Michael Jackson

So the Michael Jackson verdict came in. The correctness of this verdict is not the issue here.


What I have a problem with are all of the parallels being drawn between Michael Jackson's aquittal and Orenthal James Simpson's aquittal 10 years ago. It seems like a case of people injecting race into a topic where it doesn't belong.

As has been cited time and time again, the jury in the OJ Simpson double-murder trial was predominately black. In fact, the racial breakdown ended up at 8 blacks, 2 hispanics, 1 caucasian and 1 half-caucasian, half-native american. In the wake of the racial tensions of the time (LA riots, Rodney King incident, etc.) and OJ Simpson's history of having been "the black man that connected with whites", race became a HUGE issue in the trial; and the ethnic breakdown of the jury very well could have played a part in Simpson escaping conviction.

Now to make any comparison between that verdict and the one that was made in Santa Maria, California a few days ago is nonsense. Michael Jackson was aquitted by a jury of 8 whites, 3 hispanics and 1 asian. Was this jury compelled to set one of their own free? Were they reacting to a perceived history of judiciary unfairness to their peers? Had racial unity prevailed over common sense?

Never let the truth get in the way a good complaint.