Last night was the first time I paid any attention to the Michael Jackson trial. I knew nothing about it, but I still spent an hour watching the verdict and then listening to the jury's press conference. Somehow I found listening to the jury reassuring. They were just regular people rendering justice.
I have no idea what evidence was produced by the prosecution, but I got the idea from the jury that the accuser's mother was not credible at all. What reassured me, however, was the woman who asked something along the lines of, "What mother would allow their child to share a bed with Michael Jackson?". Michael Jackson is a freak, a creep and a weirdo, none of which is a criminal offense, but I wouldn't let my kids anywhere near him.
For me this is a complete contrast to the O.J. Simpson trial, which I was glued to. Andrew Sullivan says the relative lack of interest in the Jackson trial in America compared with other big media trials is because this case was about class and race – taboo subjects in America – and "the cold, heartless core of American celebrity".
I enjoy psycho-babble as much as anybody, but how can I take Sullivan seriously. This is ridiculous. The reason people didn't pay as much attention is because (a) the trial was not actually on t.v. – all that was available were reconstructions and (b) nobody was in any doubt that Jackson was a freak, a creep and a weirdo before these accusations became public – there was nothing shocking or titillating on show here.
