I have the utmost respect for our Justice System, really. We live in a country where our fate is decided by evidence presented to our peers. Fortunately, our version of Justice is much better than non-democratic countries like China or pre-liberated Iraq. For that, I'm grateful.
That being said, I'd like to vent a little about the MJ case. While I have to respect the verdict of the 12 jurors in this case, I find it hard to believe that MJ did NOT administer alcohol to the child in question. From everything I've heard (which is much more than the jury did) he was guilty of this offense without doubt. Does that make him a paedophile? Absolutely not. But when you add up the 1993 trial and it's settlement, the infamous Bashir documentary, and the transcripts from the current trial, it paints a picture of an eccentric personality who--at the very least--has a tendency towards odd behavior with children. A grown man admitting that he willingly "shares his bed" with children is creepy, and most people would argue that it borders closely the actions of a paedophile.
MJ is weird. True, this is not something we can throw him in jail for; You need evidence of a crime. Evidence, which the prosecution apparently did not have or was not able to clearly prove.
But keep in mind that "Not Guilty" does not neccessarily equal "Innocent."
--Hawk