CounterPunch
June 15, 2005
Juries and Lynch Mobs
What If Jackson had been on Trial in Massachusetts?
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
and JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
The twelve did exactly what jurors should do and offered a magnificent example of the abiding importance of the jury as the fundamental bulwark of freedom in this Republic. In their press conference the jurors laid waste the disappointed lynch mob with dignified and articulate responses.
Their bottom line was simple: the prosecution had simply failed to make its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Such outrageous prosecutorial strategies, okayed by the judge, as allowing the jury to hear previous allegations (many of them not even first hand accounts) against Jackson on which he'd not been convicted had cut no ice with these jurors. "He may have molested one of those kids, but they never proved he molested this kid", one juror said.
Nor were the jurors ever jolted from common sense. Those stacks of lurid porn, which the prosecution spent more than a week projecting in front of the jury on a giant screen in an attempt to further sully Jackson's reputation? So what, said a juror. Jackson's an adult. So what if the magazines were called "Barely Legal"? The key word is "legal", offered another juror.
It was a great day for the jury and a gratifying blow against the lynch mob, including outfits such as CNN which averted their gaze from photographs of abuse at Abu Ghraib, while stigmatizing Jackson as the supreme abuser.
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn06152005.html