Michael Jackson

Posts Attachments
Sort by date Most Liked Posts
Originally posted by Robert Fish@May 2 2005, 08:51 AM
Now, looky here! I made up this topic for humour, and NOT a political
platform! Keep your political comments to yourselves, and let's speculate on
wacko Jacko!
[post=307098]Quoted post[/post]​
Click to expand...


Micheal Jackson ???
He's probably Guilty as Hell !!!
But they'll never convict him !!!
Even if he were to be found guilty ...
He has the perfect defence !!!

NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY :wow:

I'm sure they could parade a dozen psyciatric experts to say that he was mentally insane, at the time of the crimes ... or for most of his adult life ...

:)
 
Actually, as soon as I first heard of Neverland Ranch, I knew he was a pedophile. Between Neverland Ranch and his obsession with trying to be a child himself with his plastic surgery, it was fairly apparent.
 
Dear Libs

YOU LOST!!!! It was fair and square to any objective person. sorry you don't like it, but its true. Now stop embrassing yourselfs and get a canidate that people like and they might win.

or nominate Hillary and lose again.
 
Originally posted by captainstupid@May 4 2005, 05:29 AM
YOU LOST!!!! It was fair and square to any objective person.
[post=307831]Quoted post[/post]​
Click to expand...
I guess IT professionals ain't objective, but Congressmen are.

*snicker*
 
Maybe no one wants to rehash this but I feel that the jury made a huge mistake with their "Not Guilty" across the board verdicts. There is so much smoke with Michael Jackson there has to be fire somewhere.

I still remember in the Martin Brashier documentary when he interviewed Michael Jackson with the accuser, Gavin something, it was so weird the way he was snuggling up to Jackson and placing his head on his shoulder and looking up at him with loving puppy dog eyes. It looked so much like he had been intimate with Jackson just the body language he was giving off.

There was too much emphasis on the fact that the mother was a piece of crap. The DA should have put the boy on the stand and forgot about letting the mother get up there.

I still think at some point when Jackson is old or has died, someone, or perhaps several of his friends who were boys will come forward and say, yeah, it's all true.....
 
Deep down I know Michael is probably guitly, but I am a little thankful that he was found Not Guilty. I feel this way because :

#1 I honestly don't think he would be able to handle prison, he would most likely kill himself

#2 I don't think his parents would be able to handle such a stress like that. I think that they had an ambulance outside the courtroom yesterday for his parents,just in case the verdict was guilty

#3 I hope and pray that he has learned his lesson and will no longer have kids at his home. The best thing would be to sell Neverland and have it turned into a summer camp for kids or something along those lines.

That is just my opinion of the situation.
 
Now that one of the jurors has said that MJ probably did molest some kids, we can only shake our heads in disgust at the outcome. Why did this happen? FOr the same reason that this discussion topic is here: celebrity. This country is so star-struck that we let them do and say anything they want without penalty. There was OJ, Robert Blake, Mark Chmura, now this freak. It sickens me -- the whole thing. Our "justice" system belongs to the rich and powerful. VOTE LIBERTARIAN!!!!!!!
 
Many people are asking "How could this happen?" and blaming the celebrity status and the American justice system. But, and this is what the jury had to say, you have to remember "beyond a reasonable doubt."

There was doubt in the minds of the jurors and not enough evidence to convict him in their eyes. The prosecution dropped the ball in proving their case with the family they chose (a history of other law suits, etc.... and putting that controlling mother on the stand!).

They declared him "not guilty," but did not say he was "innocent" of the 10 counts.
 
I dont like disagreeing but i think he just really weird, not a child molester, but just sort of childish/immature himself. he probably slept with kids but not in a sexual way, think childrens's sleepover type thing.

as for the justice system, i agree with blastoff123, its screwed
 
  • Like
Reactions: OreoEE
For those of you who think that the question of beyond a reasonable doubt wasn't met, ask yourself this: if it had been YOU, would you be let off? Probably not. It's just another example (of far too many) of the rich and famous getting treated differently from the rest of us average citizens. Look at the number of teachers, police officers, priests, etc who get convicted every year. Now, if they are guilty they should pay, but the fact that most of these people can't pay multi-millions for legal defense gives them less of a chance than Wacko Jacko, or countless other people whose fame and fortune let them buy a different justice. You'll see the same thing happen soon in Florida when (or if) Rush Limbaugh goes to trial for drug charges.
 
Originally posted by blue27@Jun 14 2005, 08:52 PM
Maybe no one wants to rehash this but I feel that the jury made a huge mistake with their "Not Guilty" across the board verdicts. There is so much smoke with Michael Jackson there has to be fire somewhere.
Click to expand...
Allegations, circumstantial evidence and rumours are not sufficient to deprive a man of his liberty - no matter how ugly, idiotic or dislikeable he may be.

Now I didn't follow the details of the trial too closely, but the fact that the prosecutor had a 'vendetta' against Jackson going back 10 years, and the accuser's family had a track-record of attempted extortion from celebrities, really does make it almost impossible for a jury to produce a 'guilty' verdict.

Bottom line is that Michael Jackson cannot be jailed just to satisfy the public's (ie. the media's) desire to be 'tough on pedophilia' (ie. make a symbolic jesture).
 
The OJ Simpson trial taught me that it all hangs on how the trial
is handled, how the evidence is presented, and how convincing
the prosecutors are.
The verdict does NOT always hang on the facts.
:(
 
clownboots19:
Originally posted by leoboy63@Jun 15 2005, 09:02 AM
Many people are asking "How could this happen?" and blaming the celebrity status and the American justice system. But, and this is what the jury had to say, you have to remember "beyond a reasonable doubt."

There was doubt in the minds of the jurors and not enough evidence to convict him in their eyes. The prosecution dropped the ball in proving their case with the family they chose (a history of other law suits, etc.... and putting that controlling mother on the stand!).


They declared him "not guilty," but did not say he was "innocent" of the 10 counts.
[post=320848]Quoted post[/post]​
Click to expand...

-If that's the case, then every criminal offense that isn't videotaped would have reasonable doubt. Of course their's some element of reasonable doubt in a sexual assault/child molestation case, especially when the defendant pleads not guilty. They are some of the hardest cases to prove. But how manygrown men in their mid fourties do you know that sleep with boys of a certian age level? I know on thing, if I had already been accused of it, I would have stopped sleeping with little boys the first time!

-The prosecution did an excellent job prosecuting this case. How much more could they have done with what they had? AND just so you know, the prosecutor's didn't choose the family....MICHAEL JACKSON CHOSE THAT FAMILY TO VIOLATE...and the prosecutor's and police did their job by charging him! You can say all you want about history of lawsuits, but Michael Jackson paid a kid's family $20 million over a decade ago, not too mention the youth minister who testified this time, saying Michael Jackson molested him also as a child. The youth minister didn't have a shady past, but then again the jury really didn't take him into account. The jury left their brains and common sense at home. I mean, they couldn't even convict him of giving alcohol to minors. How many little boys go to a guests house and start hunting for the wine cabinet and the pornos? Not too mention the fingerprint evidence and third party witnesses that saw Wacko Jacko giving the boys alcohol. One juror (who is only 19) visited NeverLand Ranch as a kid, so he NEVER should have been on the jury! Another juror has a grandchild who was convicted of sexual assualt...hmm, probably not good for a jury in a sexual offense case, and another juror afterwords in an interview said, "What kind of mother would let that kind of thing happen to her child." HELLLO!! I thought nothing happened. Child molesters target broken home families intentionally..This verdict will likely cause future or recent victims to NOT come foward. And who can blame them?

-To anyone who thinks he is not guilty, I ask you these two questions: 1) Would you let your child spend a weekend at the Neverland Ranch alone with Michael Jackson? 2)
Would you let your child sleep with Michael Jackson?
on?
 
I'm sure a lot of guys who arent old enough to be posting in here already know :)

so what do you think anyways?
 
Originally posted by surferboy@Jun 19 2005, 10:12 PM
....Why? :eek: :eek: :eek:
[post=322224]Quoted post[/post]​
Click to expand...

My feelings exactly....


You're name wouldn't happen to be Gavin would it??? :evilgrin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Michael Yi
Replies
1
Views
345
Models and Celebrities
loki_ragnorak
L
A
LamJackson9 Lam Jackson LamJackson
Replies
2
Views
337
OnlyFans and Web Personalities
mamat
M
H
Jackson Bergren
Replies
2
Views
277
OnlyFans and Web Personalities
jkc
J
S
Michael G.
Replies
0
Views
155
Models and Celebrities
sniper1308
S
Z
Michael
Replies
1
Views
246
OnlyFans and Web Personalities
Wattson88
W
Top Bottom