Who knows?

Well, Michael Jackson is found not guilty on all counts. Not particularly surprised (see my comments here). The case against him was weak, with the defence successfully undermining the prosecutions main witnesses: the boy and his mother. Listening to the jury was also interesting, giving an insight into their thoughts. They seemed pretty united behind the decision and also seemed pretty united in their dislike of the mother! I am still uncomfortable with the idea of the jury being allowed to talk to the media about their thoughts. Clearly, it reduces the mystery of the jury room and in this case perhaps shows the public that they went about it in a methodical manner, not letting the fact that they were dealing with celebrity get in their way. However, it is open to abuse for those who want to make a name for themselves. This jury has released a statement saying they all want to be left alone to get back to their normal lives. It will be interesting to see whether or not that happens (there is talk of one of the jury having a book deal, though that is just a rumour).

What now for Michael Jackson? Because of his mounting debts and extravagent spending habits he needs to earn money. His last album was a flop by his standards (selling a "mere" 6 million copies). Suggestions I have heard/read have included: singing in a Las Vagas casino, reuniting with his brothers to reform the Jackson 5, moving to South Africa.... Who knows? Hopefully he will be able to put this case behind him, get better advisers so that he doesn't leave himself open to such allegations in the future and get on with his life. I've already seen a lot of comment on the internet from people who believe he "got off" or that this was "another OJ Simpson". This case cannot be compared with OJ's trial as, in my opinion, the case against Jackson was very, very weak.

The Rebate Wars continue to rumble on:

PM warned over "national egotism"

Europe turmoil as treaty collapses

It is clear that the diversionary tactics of the French and Germans (ie diversion from the main issue of the referendum defeats in France and Holland) are working, though less so over here as the media seems to be well aware of where the main problem lies. I think the Government is perfectly right to demand a full-scale revision of the EU budget in return for the scrapping of the rebate. France has to wake up to the modern world. The CAP sits uncomfortably with the World Trade Organisation's ideal of free trade and with the G8 discussions concerning aid to Africa.

The oft heard argument from the French and Germans is that it is unfair for the poorer countries of the EU to fund the UK's rebate. Surely it is unfair for the poorer countries of the EU and the rest of the world to continue subsidising French farmers? Surprisingly, neither President Chirac nor Chancellor Schroeder have mentioned that.

Finally today, the BBC report that eBay are happy to allow auctions for tickets to live8 to take place on their site:

'Auction website eBay said while it would not prevent people from selling tickets online, it would make a donation to Live 8 "at least equivalent to the fees we collect from the sale of Live 8 tickets".

"The reselling of charity concert tickets is not illegal under UK law, so eBay will allow these tickets to be sold on the site," a spokeswoman said.

"eBay believes it is a fundamental right for someone to be able to sell something that is theirs whether they paid for it or won it in a competition," she added.

Live 8 organisers said eBay had been "very helpful", adding the concert's lawyers would take action against anyone trying to sell tickets.'

(Taken from Live 8 gig gets 2m texts)