A Ham Sandwich

Argh! Michael Jackson is driving me crazy! And not like in the Eighties when he rocked the suburbs with his infectious grooves, driving a rainbow hued generation Off the Wall and moonwalking to the discothèques. This time, twenty years from Thriller, his latest record might be criminal, as he faces ten charges of child molestation, abduction and conspiracy, as read to him yesterday at his arraignment in Santa Maria, California.

He is again everywhere, and the sensational coverage of this case, although not yet a trial but already that of the century, has driven me to use my blog as an occasional alternative news outlet and since, as I’ve just seen, CNN enlist an expert panel of entertainment moguls, television presenters and Loyola State University law professors, I might offer my ‘expertise’.

CNN’s expert panel spoke with an assumption of Jackson’s guilt and yet dedicated a segment of the show to defending his prosecutor, District Attorney Tom Sneddon against charges of unfair practice, even advising that we not judge the D.A., as he has been unfairly represented by the media and Jackson’s interchangeable lawyers. Well, the King of Pop has hardly been treated like royalty by CNN and other such news outlets.

I have to go, but before I do I just want to remind you – because CNN won’t – that Jackson, or anybody facing trial, should be presumed innocent until proven guilty and that an indictment is just a formal accusation arising from a Grand Jury, having been presented evidence by the prosecutor only. There is a saying, ‘you can indict a ham sandwich,’ but I would still advise that you presume its innocence.