A picture may be worth a thousands words, but this one leaves me speechless - it looks like a morgue shot.
The BBC does a good job of going over the legal terrain of the new Jackson case:
- The charges of child abuse against Michael Jackson may, at first sight, look like a case of history repeating itself.
Jackson faced charges of child abuse in California in 1993, levelled by the then 13-year-old Jordan Chandler, but the charges were dropped.
The prosecutor in that case was Thomas Sneddon, the Santa Barbara district attorney. He has served as in that role since 1982 - and is leading the case against Mr Jackson again.
....In 1993, the criminal case collapsed because the child and his family refused to testify.
The civil case which resulted was stopped because Mr Jackson made an out-of-court settlement that halted proceedings.
....If child molestation charges are alleged, then the victim must testify in court.
- An arraignment - where the charges are heard in court and the defendant enters a plea - has been set for January.
After that the case will go to a preliminary hearing, where evidence is heard and the presiding judge will decide whether there is enough evidence to take the case to trial.
Ms Chase said she believed the case would go to trial, because the threshold of proving evidence in a preliminary hearing was much lower than the "beyond reasonable doubt" required in an actual trial.
....The judge will then set a date for a trial, Ms Chase said.
"That can be a short time or it can be a long time. And it can be delayed at the request of the defendant, in order for them to build a case for the defence."
If Mr Jackson requests a delay, it could be a year before the case goes to trial.
....If Michael Jackson is found guilty, he will face a prison sentence. The charges carry a mandatory minimum sentence of three years - and a maximum of eight - for each count.
Ms Chase said it was unlikely Mr Jackson's passport - which has been surrendered to police - would be given back to him until a trial is over.
Article comments
1 - janelle
Michael Jackson did it, and he would do it again and again if you people I call judges doesn't stop him.
2 - Eric Olsen
janelle, i am not necessarily disagreeing with you, but what makes you so sure he is guilty? Just curious.
3 - Star
USE YOUR BRAIN AND THINK PEOPLE! I read the GQ article, heard from Geraldine Hughes and put 2 and 2 together--HE'S INNOCENT. I have also worked with troubled youth for years. Pedophiles don't molest 1 or 2 kids, they molest dozens and dozens and in a lifetime--the number can reach up to at least 250. NOT 1 kid has accused Michael, it has been these greedy, self serving dysfunctional adults. If he were any kind of pedophile, he would have abused his own kids as well as nieces and nephews by now (they also sleep over at Neverland).
4 - Eric Olsen
Star, patterns don't apply to individuals, they apply to groups - that's why they are patterns. Just because the "typical" pedophile does this or that has little or no bearing on the behavior of an individual. He may be innocent - I hope he is - but that will come from the facts of the case, not some abstract pattern.
5 - Siobhan
I know that Michael is eccentric but he is not a child molester. He has had hundreds of children around him for many years all with their parents consent, don't you think that if the parents were in the slightest bit worried about their children staying with michael in his room they would have put a stop to it. He is being picked on because of his fame, his money and his lifestyle.
6 - Bob
It is so obvios he is guilty. If he was innocent he would hide from the media
7 - jo jo mah
sense ise a blak mans, ise nos MJ is jus be'en pict awn bys dey wite foks.
wi hell, a 'lil jesus joose aints awl da bad.