Comments on: I Hate Juries

by: jason

Fri, 17 Jun 2005 21:57:00 +0000

indeed, reasonable doubt. it wasn’t a very strong case. blame the prosecutor, if anyone.

by: Owen Muir

Tue, 14 Jun 2005 20:09:47 +0000

and of course “not guilty” is by no means the same thing as “innocent.” it probably goes back to reasonable doubt.

by: Hedley Lamar

Tue, 14 Jun 2005 13:47:13 +0000

Why hate the prosecutor? Imagine yourself in his shoes — into your office walks a couple who have offered their kids up to reputed pedophile in the hope of hitting the jackpot in the civil suit that will inevitably follow the criminal trial. They manage to present a complaint credible enough to justify a prosecution, so you can’t just throw them out of your office. But juries don’t have to put up with this sort of thing, and this one didn’t. If there’s anything worse than someone who preys on kids, it’s a parent who knowingly offers his kids up to such a person, and this verdict was, in effect, a conviction of the scumbags who did just that.

by: KipEsquire

Mon, 13 Jun 2005 22:01:33 +0000

Shouldn’t you be hating the prosecutor instead?

by: Hedley Lamar

Mon, 13 Jun 2005 21:48:45 +0000

Hate juries? Come on, Ryan. Without actually hearing the jurors’ explanations, one could easily imagine that this is an instance of nullification — the jury’s refusal to cave in to the attempt by the accusers’ parents to turn Jackson’s well-known peculiarities into a big, fat payday for themselves. Even if they were convinced that Jackson did everything alleged, they could very well have concluded that the wrong perpetrator was on trial — if anyone should have been in the dock, it was the parents who allowed their kids to have a sleepover with Mike.