Pluto and Michael Jackson

[linazelle]

I just KNEW he would be found guilty by virtue of the planetary aspects.

Pluto is squaring his sun, the toughest aspect there is.

Instead of a conviction, it seems Pluto has sent yet another message during its passage through Sagittarius: the courts are not fail proof.

The reasonable doubt measure has let questionable people off the hook in a number of public trials beginning with OJ.

Are we to question Michael Jackson, or the court system? Pluto is never cut and dry--it creates change over time. The way we have seen over the past ten years with highly publicized trials. The question Pluto is begging is this: is it time to change the court system? And that includes judicial appointments and nominations.

[jrthin]

1. In this instance

the court system worked fine. The government was asked to prove its case and it didn't. People can't claim that MJ was found not guilty because there were black and uneducated people on the jury. This jury were mostly white and lived in a conservative community.

[Me.]

2. I Have To Agree

The Sneddon case was terribly flawed and the beyond a reasonable doubt standard was not met.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. In this case the system worked

I know people are annoyed that he walked, but the government case failed to prove its standards./ Or do you want to go to a Napoleoonic system, yuo are guilty until you prove your innocence?

[Coyote_Bandit]

4. Verdicts have nothing to do

with justice or with whether or not certain acts did or did not occur. They have everything to do with evidence and persuasive skill in presenting and arguing that evidence.

Before it ever saw a courtroom this was a seriously flawed case. The sad thing is that a man with less resources might well have copped a plea or been convicted - if for no other reason than he had an inexperienced and/or overworked public defender without the financial resources to do a thorough investigation and/or secure testimony from expert witnesses.

If we learn anything from all these high profile cases it should be that justice can indeed be purchased. Most criminal cases are built on a sequence of evidence that suggests that the defendant committed the crime in question. An attorney with resources and skill has an opportunity to build a defense that systematically attacks this evidence. And any good attorney will be able to impugne any indirect evidence (by questioning the motive, memory, or credibility of the witness) other than direct physical evidence (i.e. the bloody fingerprint). Even that can sometimes be explained away.

[ebayfool]

5. First & only post on an MJ thread here - this is the best posting I've ...

seen on any of them, Thank You! I've seen alot of talk today @ 'country of laws' & innocence v. guilt - but I lost my faith in those grand ideas after I watched the Rodney King trials, & others like it. I have no idea how to do it better - I don't presume to have answers, so I've stayed out of it. But it does make me feel a deep twinge when I see all the taunting @ 'golden goose' & epithets being thrown at the boy or MJ. I don't understand why people can't state rationally that they believe in the man's innocence w/out also slandering the boy, & vice versa. It can be done, but no one seems to feel the need to recognize that we really can't know who's more truthful - only 2 people truly know that one. It can be just as hard proving this kind of case as a 'he said - she said' rape case, maybe harder ... pedophilia doesn't always get reported in a timely enough fashion to have any kind of physical evidence. It's difficult, as well, to prove a negative - as in proving you DIDN'T commit a crime. The fact is you are so right in your first statement- "Verdicts have nothing to do with justice or with whether or not certain acts did or did not occur. They have everything to do with evidence and persuasive skill in presenting and arguing that evidence." It also applies to both sides of the courtroom, plaintiff or defendant. I just wish there wasn't so much 'enjoyment' in trashing & inferring motives/guilt in GD on both sides of this case. It sums up so much that makes me feel just a little bit diminished as an adult American - the glee on DU & the newsclips of other adult Americans leaping on the boy & the accused. No matter who's guessing correctly (& that's ALL any of us are really doing) - there is someone, somewhere, between the 2 of them, that has had great pain lain on them today. Either a foolish man that should have used more sense in his interactions w/kids (esp after the previous brushes that his actions, innocent or not, were perceived as) - a man that KNOWS perception is everything in the public eye - he has built a career out of molding perceptions ... he knew better! Or a boy who may or may not have been let down by his mother, the legal system or someone that set himself up as a hero to him ... or a boy that has been used by his own protector, his mama. Any way you look at it, one or both of them has been hurt in some way or another. So, the fact that you have actually stated that a verdict is no real indicator of justice or truth is just about the ONLY thought I've seen that I can wholeheartedly agree with - & I agree with it no matter who the verdict went for.

Damn, where's our wise Solomon for our times! An all-wise, all-knowing arbiter of justice!

LOL, that's it from me - hiding in the safety of our little forum. I don't wanna fight w/the big kids in GD @ this, I just want to think that there's healing for whoever's been wronged & hurt today. And, what better place to do that than here?

on edit: Or ... maybe I'm just one of those damn 'libruls' I hear about, unable to take a side because I see too much 'nuance' in everything? Frustrating!

[Coyote_Bandit]

7. In most court cases

there are only losers. Acquitted criminal defendants are not entitled to recover the costs of their defense and prevailing civil litigants often have difficulty collecting judgments due and costs awarded. Just because somebody wins a court case doesn't mean they actually collect the money. As a society we do not recognize the human costs of litigation. It can be very stressful and emotional. Bitter aftereffects often linger for years. And, even if vindicated, involvement as a party to litigation may show on a background check for many, many years. Many assume criminal defendants - even those who are acquitted - are guilty. After all, there was enough evidence against them to bring charges. Likewise, those who face civil litigation may be thought to be greedy opportunists, financially irresponsible, or incompetent in their work.

We live in a country where it is more important to win than it is to be honest, to seek truth - or to compromise differences and be peaceable. We are so vested in being right and winning that folks who have little knowledge of the evidence presented at trial feel perfectly justified in reaching - and advocating - their own conclusions. This, of course, is encouraged by our media.

I do not pretend to know whether MJ did or did not molest that boy, whether MJ was simply a convenient and opportunistic target or whether the jury simply found the boy a less than credible witness. After all, it is possible that the worst behavior of both parties could be true - MJ molested the boy and the boy lied about what occurred. But my legal training and experience tell me this case was badly flawed before it ever saw the courtroom. Flawed because the prosecutors took a shotgun approach that embraced peripheral issues, evidence and witnesses and did not focus on the alleged molestation. That approach works well with less affluent defendants who lack the resources to attack these peripheral issues. But it benefits affluent defendants by giving them more opportunity to demonstrate flaws in the prosecution case. The system worked - but only in the sense that it recognized and failed to convict MJ on the basis of a flawed case. It is unfortunate it does not work so well for all its participants.

Thank you for your kind words. You will not be surprised to learn that my disillusionment with our judicial system is such that I have left the legal profession and am looking for a new career.

[jrthin]

6. In essence, our

judicial system is unfair because the poor cannot afford the same quality defense the rich can purchase. The rich can afford to challange the government's case, the poor lacks that ability.

[Coyote_Bandit]

8. Highly skilled criminal defense attorneys

typically do not work for the public defenders office. And expert witnesses are neither cheap or free.

Civil litigation also has its inequities for the less affluent. Many attorneys will refuse to take a case unless the amount in dispute is substantial. This is especially true if the attorney undertakes the case for a plaintiff on a contingency basis. Other plaintiffs and civil defendants are usually represented on a per hour or flat fee basis. Expenses are often prohibitive in advocating or defending ones position.

Again, verdicts have little to do with justice and everything to do with evidence and the skill and resources to present that evidence in a persuasive manner. Justice may be blind - but the ability to secure and present evidence in a courtroom is limited by ones resources.

[Digit]

9. Verdicts can even be determined by the whim of a judge...

Landlord vs tenant
I was landlord....tenant did not even bother to clean the apt.
I held out charges for cleaning for which I had receipts.
Tenant said IN COURT that he did not have time to clean.
Verdict...I had to give back the entire security deposit.

I have never trusted courts to do the right or "fair" thing since.

[Pallas180]

10. Pluto square the Sun is the back problems that Michael had- while

the world thought it was an act, the Sun is the back, and with Pluto of permanency and pain, Michael experienced permanent injury to the back during this time period and REAL pain. That's astrology.

Additionally the Sun in a person's chart is the inner, the true self and the ego. Pluto has crushed Michael's ego and this episode has permanently changed him.

It is also highly possible that he would have developed a heart problem during this , as the Sun is the heart. With Pluto squaring his health is severely challenged.

I have not looked at his chart recently, but I also suspect that his Ascendant is being negatively transited, perhaps by Saturn which would explain the loss of weight.

If you looked at him leaving the court, the man is very physically ill.

As far as Michael's true guilt - the accusations even here that he is a pedophile....Michael is a switch hitter - and it's unlikely that he knows it.

He is an emotionally retarded person, arrested development emotionally, with good reason which we have all been witness too...

People show love to other people by giving them what they themselves would like. What Michael wants is a childhood, in some way to remake his own childhood perhaps vicariously by living it through other little boys who he shares his oversized set of trains and pets, his zoo, with; who else do you know who has life sized Peter Pan characters floating from the roof of his bedroom?

He has Venus conjunct Uranus (if I remember correctly) square Mars.

Venus square Mars indicates a gay person.

Venus conjuct Uranus can indicate a switch hitter. Or an ASEXUAL person.

Since the aspects are in his 11th house, natural house of Aquarius, he thinks he is being a friend and showing "love" in humanitarian ways - he has been generous to charities.

It is highly possible with such heavy accent on Aquarius that Michael Jackson is asexual, a person who has no interest in physical sex.

I find it interesting that the girly magazines found in his home were
called "pornography", and the attempt was made to make the public think they were pedophilia.

I suggest that you guys reading this throw out your Playboy and Hustler mags before some evangelist sherriff comes to your door and you find yourself in the docket for pornographic material.