Michael Jackson, O.J. Simpson, Richard Blake, and soon to be Phil Spector get off without punishment for serious crimes such as murder or child molestation. Are the jury members in Los Angeles idiots, or is the love of celebrities just too high there.
Meanwhile little old ladies in Los Angeles are arrested because their grass is too brown and dry. And students in Florida are arrested for asking too much at a John Kerry speech. Will they get the same break celebrity murderers get?
Is something wrong with this picture?
2007-09-19 04:54:51 · 6 answers · asked by Tom S 7 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
Something is very wrong with this picture!!!! I guess whoever you are if you have enough money you can pretty much get whatever you want. But let someone actually be innocent and never have been seen on a t.v. screen, and it takes years for them to actually prove themselves innocent. Its all crooked, its about "what can you give me".....it has nothing to do with justice.
2007-09-19 05:09:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think judges are very careful to make sure that celebrities do not get any breaks from a legal standpoint. There is so much scrutiny that it's rare to see people get a break just because of fame.
That said, celebrities often have lots of money, and they can use it to get the best defense money can buy. There is always going to be a problem in that sense between rich and poor.
And juries are sometimes going to make decisions that you and I would not make. It's tough to know how a case should go without hearing all of the evidence personally. O.J. Simpson did have a top defense team, but you could argue the case wasn't prosecuted as well as it should have been.
2007-09-19 15:43:30 · answer #2 · answered by wdx2bb 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Alright, first of all, were you in the jury for any of these cases? Don't you realize that most juries are made up of people like you and me? Every single jury member in the Michael Jackson case said they couldn't see evidence that he did anything wrong. The jury members in the OJ case saw reasonable doubt (poorly reasonable, but it was there.) The problem isn't the celebrities, the problem is the rest of the country. Most court cases today are decided on probable cause, not reasonable doubt. If there is probable cause that the person committed the crime, then they are guilty. The only thing the celebrities have going for them is they can afford to pay for a lawyer that can raise that reasonable doubt, and make sure that the jury remembers that IT is how our courts work.
2007-09-19 16:45:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Soon to add Phil Spector to that list. (Edit: Oops, overlooked his name. NM! :D)
Because they have the money to afford the top defense attorneys and because people are blinded by celebrity. Those two elements = acquittal.
You MAY see a celeb convicted if there is every direct video tape evidence. Otherwise, it won't happen.
2007-09-19 12:14:11 · answer #4 · answered by DeAnna 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
good defense, rich, spoiled, everyone loves them even if they do something nobody should do.. I still don't see why people idolize them.. and it's possible that there just wasn't enough proof to convict them so they get set loose
2007-09-19 17:55:56 · answer #5 · answered by I luv culture 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Something very wrong. Money!!!!! Celebrities can buy slick lawyers who can get them out of just about anything!!!!!!!!
2007-09-19 12:14:04 · answer #6 · answered by sheyna 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋