On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:43:22 -0500, Mueen Nawaz wrote:

> Nope. Common misconception.

Agreed.  This stereotype is largely reinforced by the way genius is 
portrayed in entertainment media.

Now as to whether MJ was a genius or not, well, personally, I don't think 
so.  His music always struck me as rubbish pop.  But that's just my 
tastes against his style.  But I also hold the opinion (based on what was 
reported, so arguably not a very solid foundation) that he had problems 
as regards kids and that the jury let the "star factor" get in the way of 
an objective verdict in his case, just like happened with OJ's trial.  
That's one of the problems with the way law is done here in the US - the 
jury knows who the defendant is and the associations built with a public 
persona influence the outcomes in high profile trials like MJ's and OJ's.

I wonder if the outcome would have been different if the personality 
hadn't been in the courtroom or somehow the jury were unaware that that 
was the case they were hearing.

Indeed it would be interesting to see how trials would be conducted if 
the defendant (and witnesses too, for that matter) were sequestered from 
the jury so the jury didn't know who they were.  It would be difficult to 
do, no doubt, but might make an interesting experiment in jurisprudence.

Jim

Post a reply to this message