Jury members change story

Entertainment - canada.com network Jury members of the Michael Jackson trial now "change their story" and declare that they were under pressure to vote not guilty.

Since they have a book in the marketing dept, their claims appear not without alterior motive.

The US Justice system allows jury members to benefit from the freedom of the media. It follows then that money is to be made, so they go for reaction, spinning a media storm from sealed jury deliberations. Who can argue?

How much did this trial cost America? Are these peoples' "revelations" of greater value than justice? A belief that someone may be guilty is not the point. In a criminal case the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt - and 12 people voting aquittal is an indication that the prosecution failed to achieve that.

For a jury member to say, post mortem, that the defendent is guilty of crimes other than those before the court, is to say that the prosecution did not do their job by bringing relevant charges. A conviction based on heresay is not justice. A weak case is not justice.

A conviction that follows the rules of the court is considered "safe" is it is proven that the accused is guilty. A conviction based on inadequate evidence or popular opinion is not a conviction.

Susan Drake, 51, said that during the deliberations, the two jurors who now changed their story "were clear in expressing their feeling he might be guilty but totally clear that the evidence wasn't there and reasonable doubt prevailed." She described the deliberations as "thoughtful and courteous," not intimidating.

Notoriety and Responsibility

Notoriety and Responsibility

A recent police action resulted in a drug bust and the arrest of David Henderson, twice self-made property millionaire. Famously, two former sports celebrities have been implicated despite public knowledge of their identity they remain at large and under "name-supression". This highlights not the side effect of name supression, but the main point - to bestow immunity from publication in the media. Although the media know who they are and although they are already in the media, the media can not discuss it and possibly can not make it in any way obvious as to the identity of the individuals concerned.

Meantime, word gets out. Perhaps that is a good thing. David Henderson's immediate return to NZ from overseas to plead guilty to the crime of possession of cocaine may or may not have been a good idea. Waiting until the dust settled may have had advantages, perhaps, but this man is putting himself at the mercy of the court.

The police operation also resulted in the arrest of the manager of a successful Auckland café - charged as a co-conspiritor to the "kin-pin" - a 55 year old company director. And eighth man has since been arrested.

Two sporting celebrities named in court documents have so far not been charged and their identities remain protected by suppression orders.

Meantime, the Police face random drug testing a measure to restore confidence in the force. The public apparently need their confidence restored in the police. One can imagine after all the attacks on George Hawkins, the Minister of the Police, the Government likely wish to be seen doing something about crime.