Shred of Doubt 
Tuesday, 14 .June, 2005, 19:37 - English Entries, Music, Politics

Michael Jackson was found not guilty during this night. It was night in Europe when he walked out into the California sun as a free man. I watched it on BBC world, thanks to a hint from a friend (kiitos kittos).

Do I care about the outcome of the trial?

It seems I do, else I would not write about it here. I have not followed the trial during the last weeks actively, but some news were unavoidable when looking through German newspapers on the web.

There are several things that crossed my mind during yesterdays TV coverage. The jury members made an calm and very thoughtful impression. It seemed they all went on very well with each other. During the two hour bla bla, that BBC showed us, the press conference with the jury was one of the most interesting parts. Unfortunately they cut it at some moment and showed Uri Geller (if you do not know him be happy, because if you know him you'll regret it).

Also the interview with the district attorney was interesting to see. His answers were clear and straight, they were politcally correct and kept out all the emotions that were visible from his face. In a way it was good that neither Jackson nor one of his lawyers said anything - what could they have told us?

The defence lawyers last words to the jury, before it left the court room to find the verdict, was, that they must not find M.J. guilty if there is "a single shred of doubt". It seems that influenced both the media and the jury, although it should be obvious in a court trial that nobody can be found guilty if his or her guilt is not proven beyond any doubt.

I never was a fan of Michael Jackson, although I think it is good to have some people like him around that split the public mind so clearly and that keep an eccentric life-style. He is more a symbol than a personality and found guilty or not would have added to the meaning of this symbol. Now he is reflected as a winner and some people seem to think that he is definitly not guilty.

That is wrong - he just could not be proven guilty. If he did what he was accused for, or at least some things out of the ten accusations, then it is cruel for the vicitims that he can now go free. They most likely now seen as liars in some peoples minds. It was not the trials aim to find them lying or not, there is still the same possiblity as before that they tell the truth. Everybody has to judge by her- or himslef, how high this possibilty could be.

The only thing that we can say for sure is: We cannot know. And those who say they know forget about the shred of doubt. There might be a list of things that I could bring forward why I think that the USA are a strange country and could improve on some issues, at least from my little European view, but the outcome of this trial showed to me that their law system works better then I thought.

Don't worry, I will not buy any album of Michael. He can climb up to Olympus and throw lightning from there - I will still not pay him any attention as an artist.


view entry ( 54 views )   |  permalink   |  $star_image$star_image$star_image$star_image$star_image ( 3 / 741 )

<<First <Back | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | Next> Last>>