man is a dude of any ethnicity whose obsession with wearing brand new socks as an adult results in his feet forgetting what a street is and who built it. And a white man is often guilty of making critical errors in judging people they find different or threatening. White men get off on making freaks suffer. It makes them feel justified to be survivors of their bloody cannabilistic history.
    Vilifying other people makes them feel better about all the women and children they trampled escaping the burning buildings of whatever bloody resource drained culture they originated in.
    Michael Jackson represents something to most of the world. Those that spend a bunch of energy vilifying the man are of that entitled group of bigots that never appreciated what most of the world already knew.
    Children are not sexual objects.
    Children are fun to spend time with.
    Children are a joy to take the occasional nap with.
    But then white men don’t spend that much time with children.
    Unless they are Michael Jackson.
    And Michael Jackson is not a member of the clique.

  • bhw

    Children are not sexual objects.
    Children are fun to spend time with.
    Children are a joy to take the occasional nap with.
    But then white men don’t spend that much time with children.

    Change all those “children’s” to “boys,” please, if you’re talking about MJ.

    I don’t care what color MJ was, is, or will be. He has been “dating” BOYS, not children in general, BOYS, for many years not. His relationships with BOYS are suspect because of their, at the very least, pseudo-sexual nature. He’s sleeping with boy after boy after boy in his bed. I’m sorry, but that’s not just someone who enjoys the company of children. That’s somebody who wants to SPOON with BOYS.

  • nick


  • bhw

    But, noticably, not innocent, either.

  • Eric Olsen

    Michael Jackson and post-colonialism – the symposium is just around the corner. If you get him to attend, make sure the boy who will be with him gets a separate room.

  • bhw


  • nick

    You are all so bitter ! What a funny bunch.

  • Mihos

    Comment 52 posted by Eric Olsen on June 16, 2005 02:53 PM:
    “Mihos, what I find more interesting still is your own wildly divergent presentations of yourself, ranging from erudite and reasonable to foaming deranged race-baiter. One might almost conclude a split personality or some kind of chemical imbalance”

    Why don’t you just acknowledge that it pains you to admit that your bloggery smacks of cultural imperialism.

    You project your opinions and those that share them help you feel right.
    I am here to remind you that there is always ample opportunity to earn world citizen status by embracing humility and adopting empathy for people who do not share your cultural perceptions and background.
    It infuriates me to read the callous disregard some have shown for the humanity of accused and accuser.
    and at that little digression
    thirty five percent of all the white men reading this roll their eyes because Michael Jackson does not have anything to do with humanity.
    That thirty five percent of the whole
    bloggery don’t have empathy for Jackson. Dehumanized and vilified in the court of public opinion the spector of Jackson is just a subhuman stain of apparition.
    After months of academic data compilations and paper grading on this trial focusing on a man I had previously ignored- and now know alot more about then I would have preferred,I realized what a bigoted, mean spirited country this really is. And I also realized how stubborn and myopic the freest most liberty immersed people of the world can be.
    You don’t have a right to a fair trial.
    You have the right to be projected upon by an economic majority that has no empathy for the mass majority of people who are beneath them.
    When they go on a vacation to a developing or third world nation, they generally pick a spot with amenities and such miss out on experiencing how the rest of the world lives.’
    And yet their is an unfalteringsmugness (sic)
    unique to Americans in the mistaken belief everyone else in the world has the right to their opinion – even when it is based on and in willful ignorance.
    When the rest of the world learns that Michael Jackson has shared his room and or bed with an unrelated child for an entire year they did not share the same reaction as Americans and other descendants of ethnic cleansing puritans.
    The projection of guilt of such a nauseating crime against one of the world’s most appreciated individuals -it was a long shot and then the charges are read and confidential testimony is leaked to the press by the prosecution- and this blog and others helped ramp up the lynching.
    and the saddest part is you don’t even care to learn from the mistakes of so many unethical sources..
    Now you’ll cast stones at my character with this transparent attack on my credibility – everything I type must be read with a rock of crack salt because I must be crazy or mean.
    Not really, Im just the only savage that bothers to read what you fools are up here muttering on about. And as a savage that has studied your inflections and projections for months on end and no longer a professor but a summer relaxer instead– I’ll let you know that your banter is equally repulsive as the jackson fans.
    Bend your brain and do better. Look at the world. Sad isn’t it?
    What is your contribution?

  • td

    The reason MJ is not on top has nothing to do with the trial. He’s not on top because these people are putting out more popular music.

    1- We Belong Together, Mariah Carey

    2- Hollaback Girl, Gwen Stefani

    3- Don’t Phunk With My Heart, The Black Eyed Peas

    4- Just A Lil Bit, 50 Cent

    5- Oh, Ciara Featuring Ludacris

    4 out of the top 5 are black artists. And Hollaback girl was co-written by Pharrell Williams. Yet none of them are being accused of being a child molester.

    Sorry, what was your argument again?

  • nick

    oh my God!! Who is he comparing Michael Jackson with ??? Hey sweetie even you with your tinted glasses know that you cannot compare those artists (however talented they may be) with MJ.

    Pleeeeeeaaaaaaase !

  • Mihos

    Moranistic isnt it?
    It might take a moran to make an inference here,and a moran I am not.
    Your post has absolutely nothing to do with anything I’ve written about.
    Comparing any of todays fluff industry stars famous in America for a day to world beloved career artists is like shooting a fence pole for having pigeon shit on it.

  • Eric Olsen

    all I’ve done is follow along as closely as I could from the beginning, from as many sources as I could find, and come to my own conclusions.

    I don’t have a particular problem with the verdict because I can see that the case was weak and the accusers fatally flawed.

    But that doesn’t mean he is innocent, that his lifestyle of the last 20 years is vindicated, that he doesn’t have an unhealthy and dangerous attachment to young BOYS (thanks bhw), or that he will be able to refrain from similar behavior in the future.

    He just won’t do it here in the U.S. of A.

    I do give SOME credence to the possibility that he is literally asexual. I see it as possible. Surely there is no proof he has ever had a sexual relationship with a woman and there is no incontrovertible proof I am aware of about a sexual relationship with a boy or man either. So asexuality is a possiblity, but there is virtually no doubt in my mind he had a “romantic” relationship with Jordy Chandler, and whether or not it was literally “sexual” it was twisted and wrong, period.

    What any of this has to do with race is far beyond my culturally imperialistic ken.

  • Chaco

    The family accusing him was hispanic. And wasn’t the jury that found him innocent mainly tighty whitey’s wearing new socks?

  • nick

    The point is that you cannot prove someone’s innocence in this kind of cases. So you can carry on fantasizing on his guilt if you feel like it. For my part I am going to move on and desert this filthy blog because I really cannot take the revisionists of history down here. Good luck.

  • Eric Olsen

    and I was just going to agree with you Nick: you can’t prove someone’s innocence in a case like this and that is unfortunate.

  • Mihos

    What it has to do with race and tighty whiteys.

    As I clearly stated in an earlier thread white men come in all shapes and sizes. The child accusing Jackson was Hispanic. The Jury included a few white men but there were also lots of other people in the jury that do not fit that definition.

    Race what does this case have to do with race? THe actual court case is over. The court of public opinion continues to lambaste and vilify Jackson. And let’s face it white men that actually happen to be Caucasian OWN the news media and dominate the internet. Of course you can’t see the race issue of whether or not Jackson had inappropriate relationships with a young man or boys. How could you living in your comfortable tighty whitey world?
    You do admit that you see Jackson as a bit of an apostasy and have made no little light of his appearance and fate.
    What you have not done is give Jackson credit for having an intellect. You won’t like it but Michael Jackson is this generation’s Khalil Gibran. His library included forty Gibran publications. I wager that you have never been interested in what literature Michael Jackson actually reads and keeps in his vast library?
    That should tell you something.
    I mean to say that if you have taken the time to dedicate hours to Michael Jackson bashing and haven’t taken the time to investigate what book titles are listed by the prosecution then you can’t pretend to want to understand anything about this dimensionless being.
    You made up your mind like any meat eating potato exploiting hegemonist and went to work on Jackson’s fright wig and at the expanse of your own and Jackson’s humanity I might add.

    Here is a curious factoid.
    In Jacksons impressive library there are no fewer than nine books listed by the prosecution that feature very prominently I might add young naked boys and full frontal nudity at that.
    Yet the four books Im mentioning were not a part of any evidence to convict Jackson or at least permanently taint him with being a pedaphile.
    They were National Geographic and Time Life Photo coffee table books of indigenous peoples. THe other two books were of the same species but published by Japanese or Dutch publishing houses.
    Why the digression?
    Because the had the children been white and nude they would have been used as evidence. This factoid doesnt add or subtract anything about Jackson but it speaks volumes about the intellectual subjectivism suffered by the prosecution. Jackson was being persecuted for raping little white or whitish boys. Photo books depicting white children were used as evidence.

    at any rate a thought from Gibran:
    “Your Thought and Mine

    Your thought is a tree rooted deep in the soil of tradition and whose branches grow in the power of continuity. My thought is a cloud moving in the space. It turns into drops which, as they fall, form a brook that sings its way into the sea. Then it rises as vapour into the sky. Your thought is a fortress that neither gale nor the lightning can shake. My thought is a tender leaf that sways in every direction and finds pleasure in its swaying. Your thought is an ancient dogma that cannot change you nor can you change it. My thought is new, and it tests me and I test it morn and eve.

    You have your thought and I have mine.

    Your thought allows you to believe in the unequal contest of the strong against the weak, and in the tricking of the simple by the subtle ones. My thought creates in me the desire to till the earth with my hoe, and harvest the crops with my sickle, and build my home with stones and mortar, and weave my raiment with woollen and linen threads. Your thought urges you to marry wealth and notability. Mine commends self-reliance. Your thought advocates fame and show. Mine counsels me and implores me to cast aside notoriety and treat it like a grain of sand cast upon the shore of eternity. Your thought instils in your heart arrogance and superiority. Mine plants within me love for peace and the desire for independence. Your thought begets dreams of palaces with furniture of sandalwood studded with jewels, and beds made of twisted silk threads. My thought speaks softly in my ears, “Be clean in body and spirit even if you have nowhere to lay your head.” Your thought makes you aspire to titles and offices. Mine exhorts me to humble service.

    You have your thought and I have mine.

    Your thought is social science, a religious and political dictionary. Mine is simple axiom. Your thought speaks of the beautiful woman, the ugly, the virtuous, the prostitute, the intelligent, and the stupid. Mine sees in every woman a mother, a sister, or a daughter of every man. The subjects of your thought are thieves, criminals, and assassins. Mine declares that thieves are the creatures of monopoly, criminals are the offspring of tyrants, and assassins are akin to the slain. Your thought describes laws, courts, judges, punishments. Mine explains that when man makes a law, he either violates it or obeys it. If there is a basic law, we are all one before it. He who disdains the mean is himself mean. He who vaunts his scorn of the sinful vaunts his disdain of all humanity. Your thought concerns the skilled, the artist, the intellectual, the philosopher, the priest. Mine speaks of the loving and the affectionate, the sincere, the honest, the forthright, the kindly, and the martyr. Your thought advocates Judaism, Brahmanism, Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam. In my thought there is only one universal religion, whose varied paths are but the fingers of the loving hand of the Supreme Being. In your thought there are the rich, the poor, and the beggared. My thought holds that there are no riches but life; that we are all beggars, and no benefactor exists save life herself.

    You have your thought and I have mine.

    According to your thought, the greatness of nations lies in their politics, their parties, their conferences, their alliances and treaties. But mine proclaims that the importance of nations lies in work – work in the field, work in the vineyards, work with the loom, work in the tannery, work in the quarry, work in the timberyard, work in the office and in the press. Your thought holds that the glory of the nations is in their heroes. It sings the praises of Rameses, Alexander, Caesar, Hannibal, and Napoleon. But mine claims that the real heroes are Confucius, Lao-Tse, Socrates, Plato, Abi Taleb, El Gazali, Jalal Ed-din-el Roumy, Copernicus, and Pasteur. Your thought sees power in armies, cannons, battleships, submarines, aeroplanes, and poison gas. But mine asserts that power lies in reason, resolution, and truth. No matter how long the tyrant endures, he will be the loser at the end. Your thought differentiates between pragmatist and idealist, between the part and the whole, between the mystic and materialist. Mine realizes that life is one and its weights, measures and tables do not coincide with your weights, measures and tables. He whom you suppose an idealist may be a practical man.

    You have your thought and I have mine.

    Your thought is interested in ruins and museums, mummies and petrified objects. But mine hovers in the ever-renewed haze and clouds. Your thought is enthroned on skulls. Since you take pride in it, you glorify it too. My thought wanders in the obscure and distant valleys. Your thought trumpets while you dance. Mine prefers the anguish of death to your music and dancing. Your thought is the thought of gossip and false pleasure. Mine is the thought of him who is lost in his own country, of the alien in his own nation, of the solitary among his kinfolk and friends.

    You have your thought and I have mine. ”

  • Paul Roy

    Do all of you think OJ is not guilty as well. Jesus Christ! Kind of makes you question this whole jury system of ours.

  • Paul Roy

    Oh, and Mihos are you on acid or something?

  • td

    Oh I see….

    MJ is targeted because his top 5 selling albums have sold 140 million copies.

    But Mariah Careys top five selling albums have only sold 98 million copies.

    You just don’t want to accept that Mariah Carey is in the same catagory as MJ because she’s a woman. Well, just repeat it over and over again until MJ regains his rightful title and a man is back on top dry humping an opinon again.

    Whatever professor. If you want to read racism into things where it is not then go ahead. The truth is that American’s like to trash celebrities. So do europeans. Go live in england and read up on how prince Harry is a Nazi. Or how Beckham is an adulteror.

    And they can be just as racist in Europe as America. Ask any black soccer players about that. And Japan isn’t a haven of multi-culturalism either.

    Of course some people are anit-mj because of his race. But 99% of his detractors by the tabloids and watch the news because they find his behaviour offensive. These same people also find woody allens behavior offensive.

    Why do people feel the need to criticize other people when the disagree with their behavior? I can’t answer that. All I know is that you will probably respond to this by criticizing my behavior as well.

  • Chaco

    So white does not mean white but the photos in National Geographic were not used as evidence because they were not of white boys and white people control the media and farm potatoes but this is not necessarily a white thing because they could really be black dutch which we all know is white because there is white whites and there are whites -wight-i mean right? ok that makes sense.

    Also I believe in Jackson’s innocense and am happy with the verdict and my whitey’s are tight. Which doesn’t necessarily mean i’m white. It just means i am white. In theory.

  • Mihos

    I wont be criticizing you save to say that I find your thread dense.
    Alot of people are oversimplifying what is already a simple issue and are sidestepping the larger crux.
    You that are blogging away from your tighty whitey idealism don’t take into account or at least don’t appear to have any regard for how nefarious and senseless many of the pundits IN THE PRESS have been in regards to this global figure.
    Secondly, because people of this entitled mindset are not used to having people of inferior cultures correct their myopic perspectives, they have a very rough time handling reality.
    No I am not on ACID.
    Fool Your Underwear ARE TOO TIGHT>there by robbing your largest organ of its vital circulation culminating in chronic mind farting syndrome.

    The reality is that most people in the world share their food tables and beds with strangers and unfortunately there are many more orphans than parents now arent there? So when the American and British /Australasian media slobber on about a middle aged man sharing his bedroom and god blush bed with an unrelated young person- they didnt imm jump to the puritanical conclusion that that was some sort of irrefutable evidence of guilt of Jackson being a pedarest.
    Rich people in many parts of the world and the very poor alike share in the age old culture of bed sharing-
    Americans are so entitled and special.
    You see jackson is a symbol of an American unicorn being bashed to death by the ugly ogre of American brutish stupidity.
    THe rest of the world is just standing there watching thinking- gosh these poor Americans are in the process of deevolution.

  • Chaco

    I feel that the bashing he recieved after the Bashir interview was definitely out of proportion to the actual content.
    This definitely did seem like a witch hunt.

  • Mihos

    Chaco go ahead and fish around for a conflicting statement and paint me out to be a bigot if you like.

    The issue I was attempting to make that went well over your head is about the prosecution not you the prosecution and you and other bloggers reactions to said data.

    Full frontal nudity of the tribal savage form is considered novel and harmless in coffee tablebooks by a clearly prejudiced district attorney in a county well known for its active white supremicists and hate crimes- where I might add the Santa Barbara polic department is routinely criticized for racial profiling and insenstive treatment of non Caucasians.

    THe Caucasian Hegemonist White Man DA
    took the time to use a photo documentary book focusing on the actors of the Lord of the Flies movie as evidence of Michael Jackson’s supposed child molest profile.
    THey did not list any of the aforementioned books on the evidence docket even while they clearly showed alot more penis than the Lord of the Flies book.
    The prosecution’s bias was of course made all the more clear.

    That any one of you can’t appreciate that irony is a bit troubling. Transforming my rant into a assault against Caucasian people in general is a convenient cop out of the issue at hand. White men come in all colours.
    THey work for a living dream of nicer cars and appliances that work well.
    They love sports and form their opinions like everyone else- amongst their peers.
    Not good or bad just indifferent.

  • Chaco

    Uhhh Dear Genius,
    I was agreeing with you that he was unjustly prosecuted.
    And if you could try giving us the cliff notes sometime maybe more people will read your entire post.

  • Shaniqua

    I cant even afford to dress my babies in the latest FUBU gear and whitey’s spending millions on space shuttles and fighting AIDS in africa- i dont even know where that planet is!

  • R. Johnson

    “White men come in all colors” ? Huh?…
    WTF is that supposed to mean? You have
    just crossed from being simply strange
    to Twilight Zone, Mihos my friend.

    And by the way it’s “Moronistic” not
    “Moranistic” you crazy assed moron.
    Unless you were maybe talking about the
    talented actress Erin Moran who played
    “Joanie” on Happy Days and it’s spinoff
    show “Joanie Loves Chachi”.

    Hey did ya know that “Chachi” is Korean
    slang for dick?

  • Dan

    An alternative explanation why the “Full frontal nudity of the tribal savage form” “coffee table books” weren’t used by the prosecution might be because they weren’t sexual in nature; unlike the gay porn material that was introduced as evidence. The prosecution might have felt that trying to tie in National Geographic type material would be seen as a stretch that might actually weaken his case in the eyes of the jury.

    Of course this theory doesn’t square all that well with the Lord of the Flies book that Mihos says he did use. Presumably that was asexual in nature as well. Although the young boys / deserted island theme would probably go over big as a NAMBLA members fantasy paradise.

  • Eric Olsen

    Kim chi is Korean for “forgot to douche”

  • Dan

    It’s also a zesty chinese cabbage dish.

  • Charles Manson

    Yeah, i hear ya Mihos man. its like whitey is whitey and even if you aint whitey you can be whitey and when the whiteys wipe each other out with their potato war and they wont multiply becuz of their genitals bein constricted by the tight underwear we will be at the bottom of devils hole with joanie and that chic who played pinkie tuscadero and we will just bide our time until we surface with our happy daYS HYBRID ARMY AND TAKE OVER MAN—its so fuckin beautiful man cant you see-yeah man rocky raccoon slips back in his room only to find whiteys bible man

  • HW Saxton

    “…It’s coming down fast” You tell ’em
    brother Charlie,yeah,you tell ’em man.

  • John

    A plastic surgeon was accused of making a detailed examination of MJ’s privates, while he was sedated, and Evan Chandler claimed BEFORE any accusation by his son was made that he had evidence (clearly he had that information bought) to prove molestation. So here you have to decide if you keep fooling yourself, or see that it was clearly another case of extortion on Michael Jackson.

  • Eric Olsen

    Suzie Quatro

  • td

    I don’t think you’re on acid Mihos. That would assume that you needed drugs to be crazy. No. I just think you’re crazy.

    People in other cultures sleep with non-related youths out of necessity. They have 5 children and 2 of them are orphans but only one little hut, and so they sleep together.

    Boys don’t need to sleep in MJ’s room. It’s a friggin mansion, there are plenty of other empty rooms for him to sleep in. If you take the un-related family of five and stick them in MJ’s house I guarantee that the parents give the kids there own room.

    As far as your theory that Europe isn’t as disturbed by MJ. Bullsh$t. The only reason they don’t have as much coverage is because of proximity. If it had happened over there it would be the same. Who do you think first called him “Wacko Jacko”? Look it up.

    Once you check the facts most of your argument falls apart, and all you are left with is the ranting ‘I’m right since you don’t understand because I’m smarter and must be talking over your head’, or the ‘I’m right and your wrong because I believe you’re a white racist’.

    Well, if that’s how you want to prove you point, then good luck with that.

  • James Mclafferty

    As a mariah and mj fan both equally, i feel mariah is well up there with him in the star stakes mariahs only 34yrs old so she’s got a lot more to come.People don’t have to like the way she looks or acts to acknowledge when she’s on top form like with “Music box”, she can outshine anybody.In fact,and some of you may be surprised to hear that i think music box artisticly and proffessionally(sp?),has got to be second only to thriller,or sgt peppers.Oh and pink floyds “wall”.

  • HW Saxton

    Eric, I thought that Suzy Q. played the
    part of “Leather Tuscadero”. I’m likely
    wrong though.And too lazy to google for
    about 15 seconds to verify.

  • Eric Olsen

    are Pinkie and Leather two different characters?

  • HW Saxton

    Yeah. One of them was a big redhead that
    wore a Hot Pink jumpsuit and rode on an
    F’in’ Honda 250 or something menacing
    like that.

    Miss Suzy Q. wore a Black Leather outfit
    kind of like what she is wearing on the
    cover of her first LP. The one with “48
    Crash” on it.

  • Eric Olsen

    I defer to your greater knowledge – by then I wasn’t watching

  • if it doesn’t fit, you must aquit

    June 16, 2005 – It was such a lovely sight. All the adoring fans dressed as clowns, ducks and ballerinas. Upon learning of Michael Jackson’s “not guilty” verdict, the supplicants and sycophants set free the white doves, weeping like back-sliding Pentecostals at a pew-jumping tent revival. A California jury had once again affirmed their God-given right to keep and bear self-mutilating freaks who openly boast of their propensity to sleep with little boys. How special.

    In the beginning there was OJ. Then came Robert Blake. Now we have the Under-Roo clad, heir apparent to the Elephant Man. I need no further proof that California juries are incapable of convicting those who possess even a modicum of celebrity. It seems your garden variety Californian is star struck, ignoring the blatant, glaring and obvious any time one of their icons is confronted with crimes either minor or heinous. The west coast obsession with appearing politically correct and tolerant has rendered California juries impotent when the time comes to make a simple, common sense decision. They are terrified of rendering a judgment, least they appear judgmental. Only non-celebrities are fair game. Though he likely killed his wife and unborn child, there was far, far less evidence of guilt in the Scott Peterson trial than there was in the trials of OJ, Baretta and Freak.

    If you listen to the comments of the Jacko jurors, it becomes very clear that the prosecution made their case. But, because a “superstar’s” noggin was on the chopping block, they chose to ignore the evidence.

    “I feel that Michael Jackson has probably molested boys. To be in your bedroom 365 straight days and not do something more than just watch television and eat popcorn, that doesn’t make sense to me,” said juror Raymond Hultman, who apparently feels that believing the defendant was a child molester does not mean he should be convicted of molesting a child. “But that doesn’t make him guilty of the charges that were presented.”

    No, what made him guilty was that Jackson brags of dragging little boys into his bedroom. If Joe Six Pack revealed that he slept with children, had a playground in his front yard and pedophilic porn in his bedroom, he would be locked up for life. All a normal jury needed to know for conviction was that Jackson admitted preying on kids with twisted parents, that he had paid off accusers in the past, that his lifestyle is of the most bizarre sort. However, the term “normal” does not apply to a California jury, which cares more for book deals and fame by association than it does for rationality and justice.

    Another juror, an unemployed mother, made an observation that would be laughed out of the sheltered workshop. “What mother in her right mind would allow that to happen. Just freely volunteer your child to sleep with someone. That’s something that mothers are naturally concerned with,” she said.

    The lack of a logic gene is evident in this woman, as she never once considered “what kind of deviant monster would seek out little boys, sleep with them, and flaunt his disgusting behavior during an internationally broadcast TV special?” Get a grip woman. Judging by the amount of child abuse in this country, there are plenty of mothers not in their right minds. Apparently more than a few horrible mothers allowed sleepovers with Michael Jackson. They did it partially to be around the fame, partially in the hopes of being showered with gifts and cash. They are nothing but pimps.

    But that Jackson was invited to sleep with children, and jumped at the chance, is an indisputable fact which came straight from his plastically-enhanced lips. Of course the mother is unfit, and should be brought up on charges herself. But the trial was not about debating her flaws and criminality. It was about convicting the guy who seeks out dysfunctional parents and revels at the chance to experience his version of childhood romance with their offspring.

    The jury thinks Michael Jackson is weird. By their own admission they think he is a child molester, a predator. But, and almost all jurors said this outright, the basis of their decision was that they hated the accuser’s mother. They thought her to be a con artist, and used those feelings as an excuse to avoid thinking about her son. In their little pea brains, they made the following non-intellectual leap. We hate her, and we think he molests kids. But he’s a star, and she’s just in it for the money. Poor Michael, he’s a victim.

    Several of the jurors made comments to the effect that they didn’t like how the mother looked at them. Now there’s a good reason for acquittal. The worst, a 79 year old great grandmother (who on TV has the look of a “six pack before breakfast” type of gal) gave her brilliant legal opinion.

    “I disliked it intensely when she snapped her fingers at us. That’s when I thought, ‘Don’t snap your fingers at me, lady,'”

    And then the old bag gave a coquettish wink to the camera, thrilled to finally have a national audience and bask in her moment of celebrity.

    Our judicial system, at least as practiced in California, is a joke. Jackson moonwalked out of the courtroom because of who he is, what he has, and the pitifully weak spines of those who saw him first as a celebrity and second as the worst kind of pervert. Shallow as their thought process seems to be, I doubt if these people would have convicted Jackson if they’d witnessed his alleged sexual abuse with their own eyes.

    “You’re hoping you can find a smoking gun, and in this case we had difficulty finding that,” stated juror Raymond Hultman.

    No, Raymond, you just ignored the smoking gun.

    But I’m damned certain you were smoking something.