Michael Jackson: Wealth and American Justice

[John Simkin]

I have just finished reading Leo Damore’s book, Senatorial Privilege: The Chappaquiddick Cover-Up. It is an example of how American money insures that justice does not take place.

I am also watching the Sky recreation of the Michael Jackson trial. It is very similar to the Edward Kennedy case. It is an account of how one man’s money buys him his illegal pleasures. It is also about how poor women are willing to sell their young sons for sex. From the testimony that has taken place so far, it seems certain that Jackson will be convicted. The defence have not been able to challenge the stories of sex abuse that have been told by several witnesses. Instead, all they do is to try to blacken the characters of the witness.

However, is it possible in a capitalist democracy for someone as rich as Jackson can be convicted? Yesterday the judge, Rodney Melville, made a strange decision. He ruled that Janet Arvizo could not testify on some matters but not others. It did not help the prosecution but has probably guarranteed Jackson's freedom. Legal experts believe that as a result of this decision, Jackson, if convicted, he will be freed on appeal. Is Rodney Melville incompetent? Or has he been paid to make a silly mistake.

[Derek McMillan]

I do not know whether Michael Jackson is guilty or not. I do know that his lifestyle has made him a target for blackmail. (Even if he is guilty that does not mean that he has not been blackmailed either).

It is also the case that a rich man can get a better chance in the courts than a poor one. That does not in itself mean that a rich man is de facto guilty