Southern California juries are morons.

[gridlore]

Michael Jackson walks.

Robert Blake walks.

OJ walks.

Are you idiots capable of understanding that being famous is not a defense?

Comments

[kshandra]

For this I put my lunch off for an hour and a half. Here's hoping I can actually eat, now.

[dafydd.livejournal.com]

Don't know about the others, but the prosecution in the OJ case was dreadful!

[gridlore.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but have you ever read some of the jurors' comments? One woman seemed to have not listened to the trial at all!

[robertprior.livejournal.com]

But doesn't keeping up-to-date with the news (among other things) disqualify you from the jury? I've got the impression from somewhere that US juries are mostly made up of people who don't think too hard...

[odanu.livejournal.com]

Santa Maria is Central Coast, not Southern California, with a *completely* different culture. The real issue was (again) poor prosecution and insufficient evidence.

[johno.livejournal.com]

Are you idiots capable of understanding that being famous is not a defense?

Nor should prosecutors let the hoopla surrounding the case, distract them from putting forth a airtight case.

OJ's case was screwed up from the beginning.

MJ's case they picked the wrong family to use as the subject of the specific charges.

And compared to the trial I was on the jury for last year, they are well put together. {sigh}

[twfarlan.livejournal.com]

Are you idiots capable of understanding that being famous is not a defense?

No, Doug. They're not capable of that.

[chaoswolf]

I agree. People believe that fame and fortune is enough to get you acquitted from most things, and a lot of people who juror (verb...?) for famous cases are of the opinion that fame gets you everywhere.

[fangorn.livejournal.com]

Perhaps not.
Neither, however, does 'everbody knows' constitute evidence of guilt, much less rise to the level of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.