Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate
Jackson jurors: Evidence 'just wasn't there'
Pop star acquitted of all charges in molestation case
Wednesday,
June 15, 2005
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/14/jackson.trial/
At a post-verdict news conference, jurors said that after more than 32 hours of deliberations over seven days, they all agreed prosecutors had simply not proved their case against the pop star beyond a reasonable doubt.
As they deliberated, jurors kept coming back to the "closetful of evidence" supplied by prosecutors during the 14-week trial, but "it was just not enough," said Juror No. 10, a 45-year-old woman from Solvang, not far from Jackson's Neverland Ranch.
"We expected probably better evidence, something that was a little more convincing. And it just wasn't there," she said.
Rodriguez said jurors did find credible some of the testimony relating to past child molestation allegations against Jackson, which prosecutors were allowed to introduce to try to prove a pattern of behavior.
But he said that testimony wasn't enough to overcome the jury's doubts about the facts in current case.
Jurors said they also were troubled by the logic of the prosecution's timeline.
Prosecutors said the molestation took place about three weeks after Jackson and his associates allegedly launched a conspiracy against the family to enlist their help in damage control efforts after the boy was shown holding hands with the entertainer in an unflattering television documentary.
Jurors apparently also discounted the cache of sexually explicit material seized from Neverland and presented by prosecutors, who argued the material was used by Jackson to help groom young boys for abuse.
"Those are adult magazines. Anybody can own them," Rodriguez said. "It doesn't prove the charge."
-------------------
BUT... there is one big BUT.... and it is the two jurors who claimed they wanted to convict MJ.....
BUT... we can wonder what logic this man later identified as Raymond Hultman had if he said: ""We actually challenged one another in the deliberation room," "We challenged the issues, and we came to the decision that pointed to reasonable doubt."
Later, in an interview on "Larry King Live," Hultman said he believes Jackson "probably has molested boys."
"I can't believe that this man could sleep in the same bedroom for 365 straight days and not do something more than just watch television and eat popcorn," he said. "I mean that doesn't make sense to me, but that doesn't make him guilty of the charges that were presented in this case and that's where we had to make our decision."
So..... what is beyond my logic and understanding is why he said that if this is a pure fiction and BIG LIE, so he lied on CNN or anywhere else saying such nonsense about the "this man could sleep in the same bedroom for 365 straight days and not do something more than just watch television and eat popcorn" claim.
I was totally shocked when I heard it back in 2005, and still I am, because as a juror he lied, how could he be as a juror fair if he simply lied about the 365 days of whatever, if MJ was not at neverland most of the year....
And we can compare the history of the 2005 trial -
http://www.today.com/id/8880663/ns/.../t/jurors-say-they-regret-jacksons-acquittal/
uke:
