Was the MJ verdict right? Vote here.

[smartvoter]

Poll question: Was the MJ verdict right? Vote here.

Not guilty. What do you think?

On edit, please kick after you vote.

[Triana]

1. There's no "who cares?" option (n/t)

[nittygritty]

2. my sentiments exactly.

[smartvoter]

3. Don't vote. nt

[Bluebear]

10. People 'won't care' when liberals are tried for treason either.

The jury has spoken, I care about justice.

[Joacheme Misrahe]

18. With respect Bluebear,

if you cared about justice you would be fundamentally opposed to these media circus show trials. This is deeply reminiscent of societies that have previously used peoples trials for entertainment purposes. In such a reality there can be no justice.

If you cared about justice you would also be fundamentally opposed to ANYONE who wants to decide if a person is guilty or innocent based entirely on what they have heard from the media. That's called hearsay and conjecture.

Unless you have sat in the court EVERY SECOND it has been in session. Unless you have personally SEEN and examined ALL the evidence from BOTH sides. Unless you have heard ALL testimony, and have NOT been taking evidence in to consideration from outside that court room (read: FOX News/CNN) you are in NO position to judge a persons guilt or innocence no matter how entertaining and fun (in some perverted twisted way) FOX and CNN would like it to be.

If you want to sit around judging peoples guilt based on what FOX news and CNN have told you then no my friend, you are NOT interested in justice.

[Bluebear]

20. Welcome to DU but I don't understand your post

You seem to agree with me 100 percent, what is the argument? I said the jury has spoken. How am I not interested in justice?

[Joacheme Misrahe]

21. I apologize

I'm still learning how this board works. I see now I responded to the wrong person.

[Bluebear]

22. Happens very easily, no worries.

You gave a great post.

[Bread and Circus]

How the hell does anyone know? Were you in the ctroom? Did you

hear the testimonies? Did you weigh the evidence?

Seriously.

I voted I don't know and unless you were on the jury, how would you know?

[smartvoter]

8. You have to go based on press summaries, if you know them. It doesn't

mean anything. Just curious as to what people thought -- it's not a big deal.

[Walt Starr]

9. You don't have to. The standard for conviction is clear

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

With acquittal on all ten charges and the lesser counts, no way did the prosecution meet this standard!

[Walt Starr]

4. The standard is "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt"

The prosecutors obviously came nowhere close to that standard of proof, ergo, the verdict was the right verdict!

[FrenchieCat]

5. You forgot the

"I don't give a f*ck" category, so I couldn't vote.

I have to pay my dental bill cause my insurance only covers the laughable portion!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. Don't know and could care less.

[rustydog]

7. You should care, this showed that a meglamilionaire was tried

in the same way your neighbor would be tried for the same charge.
No matter how rich you are,once you get to court, the Government has to prove its case and prove your guilt, not the reverse that Bush seems to enjoy.

[yankeedem]

13. It should say

If you're rich, once you get to court, the Government has to prove its case and prove your guilt, not the reverse.

If you're poor, and can't afford proper representation, you are assumed guilty and have to prove your innocence.

The prosecutors used the Peterson standard, which is, we don't have any evidence, but he probably did it, so send him to prison. That would have been good enough to convict a poor defendant.

[stickdog]

17. Exactly. Except 98% of poor defendents never get a trial. If they know the

score, they basically have no choice other than accepting the DA's plea bargain.

Public defenders aren't paid to waste even more of the state's time and money trying to actually EXONERATE their poor clients.

[anarchy1999]

11. Ummm. just shoot yourself for even posting this. We are all sick to

death of MJ and his trial and the media circus and so on and so forth!

[smartvoter]

15. Then ignore it. It's news. Many of us know the details even if we didn't

set out to know them because of the massive exposure, so we might have an opinion.

Deal with it.

Here's a hint: If you don't like a thread, or aren't interested in a thread, you don't have to read it. You can skip past it.

Might help you out a little...

[sweetheart]

12. Gold diggers

It was a gold digging trial, in california no less, where gold rush
fever runs hot. Michael jackson is an asshole, that has been proven.
And since when is that a crime.

Bush, Cheney and rumsfeld have organized a systematic mass murder and
violation of the constitution, and they are scot free. There is your
justice, a mirage to distract you from the crime.

[smartvoter]

23. LOL. nt

[UdoKier]

14. You need another choice.

Right decision on the merits of the case, but I do believe he's guilty in reality.

[stickdog]

16. Where's the I DON'T KNOW & NEITHER SHOULD ANY OF YOU choice?

[smartvoter]

19. Based on what you have read, stickdog. We have no power here. nt