The investigation and Trial of Michael Jackson lasted from November 2003 to June 2005. Leading up to the trial was jury selection. A man named Jeffrey Welbaum was selected as a juror, more specifically an alternate juror. Jeffrey is a controversial juror due to the fact his mother in-law worked at Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch and he was still selected as a juror. Jeffrey was able to keep his notebooks after the trial since he was an alternate juror. There were only several alternate jurors that had notebooks that fully documented the trial. This book is one of them which is a summary or shortened version of the trial that documents what Jeffrey found meaningful from trial testimony documented witness by witness. In 2006, Vincent Amen purchased the notebooks from Jeffrey Welbaum and later the rights to publish them as a book. There is a great value to the notebooks with positive implications. What does a juror note from Trial testimony to ultimately render a verdict? This question may have never been explored before prior to publishing these notebooks. For prosecutors and defense attorneys alike, these notebooks can be helpful in determining how to try cases. Based on all evidence shown and witness testimony, what a juror finds meaningful to note can provide a means to being more effective in organizing and trying a case. Enjoy reading the notebooks and based on what is documented, try to come to your own conclusion or verdict.

Exploring Judicial Politics presents twenty original essays by political scientists and judicial scholars on a variety of topics relative to judicial politics. These readings explore the ways in which law and politics intertwine in the United States and cover issues from the trial court level all the way to the Supreme Court, taking into account the various actors in the American legal system. In addition, they provide insights into how judicial scholars go about studying and interpreting various phenomena in the field. Exploring Judicial Politics is an ideal resource for undergraduate courses in Judicial Politics, U.S. Courts, and Law and Society.

We, the Jury is the dramatic story of seven jurors, who convicted Scott Peterson of murdering his wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner, despite a series of internal battles that brought the first major murder trial of the 21st century to the brink of a mistrial. The Peterson jurors argued and disagreed but eventually bonded to seal the fate of the icy killer who dumped his victims into the bullet-gray waters of San Francisco Bay. The seven jurors of We, the Jury were seven average Americans who never imagined the horrors they would face or the phantoms that would haunt them after they convicted the enigmatic murderer and recommended that he be put to death. This is the story of how the American jury system worked after being battered by critics for the way it functioned in the trials of O.J. Simpson and Michael Jackson. Unlike the jurors in those trials, who second-guessed themselves, the Peterson jurors do not question their decisions. It wasn’t one thing that condemned Scott Peterson, it was everything.

Everyday life, no whether the issues or events arise next-door or a continent away, raises questions and concerns that the public counts on journalists to answer and, more important, confront. More than ever before, we all rely on the news media for warnings, explanations and insights. The profession - and society - cannot afford lazy, inept, uncommitted journalists. Today's reporters must learn how to cover public affairs intelligently and thoroughly. First you must learn about the institutions and people who influence the news; understanding how a legislative conference committee functions or how a trial is conducted remain important pre-requisites. But it is not enough merely to know how to report. Journalists must also understand how they see, define and influence the news. Don't be fooled by the daily dose of fluffy stories about fads, fashions or fetishes. People love to revel in celebrity gossip or fantasize about extreme makeovers. But Donald Trump's love life or the South Beach Diet don't satisfy when people worry about a home invasion in their neighborhood or a rezoning proposal to bring a Wal-Mart super center to town or a Department of Education report that their child's school scored bottom-most in reading achievement. Public Affairs Reporting Now is intended to teach you the best practices and give you the best advice for covering what's generically known as "public affairs reporting. It's a term that's neither inspiring nor precise, but it's long been a convenient way of describing the kind of news coverage that keeps people informed as citizens and keeps our institutions, public and private, focused on the public good.

Giffin's smash-hit debut novel--basis for the 2011 film--is for every woman who has ever had a complicated love-hate friendship.

Read the story behind the award-winning film Judas and the Black Messiah On December 4, 1969, attorney Jeff Haas was in a police lockup in Chicago, interviewing Fred Hampton's fiancÉe. Deborah Johnson described how the police pulled her from the room as Fred lay unconscious on their bed. She heard one officer say, "He's still alive." She then heard two shots. A second officer said, "He's good and dead now." She looked at Jeff and asked, "What can you do?" The Assassination of Fred Hampton remains Haas's personal account of how he and People's Law Office partner Flint Taylor pursued Hampton's assassins, ultimately prevailing over unlimited government resources and FBI conspiracy. Fifty years later, Haas writes that there is still an urgent need for the revolutionary systemic changes Hampton was organizing to accomplish. Not only a story of justice delivered, this book spotlights Hampton as a dynamic community leader and an inspiration for those in the ongoing fight against injustice and police brutality.

Documents the life stories of death-row prisoners and the author's experiences as a pro bono attorney on Texas death penalty cases to present arguments for the abolishment of state-sanctioned executions.

Sociolinguists and lawyers will find insight and relevance in this account of the language of the courtroom, as exemplified in the criminal trial of O.J. Simpson. The trial is examined as the site of linguistic power and persuasion, focusing on the role of language in (re)presenting and (re)constructing the crime. In addition to the trial transcripts, the book draws on Simpson's post-arrest interview, media reports and post-trial interviews with jurors. The result is a unique multi-dimensional insight into the 'Trial of the Century' from a linguistic and discursive perspective.