Jackson fuckin not guilty
Home > Home Recording Forum > Talkin' Smack > Jackson fuckin not guilty
Posted on Jun 13, 2005 05:21 pm
dbmasters
Administrator Since: Apr 03, 2002
yeah, whatever, justice american style...good thing for him he's a celeb.
[ Back to Top ]
TadpuiI am not a crook's headMember
Since: Mar 14, 2003
Jun 13, 2005 05:45 pm In a way it doesn't surprise me, but at the same time it really disappoints me. I guess when you can afford the best of the best lawyers, the chances of them finding that little tidbit to keep the jury's opinion out of the "beyond a reasonable doubt" realm is pretty high. I don't think that anybody involved with that decision is going to sleep soundly for a long long time.
P.S. The forum hasn't been liking the censored smiley in thread titles lately...it shows up a little weird for me.
Jun 13, 2005 06:21 pm i hafta admit, i personally haven't heard any real 'evidence' pointing twards his guilt....sure he's an eccentric wierdo that idendtifies more with children than adults, but i think that his childhood and we (the public) had ALOT to do with shaping him into that....after this most recent episode in the ongoing saga of 'is jaco wacko'....i'm really starting to feel like it's all a money sucking scheme.....now the rest of the world can move along, cuz frankly i could give a damn about him. it's been what, 12 years now since all this tabloid crap started, and we're STILL tryin' to pin him. the man has been through enough, it's sad because we created this iconic monster, and now we poke fun at him.....ever seen Elephant Boy? FYI, i can't stand MJ, and i used to think he did it, but i have faith in the jury, and if they didn't buy it, niether do i.
olddogMember
Since: Jul 02, 2003
Jun 13, 2005 06:50 pm I don't know if He's innocent or not, but the way I see it, it's up to the prosecution to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt obviously they couldn't, so that's that. Celebrity or not I think the jury would have convicted him if the evidence supported it.
I kind of go along with what WYD said as well, He is weird but that doesn't automatically mean He is a molester as well.
Dan
Jun 13, 2005 07:24 pm Yeah, it wasn't the best and/or strongest case, but jeezuz, that guy thinks it's OK to share his bed with little boys, he has said that himself...ya gotta admit, he has a screw loose...
Jun 13, 2005 07:29 pm hes guilty of something, maybe not molesting, but having children sleep in bed with you(unless its your own child and he/she had a nightmare one night) is inappropriate and giving kids wine? yeah the justice system is so messed up at the very least the judge should have said ok your innocent by jury but i herby forbid you to have children at your neverland ranch overnight for the rest of your life, if you do it again its federal "pound you in the a$$" prison for you.
Jun 13, 2005 07:34 pm my grandpa used to give me sips of his beer when i was real young.....hmm i wonder if thats why i love beer now....
Jun 13, 2005 07:52 pm Id like to dangle JACKSON over a window like he did with the kids...then drop the sucka.
Im with dB on this one...sorry folks - ye just canny have things like that happen and no ask questions as to his mind.
Coco.
Jun 13, 2005 08:06 pm ya know who should be put in jail are the parents of those kids...I don't care what celeb it is, if they are as weird as him my kids would never stay there...then again, my kids are girls, so he wouldn't care...
Jun 13, 2005 09:55 pm im with you on that one db!
RigsbyUltra MagnusMember
Since: Nov 13, 2004
Jun 14, 2005 02:01 am Yeah, agreed.
cooloFrisco's Most UnderratedMember
Since: Jan 28, 2003
Jun 14, 2005 02:37 am Whatever. I still love Thriller. I still don't care about the case. Maybe now I can hear about some other news that doesn't affect me at all. What a waste of time.
ZX6R1033PerdidoMember
Since: Dec 15, 2004
Jun 14, 2005 08:40 am OK... it seems that I havent pissed in anyones cheerios for a while, so here goes.
I truelly honestly believe that Jackson was innocent... this time.
Due to all the past accusations, trials, press, and what not, EVERYONE in the nation knows about him. After all that, what parent would let their kids go to his house? Easy... ones who want to get rich quick. Why not send them to his house for a night, then sue him? That is all this was.
Granted, he is a VERY sick and twisted psychopath... I am not defending him. But, come on... how many people are trying to get rich by falsley accusing him of something he really did many years ago? This was an attempt to play on that, and make money. Nothing more. I would have been pissed if he was convicted... that would have been fked up.
Think about that for a second before responding.
vdalehubbardLost for words with all to say.Contributor
Since: Sep 12, 2003
Jun 14, 2005 09:09 am What child molestor isn't sick in the head? They all are. I agree that the most stupidest thing Jackson did in his life was continue to have them kids come over to his house after settling his first case of being a child molestor. The parents get the "most stupid" award here for letting their kids continue to come over. In this case, I agree with the not guilty. I believe the parents where after money here. It's possible the parents are not right in the head and that is why they continue to let their kid go over to Jackson's. I haven't heard or seen this kids parents personally to know if they are missing some beers from their 6-pack to make that judgement. The jury had to make a decision based on this one incident alone. Is he guilty of something? Sure. Of what he was being charged on? No.
Jason H.Jack of all trades master of ___Member
Since: May 28, 2004
Jun 14, 2005 10:52 am I think it was a money sucking scheme...I mean, the [first time] he went through this the public knew this guy was a loopy one...
So what "parent" would allow their kids even within the gates of his ranch after that whole fiasco??? And now this???
Guilt or not...what I think in that matter doesn't make a difference. But it is true...the procecution didn't prove it beyond a resonable doubt and in my own opinion the parents knew Jacko's child credability and his overall credability was tarnished from the early 90's incident...
Thats why I think it was all about money. But had he been proven guilty...I wouln't have been mad either. Oh well.
Jun 14, 2005 10:55 am news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=...hael_jackson_78
"Jackson Won't Share Bed With Kids Again"
geeee, that's mighty big of him...
ZX6R1033, I agree in part with your conspiracy theory, however, whether he did it THIS TIME or not is moot to me, I have no big issue with karma catching up with a guy. That said, I am still disappointed that he wasn't even found guilty of giving that "Jesus Juice" (or whatever he called it) to kids, which was alcohol...
I dunno, being weird isn't a crime, but his entire persona so perfectly fits the model of a pedophile...
eh, I guess he's just a smooth criminal.
Jun 14, 2005 11:01 am lol
vdalehubbardLost for words with all to say.Contributor
Since: Sep 12, 2003
Jun 14, 2005 11:03 am Guess Billy Jean is not his lover...
Jun 14, 2005 11:04 am that's cuz she was just a girl...
vdalehubbardLost for words with all to say.Contributor
Since: Sep 12, 2003
Jun 14, 2005 11:19 am All he wanted to do was beat it...
Jun 14, 2005 11:21 am I guess somebody had to say it LOL
Jun 14, 2005 11:36 am and now they won't just leave him alone!
BeerHunterwww.TheLondonProject.caMember
Since: Feb 07, 2005
Jun 14, 2005 11:57 am I would've thought by now that someone would've ordered a psychiatric evaluation.
A few things bother me about this whole thing. Since when can a man hang a baby over a belcony and also be allowed responsibility to care for children on his property?
Shouldn't he have some sort of license and background check to care for children? Do you really think that someone with previous abuse claims against them be granted a license? In Canada we're not even allowed to coach a sports team without a background check. I'm not sure how it is in the US, but I cannot explain how he is allowed to care for children (especially overnight) without some sort of authorization from the state.
I can't help but feel that the parents are also partially to blame. Would you leave your kids with someone that has had previous
alegations against them?
I have a lot of questions on how this was even able to happen in the first place. All I know is celebrities don't live by the same laws as the rest of us.
Jun 14, 2005 12:00 pm See, now thats how I feel. If even ONE of the charges would have stuck there would have been enough to at least monitor the guy, order evals and other such things without necessarily incarsarating him. Cuz face it, if he went to jail, he's toast.
The baby over the balcony thing was scary, admitting to sharing his bed with little kids is scary, others who had nothing to gain or loose talking about looking at porn mags with him and such...well, it adds up to something that should be investagated further.
Personally, this DA has it in for him, but it seems jumped before he had a good enough case.
Jun 14, 2005 01:01 pm in another ten years we will prolly see him back in court as he cant just buy people off anymore.
BeerHunterwww.TheLondonProject.caMember
Since: Feb 07, 2005
Jun 14, 2005 01:08 pm I'm sure it will. He has an addiction and unless he gets help, it will happen again.
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Jun 14, 2005 01:18 pm as far as the DA, I think he tryed to prosecute a few years back, but to legal loopholes, he couldn't prosecute. Now there's been laws changed, so he felt confident he could get a conviction.
in regards to the jury, i had a lawyer (80 yrs old) who said that you'd be suprised as to what a jury can figure out on their own. Things neither side would think of, the jury does. I'm inclined to think that if there was something for the jury to find, then they'd find it. Also, there may have been other mis-deeds, but the jury is bound to only pass a verdict on the information and complaint submitted. They can't go after some other issue that wasn't directly brought up in trial.
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Jun 14, 2005 01:19 pm I also agree with you BH, he's been in this hot water before, and still he goes after this sort of thing. He's got problems that won't go away just because he's won a court case. Hope he gets help.
Jun 14, 2005 02:10 pm I would tend to say, whilst there may be an element of some people jumping on the band wagon, there is SOMETHING there.
He sleeps with kids and thinks it OK. Man, if anyone else done that theyd be carted off by the police and jailed. Anyone else held their kids over a balcony, they be carted off tae.
I personally found his Christ like antics during the Brit Awards a few years ago mental as well..thinking he is God. MAn, he is a screwball...he needs locking up for ALL our goods.
Nutcase.
Coco.
Jun 14, 2005 02:15 pm i don't get the whole kid over the balcony thing....my father used to grab my ankles and spin me in circles, and do all kinds of "dangerous" (no pun intended) things with me, i loved it. it's not like he was threatening to drop him....just holdin' him up for ppl to see.
vdalehubbardLost for words with all to say.Contributor
Since: Sep 12, 2003
Jun 14, 2005 02:19 pm I just noticed something (off topic). Cussing is censored on the pages but not on the title bar at the very top! haha!
Eeeeee Heeeeee! *grabs crouch*
Jun 14, 2005 02:21 pm it's censored on my browser (IE)
ZX6R1033PerdidoMember
Since: Dec 15, 2004
Jun 14, 2005 02:21 pm I just noticed something (off topic). Cussing is censored on the pages but not on the title bar at the very top! haha!
Yeah, wyd pointed that out a while back. the links look strange too.
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Jun 14, 2005 02:27 pm check the title bar at the top of the application. my IE showed the goods, while the topic header did not. mozilla shows the goods on the window tab, plus the application title.
ZX6R1033PerdidoMember
Since: Dec 15, 2004
Jun 14, 2005 02:32 pm My IE shows both as well.
Jun 14, 2005 02:36 pm hahaha i see the F word now!
Jun 14, 2005 02:36 pm i just could never see any evidence that truly and definitely pointed to the idea that he really did these things. it seemed like he said she said.
Jun 14, 2005 03:21 pm True..tho, as I Say, he should be checked out for his mental state i.e. he is MENTAL!
Sleeping with kids is not normal behaviour for a sane adult. And, to those kids parents who let it happen - WHAT ARE YE THINKING...
I'd kick thier asses to for such gross negligence in their care of their kids...man, its a bad situ all round.
Coco.
Jun 14, 2005 09:09 pm aye...
zekthedeadcowEat Spam before it eats YOU!!!Member
Since: May 11, 2002
Jun 14, 2005 11:55 pm I decided it was a money sucking suit after hearing about Leno's testimony about the family approaching him.
Sure MJ needs some serious help but as the guy is completly surrounded by professional business/security people, you'd think they'd look into job security and keep him wealthy and out of jail. I blame his handelers for allowing him to put himself in this situation.
Jun 17, 2005 05:06 am Imagine from a black wide-nosed fellow to a white sharped nosed semi-female thing.
But he is good.
The verdict is money minting game
vdalehubbardLost for words with all to say.Contributor
Since: Sep 12, 2003
Jun 18, 2005 10:05 am "Michael Jackson is guilty.....and you're a dude!"
Best line ever!
