On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 19:22:53 -0700, Terry Pulliam Burd
> wrote:

>I wasn't a juror who was presented with all the evidence and testimony
>available and neither were you, but I've thought all along that
>Jackson isn't guilty as this prosecutor has presented the charges.
>From what I can infer, he is likely asexual and so disconnected with
>reality, so unable to exercise good judgment that he really thinks he
>can be playmates with these kids. The bit where he said - and proudly
>- in a national interview that he slept platonically with the boys
>was more or less a "tell," as they say in gambling, for me. He
>actually sees no problem with an adult male sleeping with juvenile
>males b/c he's just "one of the boys" himself with no sexual agenda.
>And he *has* no sexual agenda b/c he is asexual, IMHO.

But there's the pornography...

I don't believe he is asexual, but obviously socially dysfunctional.
And guilty.

The creep dodged a bullet. Despite losing, the prosecution did a good
thing because the case put Sicko's behavior in the spotlight so that
it's unlikely he'll go back to his old ways with little boys anytime
soon.

It's really too bad he didn't use his fortune for therapy instead of
gratification.

Sue(tm)
Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!