Pauline Coccoz, one of the jury who found Michael Jackson not guilty of molestation, attended Jackson's celebration party last Friday.
400 people attended the party, which was held at the Chumash Indian Casino.
Pauline Coccoz reportedly told journalists that:
"They were playing 'Beat It' and I almost started to cry,"
Jackson's mother, Katherine, told the fans at the party:
"We couldn't have done it without you,".
Coccoz claimed that she decided to bring her family to the party, partly as a public display of her confidence in the jury's verdict.
To my mind for a juror to openly fraternise with the person/associates of the person that they have just acquitted, sends out a very bad signal indeed re the independence of that juror.
She was, in my view, very unwise to attend and has let her fellow jurors down.
Could there be grounds for the prosecution to claim mistrial, on the basis of this juror not being seen to be independent?