Jury Deliberates in Michael Jackson Case

[irishgrl]

Jury Deliberates in Michael Jackson case

By TIM MOLLOY, Associated Press Writer 11 minutes ago

SANTA MARIA, Calif. - A subdued
Michael Jackson sat silently in court on the eve of closing arguments in his child-molestation trial, well aware that within a matter of days his future will be placed in the hands of a jury. Closing arguments in his case were to begin Thursday with jurors expected to get the case sometime Friday.

"It's a very difficult situation to sit in there and know your life is in the balance," Jackson spokeswoman Raymone K. Bain said Wednesday after the entertainer moved quickly and quietly past reporters on his way out of the courthouse.

"He has strong faith in God and in the judicial system," Bain said of Jackson. "He knows his fate is in the hands of 12 jurors."

Jackson sat stone still in court for nearly two hours Wednesday as those jurors were repeatedly reminded of the child molestation charges against him as they were given instructions for their deliberations.

The 46-year-old singer is charged with molesting a 13-year-old cancer survivor in February or March 2003. He is accused of plying him with wine and conspiring to hold his family captive to get them to rebut damaging aspects of the documentary "Living With Michael Jackson," in which Jackson appeared holding hands with the boy as he talked of allowing children into his bed for what he said were innocent sleepovers.

Bain said Jackson's emotions have varied during his 14-week trial.

"He has had anger. He's been happy about some of the information that has come out in court," she said.

Earlier Wednesday, Jackson looked straight ahead as Superior Court Judge Rodney S. Melville, sitting in the witness box to be closer to the jury, read a long list of instructions hammered out during more than a day of discussions with prosecuting and defense attorneys.

Following up on an earlier decision regarding the alcohol allegations, the judge told the jurors they may consider a "lesser charge" of "furnishing alcohol to a minor," a misdemeanor. The instruction means the jury would not have to relate the alcohol to the purpose of molestation.

Melville also told the jury how to use prosecution testimony that alleged Jackson has a history of improper behavior with boys.

The judge said that if jurors determine Jackson has such a history, "you may but are not required to infer that the defendant had a predisposition" to commit the crimes alleged in the current case. But he told the jurors "that is not sufficient in itself to prove he committed the crimes charged."

The judge paused at one point to determine if the jurors were paying attention.

"You know I read to my wife at night so she'll go to sleep. Am I having that effect here?" he said.

___

[irishgrl]

I think the Jurors got a last minute nudge from the police interview video. I voted guilty and I hope the jury does too. Money shouldnt absolve you from everything....

[GODDESS6]

i love the fact that i wrk from home @ times like these, i love watching court tv & will b tuning in whenever i can on this~ i am hoping they find him guilty, but who knows ~

[dissention]

Not guilty.

The prosecution had a very weak case and even though Jackson had an incredibly poor defense, it'll be enough to get him acquitted.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Not guilty.

The prosecution had a very weak case and even though Jackson had an incredibly poor defense, it'll be enough to get him acquitted.

I have to say I agree. I mean every single witness the prosecution put on the stand was tainted by greed and most were directly refuted, some by the person they said they saw groped a la M. Caulkin. So, MJ will walk, regardless of actual guilt, though he may be innocent and just weird, which I doubt.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I have to say I agree. I mean every single witness the prosecution put on the stand was tainted by greed and most were directly refuted, some by the person they said they saw groped a la M. Caulkin. So, MJ will walk, regardless of actual guilt, though he may be innocent and just weird, which I doubt.

He's as guilty as the sky is blue.

Did you read that new article in Vanity Fair? Jacko allegedly tried to pay off the '93 accuser AGAIN so that he wouldn't testify at the current trial and Jacko's mother, Katherine, wanted $250,000 to appear in one of his silly videos that he made to refute the Bashir documentary.

[ontheEdgeof17]

He's guilty, with a not guilty verdict.

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by dissention

He's as guilty as the sky is blue.

Did you read that new article in Vanity Fair? Jacko allegedly tried to pay off the '93 accuser AGAIN so that he wouldn't testify at the current trial and Jacko's mother, Katherine, wanted $250,000 to appear in one of his silly videos that he made to refute the Bashir documentary.

His mother wanted to be paid to be in the video? That family is so sick, man. I read a description of the last piece of evidence shown at courttv.com. It's the video of the accuser giving his statement to the police at the very beginning which came accross as sincere and corroborated his testimony on the stand. This could be very powerful and sway the jurors to a guilty verdict as irishgrl said. Since it was the last thing presented it has the effect of remaining in the jurors' memory above all else.

[CreepingDeath]

Originally Posted by ontheEdgeof17

He's guilty, with a not guilty verdict.

Yep. Just like old O.J. Simpson.

[gldstwmn]

Not guilty. Unfortunately all of the witnesses who saw MJ doing nefarious things with children were somehow discredited.
I do think he's guilty though.

[dudden22]

I voted guilty but I say it is about a 50/50 chance. The prosecution did suck but with the sharing beds, porn book, and previous charge who knows.

[Merf]

I think it will be guilty on the molestation count, not guilty on the conspiracy count.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Merf

I think it will be guilty on the molestation count, not guilty on the conspiracy count.

Is he still being charged with administering alcohol to a minor? I remember reading that the judge had reduced those charges to misdemeanors because there was no evidence to suggest that he had done so with the intent to molest, but I happened to catch that douchebag Dan Abrams on MSRNC last night and his show made no mention of the charges even being reduced when he read off the list of charges.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Is he still being charged with administering alcohol to a minor? I remember reading that the judge had reduced those charges to misdemeanors because there was no evidence to suggest that he had done so with the intent to molest, but I happened to catch that douchebag Dan Abrams on MSRNC last night and his show made no mention of the charges even being reduced when he read off the list of charges.

I think they are still there and he will be guilty of those based on the evidence I saw on the t.v., granted I have not seen it all or daily. So, we shall see.

[ryan8472]

I say not guilty.