Jesse: you are an idiot.

BY BILL HUTCHINSON
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

The Rev. Jesse Jackson said yesterday that he doubts Michael Jackson can get a fair trial without a single African-American on the jury that will judge him.

“He deserves a fair trial and should have a jury of his peers,” the civil rights leader told the television show “Extra.”

“That jury does not have one African-American, as if we didn’t have the right to vote. That’s not true, and that’s not fair!” said the activist.

The California jury seated for the superstar entertainer’s pedophile trial is composed of seven whites, four Hispanics and one Asian.

Only one of the alternate jurors is black, a 19-year-old flower deliveryman.

There were only about a half-dozen blacks in the initial 243 potential jurors pooled from Santa Barbara County, where African-Americans make up 2% of the population.

One black potential juror asked to be excused for hardship reasons.

Two others selected for the final pool were kicked off, despite objections from the defense, by peremptory challenges exercised by the prosecution.

A 51-year-old black woman who was being considered as an alternate was excused after she complained about the lack of diversity in the jury pool.

“Just look around us. A jury of his peers would be people of his age and people of color, mixed diversity,” the woman said.

“How diverse is this jury looking to you right now?”

seems to be there was about 2% black potential jurors, in line with the demographics for the county. No?

Since I live in CA, this is a BIG story. I going to presume MJ innocent but he’s the dumbest guy, black or white, I know. Despite his good intentions with helping kids who are sick, etc., you can’t bring under-aged kids into your home w/o their parents PERIOD You can’t have under-aged kid’s sleep in your bed at night. You can’t let under-aged rome your house. If you are MJ, you can’t do anything that gives the wrong appearance PERIOD

Mr Soul

Yea that rev. is always spouting some Bs about somethin’
Just listened to a speech yesterday broadcasted on Rush’s show. He was takin’ credit for somethin’n the Bush admin. is doing now. Anyway Rush pretty much tore him to shreds. Just so you guys know, i don’t make it a habit to listen to his show, but I was at my grandmothers, and as they say when in Rome. :laugh:

jerm

Quote (jeremysdemo @ Mar. 03 2005,11:55)
Yea that rev. is always spouting some Bs about somethin'
Just listened to a speech yesterday broadcasted on Rush's show. He was takin' credit for somethin'n the Bush admin. is doing now. Anyway Rush pretty much tore him to shreds. Just so you guys know, i don't make it a habit to listen to his show, but I was at my grandmothers, and as they say when in Rome. :laugh:

jerm

Lets just go ahead and change the topic to "Jeremy: you are an idiot."

seems to me the Rev wants seperate but equal status for “his peers”

Quote (silvermachina @ Mar. 03 2005,12:04)
Lets just go ahead and change the topic to "Jeremy: you are an idiot."

Mabey so, and would argue that point.
But I'm not standing on a podium in the public eye, so it casn just be a secret amongst a couple of musicians with no live who surf music forums!

Pull your head out of the rev.'s azz and take a breath bro! :D


jerm

I knew that would get your goat.

The topic title is fine. And TRUE…

TG

A jury of his peers (people like him) would be made of if seriously rich gender-agnostic-confused people with serious race denial problems.

Anyone that considers Michael to be a typical black man and thus needs typical black people (whatever THAT means they are) on that jury for that jury to be fair is in total denial that Michael isn’t typical of anything.

A jury of rich uncontrolled freaks might fall into that category, but most of those folks are dead already (Elvis, Howard Hughes, Nero, Jeffery Dalmer, …)

I think a jury of peers is exactly what he got. It looks like a good cross-section of the people that live in his area. (I’d hate to think that someone was not my peer simply because he wasn’t white…that would be an insult to both of us.)

The real trouble is finding a jury that can look past his absolute weirdness and get at the real truth of the matter in spite of the circus. He’s not at a disadvantage because he’s black and there are no black people on the jury. He’s at a disadvantage because he’s so different from any one else…period.

That said, it’s not too different from an all white jury in a known racist area with a black man on trial for doing something appalling to white men. To Kill A Mockingbird comes to mind. If Michael is truly innocent it’s going to be very hard to get any group of normal people to accept the things Michael considers innocent actions (things he has freely admitted in interviews) as acceptable behavior for an adult male. Unlike To Kill A Mockingbird It’s not race by any stretch causing these dilemmas.

I dunno, maybe having no blacks on the jury works to Jacko’s advantage. I’m just guessing here but it seems to me that many blacks might view Jacko as somewhat of a “traitor to his race”. I remember when Jacko claimed that poor sales of his Greatest Hits package was due to anti-black sentiments on the part of the label. I heard a lot of callers to a radio talk show who said they were black who didn’t like the comment - general feeling seemed to be that that Jacko had tried to “pass” and only claimed his race when it was to his advantage.

In any event, I’m sure the issue will come up in the appeal if the case goes against him.