Never work with children or animals!!

Ok,let me shed some light on my statement.

Firstly, i believe the jury did exactly what was required of them. Once impanelled, it is driven into you as a juror, to ask anything on "points of law" you do not understand, and that you MUST base your decisions on "beyond a reasonable doubt". The interview i saw, showed the jury to be a sensible bunch of men and women. Although i HATE the fact that they are able to profit by interviews and book deals, as will Jackson now he has been acquitted.

Those of us who work in the CJS know the system well enough to be able to manipulate where we can, the right questions to ask, boundaries to push, when it comes to cross examination and evidence.
From my autopsy of this case, i believe the mother of the child was a loose cannon and the prosecution should not have used her OR they should of "clued" her in more as to the types of questions she'd be asked under oath. Prosecution thought she'd be their star witness, she screwed it right up for them.
I read on someones blog about evidence not being important....HELLO!?? Are you serious????
It's the lack of substantial evidence that also let the prosecution down. Yep, sure they had a heap of evidence but a lot of it was secondary not primary, what they had was enough to get the case committed to trial not enough to find him guilty.

The kid. He did the best he could have. I can't remember off hand how long this case took to go from when it actually happened to when it actually went to trial. I know all of my matters here take around 2 years to go from being committed to the actual trial.
Now, i know myself, i have trouble remembering wtf happened last week let alone what happened two years ago. Yeah sure, you may remember the actual incident but not everything leading up to it. How do you think a kid will go remembering it all?
Let me tell you, the kids i deal with are ranged from 3 to 17, 90% are all sexual abuse matters 10% straight assaults.
These kids say to me, "how can we remember, when we try so damn hard to forget"? They want to forget what happened to them, it's natural. Yep, it makes our job so much more difficult, trying to get them to remember. They act all confident, get in the court room or the pre recording room, defence start cross examining them, and i could just curl up.......i just know the defendant will be found not guilty. Deep down we know he did it, but because of the questioning, and the fact the kids can't remember, or if there is a number of kids involved, part of their evidence doesn't match, they don't answer properly or get confused....the case goes out the window. All we can do, is wait till the defendant strikes again, and hope the police are there to arrest him.

Kids rarely lie about sexaul assaults. Sure you get the very few who do, they are usually the older ones and even though the case may get committed to trial, it will get thrown out once the kids are being prepared, prosecutors know. This is only in Australia though. America and the UK i don't think they can hit a case on the head after its been committed.

Where there is smoke , there is fire.

Look the up shot of all of this is that Jackson being a wealthy star is able to pick the weakest links ( families in need) . He has taken advantage of that. Now that this is over, i beleive he will become a recluse, perhaps write a book to pay for his team of lawyers. He is meant to be broke now so perhaps he'll sell his 51% share in the beatles.

With most peadeophiles they usually keep offending till they get caught. I think Jackson will be so,shit scared after this trial, he will behave himself. Perhaps.
My opinion.