Do you know why they found him innocent?
Because they felt offended by the mother of the accuser. They said it them selves. She snapped her fingers at them. One got offended. Another said the mother kept looking at them. She got offended. Another didn't like the way she corrected mj's attorney. He got offended. This verdict was brought on because of emotions and they didn't like the mother. That's not right at all. Emotions shouldn't play into a court case. No matter what any side does to make you uncomfortable, you look at the facts, not whether one of the people pissed you off. And that's what is wrong. They didn't look at the facts. They interviewed the foreman of the jury. He said they said he was innocent because they didn't like what the mother was doing to them and they didn't believe her. And the interview her said " well deep down in your heart, do you believe mj mole3sted that kid?" And the foreman didn't answer. HE DIDNT ANSWER. He thought mj did it.
Now i must admit, the prosecution bringing on a charge of conspiracy is fucking retarded. and they didn't even bring Mj to the stands.
But the evidence was there.
1) Porn was found next to mj's bed
2)They found wine in the coke cans (Jesus juice)
3) there was a tub of Vaseline next to the porn
4) Mj admitted to sleeping with a kid in the same bed every night for one year
5)He paid of that first kid around 5 mill or something when that kid accused him of it. Do you know why? Because if mj did go to court with that first kid, he would have been thrown in jail for sure.
That is all you need to convict him of molesting him. Also how did the kid know that the wine in the coke cans are called by mj "Jesus juice"? Only if he was with him. And how did the kid know that his penis was discolored with black and white splotches? You need to see it to know it. Now how can he not be guilty from that?
Even if he was not guilty of molesting the kid, then how is he not guilty of giving the kid alcohol??? That is absurd. That is why i am pissed.
So looks like you don't win.