Michael Jackson NOT GUILTY!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an interest in aquariums or fish keeping!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I was wondering what had happened, didn't hear from it for about a week or so.

Dunno what really happened, but from all that I've heard I think he's just a weird man, who didn't do anything wrong. He just had a very sad childhood.
 
What really got me was that he admited to sleeping with other people's children in his bed. Kissing and hugging and touching them. His employees said that they saw him to stuff to little boys. They would find little boys underwear in the hot tub along with Jacksons. There is something wrong with that picture. I know, how could a parent send their child to the house after hearing about the 93 case. But it still doesn't give him the right to exploit an innocent child like that. Even if he wasn't guilty of the 93 case, I'd still keep my distance. For the safety of the child. My brother even said that he would never let his son go near a child sex offender, even if he was found not-guilty. The thought that it actually COULD have happened is too much of a chance.
 
He is such a freak....makes me sick. First OJ, now Michael Jackson.....just goes to show what kind of an unjust society we live in. Who has faith in our legal system now?
 
The words that came out of my whole families mouth was " WHAT NOT GUILTY!?" and then every word that Im not allowed to say on this forum :lol:
If it would have been your neighbor, or some other ordinary guy, it would have been guilty. Isnt the justice system lovely?
 
Perhaps you would care to be a part of a justice system that is better than ours...oh that's right there isn't one.

The entire ideology behind our justice system is that...it is better for 10 guilty men to go free than one innocent man be punished. Which of you sat in the court room through all the testimony? I don't even know if the trial was televised, but if it was, which of you sat through all the testimony? Or are you basing your opinion of his guilt on what you've heard and possibly read?

BTW, this thread is already very close to being locked.
 
So much for innocent until proven guilty.


That's the thing though, in this country if you get accused of something your name is out everywhere (wether it be a local paper or national media depending on the crime, who you are, what the media decides is important that week etc.) and once your name is out there for doing something most people assume your guilt from the get go. Ask that guy that was accused of setting off the bomb in that park during the olympics in Atlanta about that. So if we want people to be innocent until proven guilty in this country we would protect the identity of the accused as well as the accuser.

As far as this case goes, I don't know what evidance was out there during the trial so yeah maybe i was a little quick with my "you can do what ever you want in this country as long as you have money" comment, but IMO the guy is guilty of doing inapropriate things to children from things i have read and heard before.
 
I agree, it's because he has money. If he wasn't famous, then he would have been found guilty. They find people guilty of murder on less evidence than what he had. Then again, think about how the jury feels. If they would have found him guilty, think of all the death threats and harrasment they would have endoured from MJ finatics. I would be terrified to return a guilty verdict if I was in their shoes. Thankfully the biggest crime committed around here is retail theft under $100.
 
If you belive he is guilty or not, there is no way any of us can have a real opinion about the truth. As RR said, who was in the courtroom?? All we know is what the media tells us. I startes this thread, and I wish that you could keep your comments civil so it doesnt get locked.

You can disagree with the verdict, just do it properly please. :wink:
 
IMO, there wasn't enough to convince me of his guilt. The prosecution had a very poor case, and presented it even poorer. The whole case was, "He said that she said that the kid saw this happen"... There really was no hard evidence. Again, JUST MY OPINION :)
 
Eh. I wouldn't go that far.
If hes guilty then he will most likely do it again. In that case we can try him again, and if he dosn't go it again, then its all for the better i suppose. I feel sorry for the kid, and his family, but I suppose I would also feel sorry for michael jacksons family for having to be put through this whole ordeal.
 
I'm not saying Jackson isn't totally disturbed or that he's innocent of the charges, but I think the reason he won was because of the scumbag family that prosecuted. Personal-injury suit chasing scumbags. They'd already frivolously sued JCPenney for personal injury damages.
 
As far as this case goes, I don't know what evidance was out there during the trial

but IMO the guy is guilty of doing inapropriate things to children from things i have read and heard before.

LOL, contradiction in one paragraph....

So if we want people to be innocent until proven guilty in this country we would protect the identity of the accused as well as the accuser.

I'm sure we would do just that, if your will to give up just a few of the freedoms our forefathers felt were essential when building this country and writing the bill of rights...
 
With regards to the family... I think the mom's ultimate plan was to get Jackson to molest her kid to get another payday....

Think about it, what parent in their right mind would let their kid spend the night with a guy who has paid millions of dollars to make a molestation case go away? Someone who is willing to do anything for money, and this lady fits that profile.
 
dogspot said:
With regards to the family... I think the mom's ultimate plan was to get Jackson to molest her kid to get another payday....

Think about it, what parent in their right mind would let their kid spend the night with a guy who has paid millions of dollars to make a molestation case go away? Someone who is willing to do anything for money, and this lady fits that profile.

That's an opinion I can agree with, even though it is wild speculation...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom