|
The longer the deliberation goes, the more chance of a guilty verdict on at least one of the counts. OJ's jury was done very fast, and when we got word they were returning to the chamber to officially announce their decision, we already knew it was not guilty because of the speed.
Michael's jury taking this long is surprising to me, I didn't think the prosecution made a particularly strong case, and the defense put so much doubt into the validity of the accuser's story that I would have thought it would be easy.
Let's put it this way: You or I don't get convicted on any of the counts if we swap places with him. Their case was that weak. But MJ has a stigma attached to him because of his bizarre behavior with children, and his admission to sleeping with them on national television. It's like we all believe that he's probably guilty of SOMETHING illegal with those children, but did the prosecution prove it? The jury might be voting with their hearts instead of their heads. Curious to see what the outcome is.
Reminds me so much of the McMartin molestation trial from years past (All CA people over the age of 30 know what that is heh) where you just knew that something happened, but the prosecution couldn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
__________________
|