Skip to main content

Losing "Gracefully"


Bull Dog
Originally uploaded by macsmind.
CNBC commentator Nancy Grace had a heated exchange with Michael Jackson Jury foreman Paul Rodriguez. It went like this:

When you have so many little boys coming in and saying, `this happened to me,' you got a $20 million settlement to make one kid go away, a $2 million settlement to make another kid go away, you got a grown man sleeping with little boys," she said. "Hello!!"

Rodriguez attempted a reply, but was cut off after two words.

"How do you explain this guy's sleeping with a 13-year-old boy 365 nights in their underwear?" she asked.

Rodriguez explained that the jury did not have enough evidence to convict Jackson beyond a reasonable doubt in the case before them.

Grace later pressed Rodriguez for his personal view on what Jackson did with boys in his bed. Rodriguez said he only wanted to talk about the evidence set before the jury.

"I was very stunned to hear a juror refuse to state what he thought Jackson does in bed with all of his line of little boys, say he didn't want to stick his neck out by telling what he believed," she said. "I mean, isn't that the point of the justice system, to do what you believe in, what you think is right, for Pete's sake?"

The trouble with Nancy and other 'commentators' is that they always want to try the case BEFORE the jury does. Making 'bets' on outcome is not only circus but totally unprofessional and quite frankly stupid. Unless your one of the jury sitting in that room what YOU think has absolutely NO bearing on the case - it's a waste of time.

Yet starting with OJ Simpson all the way up to now news networks have given lawyers an even worse rep than they had before.

Nancy was out of line. Mr. Rodriguez had done his duty - whether you like the outcome or not. He should be castigated in front of viewers simply because you lost a bet and got egg on your face.

Shame on you Nancy and all you represent - the worst in jurisprudence and the absolute worse in journalism.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Calling Mr. Fitzgerald?

**UPDATED AND BUMPED****

As I told you about in this post yesterday as a source confirmed to me that the Justice Department has launched a probe into the NSA leak. Mr. Risen, you are in trouble - prepare your defense. I told you so.

The White House will be announcing the probe at about 12:30pm. My source tells me that this probe will most likely result in another prosecutor being assigned as of course Fitzgerald is still busy/dizzy on the Plame/Game No-Leak. Additionally, other probes into other recent leaks such as the CIA 'prisons'leak is in the works as well. As I said, this is the NEW Bush - on the attack - it's no more Mr. Nice Guy!

About time! Also covering Michelle Malkin

*****End Update*********

UPDATE II: Looks like I owe my source big time as yet another tip comes true as the Washington Post is on the target list as well for the CIA Prison leak.

****End Update II*************************************

Update III: Via Fox: "The government has no legal right to…

Able Danger - Sign Up - Get the Truth

Per the Able Danger Blog (newly added link), get over to this petition and sign ur name. Again, if there is any chance of true bi-partisan hearings, the people are going to have to speak up and loud.

Just do it!



Newsbusters Busts the MSM on Bush Event

Newsbusters, the blog of Brent Bozell's Media Research Center, exposes the MSM attempt to spin President Bush's meeting with troops into a 'staged event'.

Truth is that the event was not staged, the troops were telling their real feelings: that they support the war and our President.

I guess they might have this story mixed up with the "planted question" to Sec. Rumsfeld back in December 2004.

Yet, that wasn't the case here, Soldiers when asked, will tell you the truth.

Just like in this picture, they tell it like it is!











Michelle Malkin has links to other reactions. Also Blogs for Bush.

UPDATE I: Michelle has a further reponse from one of the soldiers in the video. Here's an excerpt:

"First of all, we were told that we would be speaking with the President of the United States, our Commander-in-Chief, President Bush, so I believe that it would have been totally irresponsible for us NOT to prepare some ideas, facts or comments that we wanted to share …