Planetarion Forums

Rumad · 3 Mar 2005, 16:19

Is it only me or is anyone else following the case to see how long jacko gets?

The more I have read on the charges, the porn found on his pc and the general allegations, the more I think he is guilty.

I just wonder why a man who has so much would want to risk everything like he has.

I just hope his spin team dn't manage in shwing the kids mom up to be a crack whore, because thats fairly irrelevant to his charges against him and deflectionary tactics.

xtrasyn · 3 Mar 2005, 16:22

It´s just you.

Other people find him too revolting to look at.

KoeN · 3 Mar 2005, 16:26

i lolled at the 'reconstruction' of the proces. pure cult!

roadrunner_0 · 3 Mar 2005, 16:30

its all a piss take really, there is never going to be a fair trial, and he will get off simply because there is no way they can realistically jail him

Nondescript Human · 3 Mar 2005, 16:42

Really? I think there's a good chance they'll find him guilty whether he is or not. I haven't been following the case that much though.

Phil^ · 3 Mar 2005, 16:44

If guilty : Jail
If not : Mental asylum

thats my opinion of what should happen to him

xtrasyn · 3 Mar 2005, 16:57

Whay should happen to him is a whole different cookie

JammyJim · 3 Mar 2005, 17:00

i found the porn funny

OMG KIDS FINGERPRINTS ON PORN

jesus christ. if you found porn youd look at it. it doesnt mean that he GAVE it to them to look at. Plus...porn on the pc....

id estimate 99% of GD has had porn on their pc at some point. If not 99% of internet users in general.

ChubbyChecker · 3 Mar 2005, 17:04

While I think he probably is guilty I don't think there'll be enough evidence to find him guilty, so he'll get off. Until the next time anyway

Montezuma · 3 Mar 2005, 17:26

I don't think he is guilty. Just terribly naive and simple minded. I don't think he is a threat to children, but I don't think he should be near them either, just a little too weird for my liking.

But then, if you were a kiddy fiddler you'd go for the terminally ill kids too. They aint gonna be around for long to talk about it...

Marilyn Manson · 3 Mar 2005, 17:28

Well, he had sex with me when I was fourteen, so I'd say he was probably guilty.

Mek · 3 Mar 2005, 17:31

i believe he will get off these charges..

Tactitus · 3 Mar 2005, 19:10

In any state but California I think he'd end up doing some serious jail time.

However, after the criminal trial the civil suits will begin--and against that ravenous beast there will be no escape.

MrL_JaKiri · 3 Mar 2005, 19:22

It depends what you mean by "guilty"; did he commit the crimes? Quite possibly. Was the motive behind the crimes anywhere near that which is assumed by society in standardising its punishments? Quite possibly not.

Tomkat · 3 Mar 2005, 20:09

I don't think he is guilty actually.

He's a strange character, but I don't think he's a pedophile. He just likes hanging around with young boys, as he's quite immature himself. I doubt it's a sexual thing. This woman (the mother) saw the chance, and leaped at it.

The question I'd have thought would be - with all this "reputation" Jacko has in terms of boys, what mother in her right mind would let him near them? Except one who was out for an easy court case.

Mek · 4 Mar 2005, 02:04

in Michael jacksons lawyers opening statement he passed comments about how the mother has tried to use the child to fleece money out of other celebrities.. wud i be right in thinking she thought Michael jackson wud go for an out of court settlement and she wud get sum easy money?? bet she wasnt banking on him fighting it..

the mother knew she was onto a good thing with MJ and his reputation..i hope he gets off and that "mother" gets lumbered with a giant legal bill.. it wud serve her right

Dace · 4 Mar 2005, 02:12

I think he's guilty but i also think that he's hired very good lawyers who are gonna try everything they can to get a mis-trial *shrug*

JonnyBGood · 4 Mar 2005, 03:00

I think he's a fairly ****ed up individual and the probability of a fair and impartial trial is astronomically low. I my personal opinion he didn't do it.

Dead_Meat · 4 Mar 2005, 14:36

To have a fair trial, I believe you need jurors who don't have pre-conceptions of Jackson, which would basically mean they'd never heard of him.

This is, in effect, why Jackson has become the biggest global superstar ever, so that he can kiddie-fiddle anywhere in the world and never have a jury that was un-biased.

Now that's dedication.

Deepflow · 4 Mar 2005, 15:38

i reckon he didnt do it, but its not as if im in full possession of the facts. The only ones who can be completely sure are him and the little boy. It'll probably be fairly random in the end what the verdict turns out to be though.

Stew · 4 Mar 2005, 18:48

I know this is "old" but maybe one or two haven't seen it and it did make me smile.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you, exhibit A.

Marilyn Manson · 4 Mar 2005, 18:51

That is quite sickening.

Stew · 17 Mar 2005, 22:34

Escape From Neverland!

Yahwe · 17 Mar 2005, 22:58

on a point of information:

the porn would not be admissable evidence in england

Kurashima · 17 Mar 2005, 23:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yahwe

on a point of information:

the porn would not be admissable evidence in england

Steven , based on the current evidence available, if this case were being tried under British Law, what would the outcome be?

Please give us a professional opinion which wont cost us £120 an hour.

Yahwe · 17 Mar 2005, 23:15

it'd run in england i think, ie. there would be a trial

(i haven't heard all the evidence) the prosecution case is clearly weak. i'd make a half time submission of no case to answer on the basis that the alleged victim's evidence was torn apart, as was his brothers. the prosecution are leaning heavily on circumstantial evidence which is always a bad sign.

i wouldn't expect to win the half time.

but if it wasn't michael jackson i would certainly expect a british jury to aquit. there'ws simply not enough evidence and british juries are very good at understanding how much more important for society in general it is that the prosecution prove their case beyond reasonable doubt.

Stew · 17 Mar 2005, 23:17

So you're saying he'll be found guilty then?

Yahwe · 17 Mar 2005, 23:23

dunno.

its america. who can predict?

my point of criticism would be that very fact. america's legal system has flaws which make it unpredictable. justice is usually more stable

Stew · 17 Mar 2005, 23:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yahwe

justice is usually more stable

Like Britain's 'he who pays more, wins' system?

Kurashima · 17 Mar 2005, 23:25

I think what Steven is saying is that the prosecution team hasnt a leg to stand on, the accuser and his family are being portrayed as liars and money grabbers (and quite successfully i might add), and that Mr Jackson, if the jury has any sense, will be acquitted since there isnt enough evidence for a successful prosecution.

TBH, the civil suit will **** him. He could win this one without any problem, but the civil suit doesnt even need to establish guilt, just "Probable Cause" for the family to win a fortune, and the luxury lifestyle that IS "The American Way" (If youre too dumb to work, and too slow to learn, just file a lawsuit and let your lawyer make you rich).

Stew · 17 Mar 2005, 23:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kurashima

I think what Steven is saying...

I understood fully what he was saying, I was merely mocking the American legal system.

Yahwe · 17 Mar 2005, 23:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stew

Like Britain's 'he who pays more, wins' system?

this is not the system.

Phil^ · 17 Mar 2005, 23:53

isnt it " he who loses, pays the winners legal costs " ?

Tomkat · 18 Mar 2005, 03:12

The Beckhams asked Michael Jackson if he fancied spending a week or so on their boat.

He said "Sure, I'd love to cum on a little Cruz"

oh ho ho

Madina · 18 Mar 2005, 10:13

Tomkat made a funny

xtrasyn · 18 Mar 2005, 10:25

And a good one too lol

Tomkat · 18 Mar 2005, 16:57

roadrunner_0 · 18 Mar 2005, 19:31

has anyone seen any of sky's stuff? now that is ****ed up, with the reconstructions they are doing and all

the kid is being shown to be a lying money grabbing little bastard by all accounts though

Sarina_Joy · 18 Mar 2005, 20:38

OMFG JJ is the voice of reason !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How the hell did that happen?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rumad

The more I have read on the charges, the porn found on his pc and the general allegations, the more I think he is guilty.
.

As JJ says having porn on your pc does not make you a kiddie fiddler. Hell, having child porn on your PC does not make you a kiddie fiddler - it just means you like to look (Can we please for god sake not get into a conversation about whether it's ok to look - it was painful enough the last time with Doveys 'I AM A MOTHER AND YOU ARE ALL DISGUSTING' bullshit).

I have no idea whether he is guilty or innocent. I have not seen all or enough evidence to convince me either way. But unless the prosecution can utterly convince the jury that he sexually 'interfered' with this child, he WILL get off.

xtrasyn · 18 Mar 2005, 21:57

Elvis never had these problems.