Michael Jackson

[j2k4]

Originally posted by cowswithguns@24 November 2003 - 10:52
And also this crap about him being a 'child in a man's body' really annoys me. He is quite capable of acting like an adult in other aspects of his life.

Exactly.

He is 45 years old.

Of course, it may turn out the "Child in a man's body" defense is superbly effective-one never knows, these days.

[cowswithguns]

Oh....I think it's very possible that his legal eagles will milk that for all it's worth...try to close the age gap by putting him on the same level as the children hence making it appearalmost acceptable.

People are very gullible and given that he is as crazy as a coconut it won't be easy to convict him.

[blade1356uk]

Total agreement with cowswithguns,the authorities have been blinded for too long about the guy,he even admitted on world wide tv that kids got into his bed,the parents want prosecuting as well because they are no better than him,by letting there kids go to his ranch knowing that he had been accused before,calling a young sick child a liar & all MJ fans I might add the same are as sick as him.

[dwightfry]

They have audio tapes of the accuser, his mother, and his younger brother all praising MJ on how much of a blessing it was to have him in there lives. How MJ has done nothing to hurt any of them, and how he is a fantastic father figuare to her kids.

The tape was definitly made after the alleged actions took place.

[Billy_Dean]

Originally posted by dwightfry@27 November 2003 - 02:04
They have audio tapes of the accuser, his mother, and his younger brother all praising MJ on how much of a blessing it was to have him in there lives. How MJ has done nothing to hurt any of them, and how he is a fantastic father figuare to her kids.

The tape was definitly made after the alleged actions took place.

Did they say it after the shrink phoned the police? I think not.

[dwightfry]

Did they say it after the shrink phoned the police? I think not.

you 'think' not....you don't 'know' not.

I don't get it. some of you seem so set on taking things at face value when comes to his guilt. He is accused so therefore he is guilty. They got an arrest warrent, therefore he's guilty.

and yet this says he's he may innocent... nope...doesn't prove anything.


Sexual abuse towards a child in serious. To accuse an innocent man who has done nothing but good for everyone, ESPECIALLY ill and dieing children, is just as serious.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by dwightfry@26 November 2003 - 13:59

Did they say it after the shrink phoned the police? I think not.

you 'think' not....you don't 'know' not.

I don't get it. some of you seem so set on taking things at face value when comes to his guilt. He is accused so therefore he is guilty. They got an arrest warrent, therefore he's guilty.

and yet this says he's he may innocent... nope...doesn't prove anything.


Sexual abuse towards a child in serious. To accuse an innocent man who has done nothing but good for everyone, ESPECIALLY ill and dieing children, is just as serious.

Renfield-

Call it cynicism if you must, but the promise, or even hint of MONEY has historically proven very effective in buying silence or innocence.

In any case, only the accuser's statements weigh, as I'm sure Mom wasn't in the room, unless she was participating.

I agree-"Innocent until proven guilty"-but this isn't a courtroom, and we are only speculating.

At this point, I tentatively cast my "imaginary" vote for "guilty", just as I do in the Kobe Bryant case.

Kobe shouldn't have gone anywhere near that girl.

[Billy_Dean]

Originally posted by dwightfry@27 November 2003 - 02:59

Did they say it after the shrink phoned the police? I think not.

you 'think' not....you don't 'know' not.

I don't get it. some of you seem so set on taking things at face value when comes to his guilt. He is accused so therefore he is guilty. They got an arrest warrent, therefore he's guilty.

and yet this says he's he may innocent... nope...doesn't prove anything.


Sexual abuse towards a child in serious. To accuse an innocent man who has done nothing but good for everyone, ESPECIALLY ill and dieing children, is just as serious.

The child was seen by a shrink, he heard things about Jacko and phoned the police, after that there were no statements from any of his family praising Weirdo. Nobody knew what that crazy bastard was doing to the kid till he saw a therapist. The tapes may have been made after the actions took place, but they were before the police became involved.

Is claiming his innocence without proof any worse than proclaiming his probable guilt? Which BTW, I have not claimed.

[j2k4]

In light of Jacko's purported economic difficulties, I would expect the ACLU to offer it's good legal offices to him, as they have gotten hip-deep in defending NAMBLA.

It would seem to be a bit of a "natural" to me.

[dwightfry]

First of all...HOLY CRAP....I saw NAMBLA on Southpark....I didn't think it was real. I thought it was a joke.

"Is claiming his innocence without proof any worse than proclaiming his probable guilt? Which BTW, I have not claimed."

The people that I am talking about don't consider it 'probable guilt'. These people have labeled him a pedophile.

I know that he may have done it, but that is all anyone can really say. They shouldn't judge him.