Not guilty but I'm giving you 10-years just to be safe!

The Gut Says You’re Guilty
By Joseph Walther


I need to talk about two issues this week. The first is the Michael Jackson verdict and the second is the Schiavo autopsy report. One carries no more significance than the other does, but the outcry over both has bordered on the absurd, not to mention stupidity. The condemnation of the Jackson Jury is beyond my comprehension. The continued denial in the Schiavo case on the part of certain people amounts to a “my mind’s made up, so don’t confuse me with facts” mentality to say to least.

Let me begin with Michael Jackson. Unless you have been in a coma over the past fifteen weeks or so, you are aware that the jury in the Michael Jackson molestation trial has returned a verdict. Not guilty on all ten counts was the consensus of the jury. The cable news networks babbled incessantly about this trial since the day it started. True to their normal reporting fashion, all of the networks were fair and balanced; and if you believe this, gullibility is your strongest trait.

The prognosticators on every network, particularly Court TV, had the man convicted and having forced anal sex with Bubba inside of the Bad People’s State Prison. The spins were so lopsided that one could not but think of Michael Jackson as pond scum of the worst kind. While I am not a Jackson fan, I don’t automatically assume his guilt. I think his antics are on the outer perimeters of Weirdo City at best and a manifestation of genuine sicko-mania at worst. I would not permit my minor children to visit the Neverland Valley Ranch, let alone sleep over night.

The jury of twelve plus four alternates sat through the entire trial and heard every shred of evidence. Not only did they hear the evidence, they were able to see and interpret things that people did not say in so many words. None of the cable news networks enjoyed this kind of vantage point. Neither did the “expert” prognosticators.

There are two kinds of guilt in this world. Real guilt is personal and based on what someone has actually done. It is independent from and irrelevant to any criminal court proceedings. Legal guilt is the second and we define this as what the state can prove. The two are in no way necessarily mutually inclusive. In other words, legal guilt and real guilt may not be the same thing. This is the reason that a jury verdict in a criminal trial must be beyond a reasonable doubt and based solely on legal guilt.

A jury in a criminal case NEVER finds a defendant INNOCENT. It only finds that a defendant is guilty or NOT guilty. A not guilty verdict does not mean innocent. It means nothing more than the fact that the state failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

This jury, based on the evidence provided, found Michael Jackson not guilty. Many of the “experts” and most of the local yokels calling into radio talk shows, claiming that this jury blew it, based their opinions on “gut” feelings. People, who think that Michael Jackson is guilty because their guts tell them so, need to understand that a court defines this sort of thinking as REASONABLE doubt.

It amounts to a jury concluding that there really isn’t anything it can get its arms around; but, by God, a little voice in its collective head tells it that the defendant is probably guilty. It’s the same thing as the presiding judge, acknowledging the jury’s not guilty verdict, but deciding to sentence the accused to a 10-year sentence just to be safe! We’d find this unconscionable, but it is no more so than finding a defendant guilty on anything less than credible evidence and even then, beyond a reasonable doubt.

Moving on, “no doubt about it" hard science solved the arguments in the Schiavo case. The medical examiners found her to have been in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery or improvement. In addition, she was blind and there was no evidence of abuse prior to the heart attack that rendered her in the controversial condition in the first place. She died from dehydration and NOT the starvation predicted by the “keep her alive crowd.” Hard science overruled subjective reasoning. The doctors’ diagnoses of her condition were correct all along. This should put the matter to rest!

I can understand her parent’s denial. I do not even like to think about losing one of my children. However, Jeb Bush’s decision to open an investigation is nothing more that stupid pig-headedness. His brother’s, the President of the United States, statement that he also disagrees with the findings is just another example of his stubbornness to accede that he could be wrong about something.

Finally, I would not blame either Michael Schiavo or Michael Jackson for pursuing malicious prosecution cases against their accusers. There certainly are grounds. In both cases, Jeb Bush and Tom Sneddon seem to have had an excessive amount of emotional involvement.


Joseph Walther is a freelance writer. Contact him by clicking on the CONTACT ME link above or email him at TheTrueFacts@comcast.net