Michael Jackson is one sick fuck

[free]

I watched the ABC grand jury testimony of the accuser of Jackson, and if he telling the truth, boy is he a sick fuck. Here's a few points from the testimony.

Looked up porn site with a minor, then turned to his son, Prince, and said, "Prince, you're missing some good pussy."!

Made a little boy drink 'Jesus juice'?!

All men have to masturbate, let me show you how?!

I turned it off at that point. Jackson makes me fucking sick. I really hope he get raped to hell and back in prison. The child's survived cancer, and now he has to deal with this shit.

Does anyone wan't to stand up for this little fuck.

[jeo4]

I have no choice but to agree with you. Michael Jackson is a sick fuck.

[Mr-Blonde]

http://www.ssqq.com/ssqq/images/jokepic0401%20michael%20jackson%20home%20alone.jpg

I refuse to believe that after all these years he is simply the victim of a smear campaign. I hope they hang the bastard by his tiny marbles.

[Damone]

If that is all true then Michael has got some serious, serious issues.

It's hard to believe that at one time he was probably one of the few performers that I would say a good number of people had a favorable opinion of and now we see how far he's fallen.

[<3mekthx]

Very twisted. I was reading up on this at the smoking gun website. Here are a few more allegations.

A man who gave boys nicknames like Doo Doo Head and Blowhole and then quizzed them about whether they masturbated and if "white stuff" came out. A man who conducted drinking games with minors and surfed porn with them on a laptop in his Neverland Ranch bedroom, noting that if anyone asked what they were looking at, the kids should just say they were watching "The Simpsons." A man who frequently talked sex with his little companions and explained that "boys have to masturbate or they go crazy." A man who told one pajama-clad boy that he wanted to show him how to "jack off." When the tipsy child declined the demonstration, Jackson announced, "I'll do it for you," and buried his hand in the boy's Hanes briefs, size small. And a man who emphasized to his little friends that these activities were "their little secret" and should not be disclosed to anyone, even if a gun was at their head.

[TheDeadWalk]

I refuse to believe that watching segments of ABC, Court TV, MSNBC, or reading snippets in the National Enquirer or Weekly World News allow me to make an objective opinion on whether or not a man is guilty of his accusations.

The profession that I plan to be in, could very well someday lead to someone making accusations at me, with me on trial, and several clones in my county proclaiming me to be a sick fuck, whether I'm found innocent or guilty.

I don't want to stand up for Jackson, he really comes off as a weird fucko. But I'm not about to call for a lynch mob either.

[Cronos]

ive thought he was guilty of this sick stuff when he made that out of court settlement, if he was innocent why didnt he fight it???


and those accusations are really really fucked up

[Twisted Sister]

Originally posted by TheDeadWalk
I refuse to believe that watching segments of ABC, Court TV, MSNBC, or reading snippets in the National Enquirer or Weekly World News allow me to make an objective opinion on whether or not a man is guilty of his accusations.

The profession that I plan to be in, could very well someday lead to someone making accusations at me, with me on trial, and several clones in my county proclaiming me to be a sick fuck, whether I'm found innocent or guilty.

I don't want to stand up for Jackson, he really comes off as a weird fucko. But I'm not about to call for a lynch mob either.

I'm with you 100%, TDW. I do surveillance for a living, and can attest that people are VERY different when they think no one is watching, I don't care who we're talking about. However, there are so many factors in the Jackson case that I'm not comfortable lynching the guy. For example, he's one of the most famous - and eccentric - people who have ever lived. Combine that with money, free publicity, cancer, children and wannabe celebs, there is also a very good chance that allegations are false. Then again... Where there's smoke... See what I mean? I don't think it's fair to judge the guy until there is irrefutable evidence against him.

[Shockwave]

I dont know if hes guilty or not..but i still say hes sick as hell.

[chilli pepper]

One of the few people in the world I completely despise. People are talking about how you shouldnt jump to conclusions because you really dont know what was going on, but no, the dudes a straight up, blatant pedophile. I hope that hes convicted, sent to prison, and beaten to a fucking pulp and just left to bleed out and die a slow painful death.

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by Cronos
ive thought he was guilty of this sick stuff when he made that out of court settlement, if he was innocent why didnt he fight it???


and those accusations are really really fucked up

Being involved with a serious court case like this is like having the flu every single god damn day of the week.

Eventually you just want to settle it, get it overwith and get it behind you.

It doesn't matter if you're innocent, these people will drag the court case out forever while the media keeps a stranglehold on it like Lacy Peterson's murder, Jon Benet Ramsey, etc.

I do speak from personal experience, only mine dealt with a hostile child custody case. We gave in and settled winning custody, but grudgingly allowing standard visitation to the other side because we were tired of the stress, tension, anger, and feeling sick to our stomach everytime some new revelation was sent to our house from the courts or the attorney.

I encourage everyone to look at every single possibility including putting yourself into his goofy ass for awhile. Yeah he's a fuckin goofball, but he's no pedophile... yet. What may seem as clear and sensible answers to you may be more complicated when in another person's shoes.

[B1rd_Po0p]

I agree that no matter what - he is a complete freak who lost touch with reality years ago. My problem with him is that he seems to think that his celebrity status is going to make everything just go away. At some point though, being a celebrity is no longer a get-out-of-jail-free card (it never should be in the first place, but unfortunately - it is) and you have to take responsibility for your actions. (Same goes for frickin' sports 'celebs' - fuck you Kobe Bryant) It just urks me to no end that these people think they are somehow above the law... So I just hope that if he is guilty he finally gets punished and if he's not: well, then he can go back to being in denial...

[Twisted Sister]

Originally posted by B1rd_Po0p
I agree that no matter what - he is a complete freak who lost touch with reality years ago. My problem with him is that he seems to think that his celebrity status is going to make everything just go away. At some point though, being a celebrity is no longer a get-out-of-jail-free card (it never should be in the first place, but unfortunately - it is) and you have to take responsibility for your actions. (Same goes for frickin' sports 'celebs' - fuck you Kobe Bryant) It just urks me to no end that these people think they are somehow above the law... So I just hope that if he is guilty he finally gets punished and if he's not: well, then he can go back to being in denial...

Well said, B1rd_Po0p. I look forward to the day when celebs realize that they're mere mortals after all. Unfortunately, although not the first time it happened, the OJ Simpson verdict ushered us into the age of celebrity justice. Sad, ain't it?

[B1rd_Po0p]

Oh God, don't even get me started on the whole OJ fiasco...

[BadCoverVersion]

Originally posted by Cronos
if he was innocent why didnt he fight it???

The same logic could also be applied to the Chandler parents.

Put yourself in their place. Would you, COULD you be bought off?

[deuce5]

1. Michael is a weird guy... big deal.

2. He didn't do it, sorry to let you all know.

3. I don't even like the guy, or his music but i still don't think he did it, and he wont be found guilty.

4. Last time he paid the kid off because it's bad publicity, and he doesn't want to go to trial everyday.. he wanted to get it over with. I would to.

5. You people keep beleiving everything you hear on the news.

[Shockwave]

2. He didn't do it, sorry to let you all know.

Im sure glad u cleared that up for me, i wasnt sure until now!

-Shockwave goes to turn himself over to the sarcasm police- :(

[NuclearMisfit]

Well the people and medias minds are made up about Jackson, why fight when youd only persecute yourself even further. He could be innocent but Its obvious nobody believes him. Why should the jury be any different?

OJ, Peterson they incriminated themselves when they try to run, OJ during that police chase in the white bronco and Scott dyed all his hair and was heading to Mexico. Jacko doesnt run because it shows that hes got nothing to hide.

But heres what I dont understand, if your charged with child molestation one time. WHY SHOW UP ON TV WITH THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR KID IN THE BED WITH YOU!?

[jeo4]

Originally posted by deuce5
1. Michael is a weird guy... big deal.

2. He didn't do it, sorry to let you all know.

3. I don't even like the guy, or his music but i still don't think he did it, and he wont be found guilty.

4. Last time he paid the kid off because it's bad publicity, and he doesn't want to go to trial everyday.. he wanted to get it over with. I would to.

5. You people keep beleiving everything you hear on the news.

1. And your point is...

2. Thanks for clearing that up. *Joins Shockwave*

3. What makes you so certain?

4. And he tried it again. This time he wanted the family to move out of the country until the trial was over. He wants to get it over with because he was caught at it again and wants a jury to believe the same thing.

5. Better the media than Michael Jackson.

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by NuclearMisfit
But heres what I dont understand, if your charged with child molestation one time. WHY SHOW UP ON TV WITH THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR KID IN THE BED WITH YOU!?

When somebody talks about Wacko Jacko, one thing you never hear them say is how sane and grounded the guy is. This is a guy who has reportedly made faces and flippant remarks to a judge while on the stand. Simply put he's nuttier than a furry fruitcake! He has a long history of making bad decisions.

Originally posted by thedeadwalk
Being involved with a serious court case like this is like having the flu every single god damn day of the week.

Eventually you just want to settle it, get it overwith and get it behind you.

Sorry but this doesn't hold water with me. I'd rather go though the hassle of court appearances for years to try to prove my innocence than than let people go on believing that I was a fucking pedophile. And by paying the kid off he only made himself look more guilty.

[rilocay]

I know i am going to get alot of shit for this, but if you can see where im coming from then i guess ive done what ive set out to do. First of all, if he did do that peadophile shit whatever it was to my kids, sure as hell id want him punished big time, i mean audition (takashi miike) style but the fact is its not my kids so i cans ee through tis clearly.

Micheal Jackson music has forever changed music and society forever, just listening to one of his songs is evident of that. He has also given alot of money to several charity's that his money has helped save hundred's of lives from kids in usa and im pretty sure parts of africa too. Now thats alot, im sorry, but how he has changed the world through music, and help save alot of lives is too much for me to give a shit about sum kid which this whole mess wud fuk him up more den if he just got counceling form the get go if it happened.
I mean look at everything mj has done, and then come to this kid shit...i honestly think its stupid, he has done so much for the world and yet people are overly going off at this dude for doing something worng.

I admit to him recently goin a bit crazy (understatement) and i see that the court is tryin to fairly punish him just as if he was your everyday joe, but face it, this guy isnt the yellow bastard.

I think people should cut him some slack with all the shit that he gets, thats all, seeing as how much good things hes done...

[Allie]

I admit to him recently goin a bit crazy (understatement)

First, yes, that is an understatement. He made a little kid with only one kidney drink mass amounts of alcohol with the intent of god knows what.

Second, it's not incredibly recent.

He has also given alot of money to several charity's that his money has helped save hundred's of lives from kids in usa and im pretty sure parts of africa

I see what you're saying but that doesn't give him amnesty for the rest of his life. He didn't donate so he could live the rest of his life without consequence, he did it out of his own will and it shouldn't even be considered.

ut how he has changed the world through music, and help save alot of lives is too much for me to give a shit about sum kid which this whole mess wud fuk him up more den if he just got counceling form the get go if it happened.

I can't really understand what you're saying here. But. If you're referring to how we need to "give him some slack" because he was a music revolutionary... then I disagree. Once again, I think his music ability doesn't give him amnesty. Just because he was given talent doesn't mean he has the right to rape children. :rolleyes:

Also, you're acting like this is one child. There are a lot of children. And they're going to be FUCKED UP for the rest of their lives probably.

[rilocay]

Originally posted by Allie
First, yes, that is an understatement. He made a little kid with only one kidney drink mass amounts of alcohol with the intent of god knows what.

Second, it's not incredibly recent.



I see what you're saying but that doesn't give him amnesty for the rest of his life. He didn't donate so he could live the rest of his life without consequence, he did it out of his own will and it shouldn't even be considered.



I can't really understand what you're saying here. But. If you're referring to how we need to "give him some slack" because he was a music revolutionary... then I disagree. Once again, I think his music ability doesn't give him amnesty. Just because he was given talent doesn't mean he has the right to rape children. :rolleyes:

Also, you're acting like this is one child. There are a lot of children. And they're going to be FUCKED UP for the rest of their lives probably.


touche`

[Dead Halloween]

How does he keeps getting kids? I don't think there's someone that naive too think that their kids are safe in his house.
I think most of those kids parents/tutors are sending them on purpose expecting that he does something to them and then sue him for millions.

[Allie]

How does he keeps getting kids? I don't think there's someone that naive too think that their kids are safe in his house.

True. Something needs to be investigated by social services, those parent's are total whack-jobs.

[Korny]

I know this may sound like a redundant comment, but it still just baffles me how off the rails one man can go.

I kind of feel sorry for him in a way. In HIS sick and twisted mind, he isn't doing anything wrong.

[Joshmo]

Anyone who :

Travels to Haitii and attempts a Voodo ceremony to kill Tommy Matola and calls him a white devil on Tv...that even made Al Sharpton move ten paces back....commision their portrait to be painted depicting themself in place of Christ in "The Last Supper", offer a kid wine, calls the wine Jesus Juice..as well as altering their appearance so as to be ugly on the outside....is one ugly fucker on the INSIDE...the freak is SINISTER.

[Jon Lyrik]

Yeah, he's a sick, sick, sick fuck, and a massive weirdo, although in his defense he probably lost touch with reality long ago and his conscience doesn't know what he's doing.

[PrettyInPink]

I can not say MJ is innocent, but I sure as hell can not say lets hang the fucker. In my PERSONAL opinion I don't buy it. This for me is not clear cut child abuse. I don't know why, what, where or when, but it's all too much for me to believe. Now that doesn't mean im right and it doesn't mean you should listen to me.
What really disturbs me, is the statements being made here as to his punishment for being guilty. How can we possibly say sling him in a cell, let him be raped, beat him to death... etc...etc..
This guy has not even been given a verdict yet he's has been publicly stoned.:(

I think that people have vented their feelings towards MJ and these allegations in other threads, and im not really gonna go into all that again as it did go on for a long long time, but some of the things I have read here I find crazy. Maybe it's me? I just do but the whole jesus juice, telling Prince he is missing out on some good pussy ( that im still shaking my head at) and showing boys how to masturbate, helping them to do it. I JUST DONT KNOW. It doesn't add up for me.

I also think him being a BIG celeb actually has done him more harm than good. You think just cause he is MJ he shouldn't be allowed to get away with it, well I think if he wasn't MJ he wouldn't be in court and he wouldn't be charged with these things. I also think because he is MJ a lot of people want to see him punished anyway, regardless of his innocence or guilt. Come on if you don't like the guy cause he is strange, cause he doesn't live like you or me, cause he changes his looks to extreme, because he has a talent. Lets lock the fucker up anyway. Im not saying that is any of you guys but it's certainly a lot of people out there.

My main concern has always been the fact a parent can be paid off. It doesn't even have to be explained if you are a parent you will know that NO amount of money is enough to make you shut up. NO AMOUNT.

Like I say, these are my opinions and im not slating anybody for theirs, I just don't think we should be wanting him to go through pain, torture or rape without knowing the full facts and we probably never will. If he does go to prison, im sure he will suffer.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Oh dear oh dear.....And who says the lad is telling the truth?
His Family are set to make a FORTUNE out of this. Money corrupts ALL.

Then again he may be telling the truth.

But the fact is YOU don't know. Things have to be proved!
So why don't you wait and see before we start crass 'sick fuck' threads.

After all i could say and accuse YOU of every deviant act known to man and get it reported....and i may be lying.
But there will still be someone who starts a "XXX is a sick fuck" thread.

THINK before posting.

And in my view Jackson has not got a sexual bone in his body.
yes, it is inappropriate for a grown man to casually share his bed with various kids. But it seems to me he's a big kid himself.
he's blind to why it is wrong...but i see nothing in him from what he has said and how he reacts and acts that is in anyway seeing a sexual angle to his behaviour.
he seems like an utterly sexless child.

[Twisted Sister]

Originally posted by PrettyInPink
I can not say MJ is innocent, but I sure as hell can not say lets hang the fucker. In my PERSONAL opinion I don't buy it. This for me is not clear cut child abuse. I don't know why, what, where or when, but it's all too much for me to believe. Now that doesn't mean im right and it doesn't mean you should listen to me.
What really disturbs me, is the statements being made here as to his punishment for being guilty. How can we possibly say sling him in a cell, let him be raped, beat him to death... etc...etc..
This guy has not even been given a verdict yet he's has been publicly stoned.:(

I think that people have vented their feelings towards MJ and these allegations in other threads, and im not really gonna go into all that again as it did go on for a long long time, but some of the things I have read here I find crazy. Maybe it's me? I just do but the whole jesus juice, telling Prince he is missing out on some good pussy ( that im still shaking my head at) and showing boys how to masturbate, helping them to do it. I JUST DONT KNOW. It doesn't add up for me.

I also think him being a BIG celeb actually has done him more harm than good. You think just cause he is MJ he shouldn't be allowed to get away with it, well I think if he wasn't MJ he wouldn't be in court and he wouldn't be charged with these things. I also think because he is MJ a lot of people want to see him punished anyway, regardless of his innocence or guilt. Come on if you don't like the guy cause he is strange, cause he doesn't live like you or me, cause he changes his looks to extreme, because he has a talent. Lets lock the fucker up anyway. Im not saying that is any of you guys but it's certainly a lot of people out there.

My main concern has always been the fact a parent can be paid off. It doesn't even have to be explained if you are a parent you will know that NO amount of money is enough to make you shut up. NO AMOUNT.

Like I say, these are my opinions and im not slating anybody for theirs, I just don't think we should be wanting him to go through pain, torture or rape without knowing the full facts and we probably never will. If he does go to prison, im sure he will suffer.

Well said, PIP. It doesn't add up to me either. I hope he gets a truly impartial jury, if it's even possible at this point. And I think he's going to suffer regardless if he's convicted or not.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by 42ndStreetFreak
Oh dear oh dear.....And who says the lad is telling the truth?
His Family are set to make a FORTUNE out of this. Money corrupts ALL.

Then again he may be telling the truth.

But the fact is YOU don't know. Things have to be proved!
So why don't you wait and see before we start crass 'sick fuck' threads.

After all i could say and accuse YOU of every deviant act known to man and get it reported....and i may be lying.
But there will still be someone who starts a "XXX is a sick fuck" thread.

THINK before posting.

And in my view Jackson has not got a sexual bone in his body.
yes, it is inappropriate for a grown man to casually share his bed with various kids. But it seems to me he's a big kid himself.
he's blind to why it is wrong...but i see nothing in him from what he has said and how he reacts and acts that is in anyway seeing a sexual angle to his behaviour.
he seems like an utterly sexless child.

I disagree on many levels. I think he's been called on this too many times to dismiss his behavior as child-like ignorance. He's a grown man and his songs in many cases are very sexual in nature. And they've been this way for decades. This is a singer who came from an abusive home. He has been married multiple times and has kids. How can he not be sexual??

Opinions are ours to have. If the phrase "think before you post" comes into play, then it belongs on both opinions, not just one. I for one am seeing more and more evidence that this man can't be trusted. He lies and gets caught very easily. Police are still angry with him for lying about his treatment while in their custody and they are looking to prosecute for it. Is everyone around him lying, or is he full of it to the point that he concocts lies to throw suspicion off of himself?

There are many other behaviors that bring his character into question. He sleeps with the boys in one room while he has their parents in another part of the house entirely. He bathes with them. He changes with them. While many people would dismiss this as "what kids do", why would he want to be naked in the same room as a child? Again, these are parents' and children's allegations, not something made up out of thin air. And reports are coming in that he is paying familes off not to come forward and testify against him for this very same behavior. This is too odd to be a coincidence. In my opinion, he's been caught again and this time there will be no backing out of it. He tries to explain this away as "these families wanted money" and they used a "false story" to get it. Okay then. What happens if they don't take money? They decide to go to court and spend months in court, putting their own children through a humiliating testimony about Michael's behavior. Or they take the money, go for counselling, and never see him again. Simple enough...but what about the families that aren't taking money? Is it possible that no price is high enough to dismiss the issue? It's very hard to make decisions like this when your child has been wronged.

Other behaviors he's tried to explain away:

Numerous plastic surgeries
Changing of skin tone
Shopping for oddities
Voodoo rituals
Wearing masks


Now suddenly he's more sensitive about comments made about him. If you'll recall, he laughed off jokes by Eddie Murphy and even included him in videos, such as "Remember The Time". Now he's angry because in a video for "Just Lose It", Eminem dresses as and has lyrics poking fun at Michael. So he sued Eminem. If he's innocent, why is he so thin skinned about this one song?

I believe he's guilty and trying very hard to cover it all up. And I doubt that he'll get off scot free. He may wind up not only in prison, but in psychotherapy for years. I feel sorry for him to an extent, but I don't believe he is innocent at all.

[BadCoverVersion]

Originally posted by PrettyInPink
My main concern has always been the fact a parent can be paid off. It doesn't even have to be explained if you are a parent you will know that NO amount of money is enough to make you shut up. NO AMOUNT.

That's what troubles me too PIP...it's common knowledge that the Chandler parents took a bung and went on their merry way.

I also find a lot of these new allegations hard to stomach, they seem a trifle 'outlandish' to put it mildly.

[Joshmo]

People never fail to crack me up...

I think after ALL these years, a $40 mil buyoff, MORE allegations of child abuse...etc..for someone to STILL say, I dont buy it...I think hes just a big kid who has never grown up..etc....YOU types are the ones who need to "think" before posting.... :rolleyes:

[The Heart Collector]

Originally posted by BadCoverVersion
That's what troubles me too PIP...it's common knowledge that the Chandler parents took a bung and went on their merry way.

I also find a lot of these new allegations hard to stomach, they seem a trifle 'outlandish' to put it mildly.

This is Michael Freaking Jackson. I wouldn't consider him sprouting wings and eating planet earth to be outlandish.

[aerocrystallake]

I've tried to defened MJ for a while, even though with all this new evidence it becomes increasingly difficult to do so. But reguardless, the one thing that confuses me is the actions behind the parents.

Think about it. If you were the parents of the child involved in the 1993 case and you believed that MJ was guilty, would you have accepted the payoff? Does a payoff take away all the emotional damage and get the pedophile off the streets? If it was my children I would not just accept the money like that. I would fight hard in court to prove that MJ is a sicko that molested my children, and then after he was proved guilty, I would sue him for all the damamge. The motives of the parents just seem very shady. This new kid who is accusing him comes from a questionable family background. His mother had no trouble accepting all the charity, money, and services that came from their extended "stay" at Neverland. The allegations didn't even come till after the documentary came out. It just seems a little shady. This boy was a preteen/teen who would have known that something was wrong from the getgo and reported it right away. The fact that his mother didn't begin accusing MJ till the renewed controversial interest in the man began reappearing. Who knows

I hope for MJ's sake that he didn't do it. If he did then I hope he gets some serious help. You have to remember that this is a pyschological/emotion sickness that he would have. Just as I don't like to see drug addicts go to jail, I don't want molesters to either. It's not safe for them(even though most aren't concerned with their safety) and it's not treating their problem.

[The Heart Collector]

Maybe the parents didn't want to subject the kid to the ruthless questions that Michael's defense lawyers would have come up with.

[PrettyInPink]

Originally posted by Joshmo
People never fail to crack me up...

I think after ALL these years, a $40 mil buyoff, MORE allegations of child abuse...etc..for someone to STILL say, I dont buy it...I think hes just a big kid who has never grown up..etc....YOU types are the ones who need to "think" before posting.... :rolleyes:

This is one subject I would actually think very long and hard about before posting. I am a parent. I am the mother who would want blood from anyone who hurt my child. I am a very openminded person. I also like to think I respect every other persons views on here and in life.

As I say, I PERSONALLY don't buy all these allegations. I don't ever expect anybody to take my word for it. What got me about this thread was the whole statements of what we should do to this guy, before he has even been found innocent or guilty. I just think we as a nation have come much further than publicly whipping or stoning people with no clue as to if they deserve it. I can't tell you the truth, and all we do is use our heads, listen to the evidence and decide for ourselves. What I am saying is that what I have read or heard so far seems really really crazy to have been going on under all these parents noses and nobody did or said a thing until it was time to jump on a great big bandwagon.

As for taking a payoff because the parents did not want their child to have to go through a court case etc etc. Well thats all fine and dandy for a good few years. Lets all bury our heads in the sand, spend the money and live like nothing ever happened. But what happens when this kid grows up, starts a relationship and one day BANG has a kid. As any parent would know there is no stronger (or should be) no stronger love for anything than a love for your child. Everyone in your life takes a big step back and you have sole responsibility for this child, be it a mother or a father. Now this allegedlly abused man/woman now has a child and they start to think hold on how could my parents let this happen to me, cause they now know they would never let that happen to their child. That I believe is mentally the worst thing that could happen. If the allegations were true then I think this person is gonna be so screwed up when he becomes an adult and has to face the fact his parents took money from his alleged child abuser. My god, it doesn't even bear thinking about.

If you ask me, I do think these allegations are quite far fetched. They are so bad and seem to be a new one being made up every day. Maybe im wrong and if I am, I will always be willing to admit that. But for now I trully believe the people who need the most help are the ones filling these child heads with all these things to say, and if it ever is proven that these allegations are false then I hope you all would want to punish the parents or people who have put these children through this.

[BadCoverVersion]

Originally posted by Joshmo
I think after ALL these years, a $40 mil buyoff, MORE allegations of child abuse...etc..for someone to STILL say, I dont buy it...I think hes just a big kid who has never grown up..etc....YOU types are the ones who need to "think" before posting...:rolleyes:

Well bugger me backwards, I've seen the light.

Originally posted by The Heart Collector
This is Michael Freaking Jackson. I wouldn't consider him sprouting wings and eating planet earth to be outlandish.

Jacko is a complete fucking fruitcake, I'll give you that. But the allegations just don't seem to 'ring true' in my mind.

Let's address the "Prince, you're missing some good pussy" comment. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but the general consensus is Jackson likes little boys. It just seems wrong, wrong, wrong!

I thought Jackson the child molester used words such as "pee pee" when referring to genitals. So why the hillbilly trucker approach when perusing photo's of nekkid chicks?

On a completely different note, has anybody seen Capturing The Friedman's? Those cats weren't even famous and the whole shebang developed into a ridiculous media circus.

Oh, and hear, hear on the above post. Well said PIP.

[free]

What got me about this thread was the whole statements of what we should do to this guy, before he has even been found innocent or guilty.

If you were referring to my initial post, please note that in the first sentence that I did say, "and if he telling the truth", and that I based my post on the assumption that he, indeed, was telling the truth.

Was my suggestion of a punishmeent a little harsh. Now that I think about it, I guess it was, but I was so shocked by the allegation that the child was making, a felt like I needed to vent. That brings a good question, what would an appropriate punishment be? Jail or counseling, or both?

As for Jackson paying him off/ parents taking the money, you have to remember that the parents, not the kids, fight the legal battle. Maybe the money was worth not having their child's molestor in prison. It's a sick thought, but some might be that shallow and dispicable.

[BadCoverVersion]

I don't doubt the fact that there are fickle, money-grubbing people in this world...and your argument is valid, if a little weak IMO.

Maybe Chandler's parents did do him a grave disservice, but I can't help but believe that the motive was purely $$$...what's to say it isn't the case once again?

If Jackson is guilty of these heinous crimes then he should be subjected to a life imprisonment, NO parole, NO rehabilitation. Paedophiles are the scum of the earth...and I believe no amount of counselling can truly 'cure' their ills.

[Shockwave]

If he wasnt a celebrity this would be over all ready.

[PrettyInPink]

I wasn't exactly quoting anyone on here Free, sorry if you got that impression. It's just the general feeling of the thread. I completly respect everyones views on who they believe, though I think the title of the thread is a little harsh if he is innocent. ;)

I think this is deff a subject where people have very strong views, and I do believe he should spend the rest of his life in prison if he has done any of these horrible things. Nobody can ever help anyone who has these perverse feelings towards children, it's a sad state of mind and im sure none of us here can ever understand that. People who do this need to be banished from society all together and never allowed to walk with decent human beings again IMO.

I know if it was me and any of my children I peronally would want the guy dead, seriously I would kill him myself and happily be punished for it. Thats why I can never understand how a parent accepted money from him if they trully believed he had harmed their child. It's beyond belief for me to even contemplate that.

I just don't know, we could go on forever debating about it and im sure a lot of people will, I just hope the truth will come out somehow whatever it is, though it's highly doubtfull.

:)

[Tuukka]

I don't quite understand why people would believe the parents who accepted the money instead of putting Jackson to trial. Basicly a phedophile paid them to get a permission to rape their child. And they agreed. The phedophile also paid them so that he would have a chance to rape more children in the future. And they agreed on that one as well.

I don't think they come off as trustworthy people.

[deuce5]

Originally posted by Tuukka
I don't quite understand why people would believe the parents who accepted the money instead of putting Jackson to trial. Basicly a phedophile paid them to get a permission to rape their child. And they agreed. The phedophile also paid them so that he would have a chance to rape more children in the future. And they agreed on that one as well.

I don't think they come off as trustworthy people.

Once again (to everybody) Keep believing everything you see on tv.

[B1rd_Po0p]

Well, we should all know from being bombarded daily by papers, magazines, tv and movies that celebrities are NOT considered to be 'normal' people. They are somehow above the rest of us: how that ever happened I'll never know. They get special treatment, and special immunities. (How many celebrities have ever committed a crime and done any serious time?) - not counting Martha in camp cupcake, that's a joke. The best example of this will always be OJ Simpson. ("If the glove don't fit - you must acquit". Never mind the DNA evidence...)

But by putting these people up to some kind of God-like level, it seems like they can be trusted simply because they're famous. That is the only reason I can think of as to why parents would keep letting MJ have their kids without supervision. He's rich and famous - therefore he must be a kind and trustworthy chap. Me personally, I'm not going to conclude anything until I hear what the judge and jury decide. I think that some of the allegations are outrageous, but that doesn't necessarily mean they aren't true. Some people are seriously fucked up and do some really weird shit. Let the dude get his day in court; but I'm willing to bet that if he is found guilty he'll never spend a single day in prison.

[CMAGUS]

wether it is true or not I still don't see how or why he wasn't locked up long ago.I still don;t see how people accept him " sharing his bed with kids" that isn't right it's like some guy on a street rounding up kids just to share his bed would that happen?No it would'nt theyw would arrest his ass and it should be the same for him celebrity or not.I guess we will find out soo n enough if it's true or not the trial begins on the 31st

[DRbeauty]

I work with this lady who knew Michael Jackson. When I asked her about the allegations and if she thought he was guilty, she didn't even hesitate. She said "He did it".
The thing that people don't understand about Michael Jackson is that he puts out this certain image of himself. I'm Peter Pan I won't ever grow up, I'm forever damaged by my father's abuse, I never had a chance to grow up. While some of this is true, he's different from what he puts out. He's calculating, and he knows exactly what he's doing. This comes from the people who know him the most. Like Lisa Marie Pressley, who lived with him. Although she said that she did not see him do anything with children it doesn't mean he's innocent. Just like it doesn't mean he's guilty.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that famous people put out certain images that they want us to see. So, we shouldn't judge a book by it's cover. And I kinda lost my point.

[Tuukka]

Originally posted by deuce5
Once again (to everybody) Keep believing everything you see on tv.

RE:

Huh? What the hell are you talking about?

I've never watched anything related to this trial on TV. In fact I don't even watch TV in general. Newspapers tend to be better source of information.

I think there is a 50% change that Jackons rapes children. But I don't *know* it. And regardless of whether he is a rapist or not, I still don't think that parents shouldn't let the rapist of the child get away regardless of how much money they get.

[free]

though I think the title of the thread is a little harsh if he is innocent. ;:)

True, but it got your attention, ehh? ;)

I agree, debating an issue like this would get you a hundred different responses from a hundred different people. I personally agree with you both, life imprisionment for anyone. Of course, factoring in the Celebrity discount, that would come to, what? A week and a half?

Maybe Chandler's parents did do him a grave disservice, but I can't help but believe that the motive was purely $$$

I tend to agree with you. But many people have used innocents as pawns for their or their friend's financial gains...

[Kal-El76]

I say hotglue his yoink & sack combo to the floor of an empty, kerosine-soaked room, leave the door unlocked, light it ablaze, and leave him alone with a butcher knife.

"Of course, thats just my opinion. I could be wrong"

[jeo4]

Bill Maher once said it best: Not guilty by reason of celebrity.

And fuck me if it isn't coming completely true.

[B1rd_Po0p]

Originally posted by jeo4
Bill Maher once said it best: Not guilty by reason of celebrity.

And fuck me if it isn't coming completely true.

"coming"? isn't it kinda always been like that?

[RicochetShaw]

Originally posted by 42ndStreetFreak
Oh dear oh dear.....And who says the lad is telling the truth?
His Family are set to make a FORTUNE out of this. Money corrupts ALL.

But the fact is YOU don't know. Things have to be proved!
So why don't you wait and see before we start crass 'sick fuck' threads.




Well said sir.


I just have to say, I'm very disgusted and upset with many of you, some people are just so full of hate. How do you know what this guy is done? There hasn't been any cold hard PROOF yet. Many of you are blood thirsty, just wanting an excuse to see some one who is different die. I think that's a terrible thing in many of us, hating what is different.

OK, don't get me wrong, I obviously think Jackson is a mentally ill individual, but that's all we're sure of. We have NO PROOF of what he's been accused of, so why are you jumping to such extreme conclusions and overcome with hatred, wanting to "see him get raped out of prison"?! That's just absolutely disgusting, and you should feel ashamed. The only thing we're sure of is that he's a mentally sick person, and should probably be institutionalized, but calling for his blood just because of some accusations from UNKOWN SOURCES that could very well be false.... well, I just have to weep. There's just so much hate in the world, it really makes me sad.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by RicochetShaw
Well said sir.


I just have to say, I'm very disgusted and upset with many of you, some people are just so full of hate. How do you know what this guy is done? There hasn't been any cold hard PROOF yet. Many of you are blood thirsty, just wanting an excuse to see some one who is different die. I think that's a terrible thing in many of us, hating what is different.

OK, don't get me wrong, I obviously think Jackson is a mentally ill individual, but that's all we're sure of. We have NO PROOF of what he's been accused of, so why are you jumping to such extreme conclusions and overcome with hatred, wanting to "see him get raped out of prison"?! That's just absolutely disgusting, and you should feel ashamed. The only thing we're sure of is that he's a mentally sick person, and should probably be institutionalized, but calling for his blood just because of some accusations from UNKOWN SOURCES that could very well be false.... well, I just have to weep. There's just so much hate in the world, it really makes me sad.

Maybe people wouldn't be on his ass if he weren't repeatedly accused with multiple witnesses coming forward. I'm not going to run out and buy a pitchfork and light a torch, but this doesn't mean I'm going to believe him over a credible witness, especially after he's been caught lying.

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by Shockwave
If he wasnt a celebrity this would be over all ready.

I don't know about that, just look at the Lacy Peterson case and how long that took. In 2004, I dealt with a legal issue that took 10 months just to get to a pre-trial. The judicial system is very slow, very backed up, and if attorneys want to slow the process down, they do it.

If some woman, her child, and three liars got together to tear me apart on the stand and put me into prison and pay them a shitload of money, and my attorney told me there was a chance I could be found guilty, I would try to get him to keep dragging the prolongings and procedures just to make them consistently pay for their legal fees in efforts to get them to go broke paying for their lawyer so they could eventually throw in the towel and look like the shitheads that they are.

Of course, I'm not saying that these so-called "credible witnesses" are immoral liars, I myself don't know, because I don't know them, and haven't been witness to their testimony and cross-examinations, and sat in a jury room with other jurors to deliberate on the accuracy of their testimony.

[Underground]

I'm not a man to stand in front of a hangin yall, but...

spit

..here's why I think michael is a freak and hangs out with kids. He was the biggest singer in the world, millions acted, dressed, and idolized him. What happen? His face was burned off and he looked like a freak, destroying his ego. Why hang out with kids? Cause they might be the only ones that wouldn't ask about his nose and fucked up pastic surgery.

About the case, basicly why would any parent agree to have their child stay there? ..and Why would Michael make the same mistake twice, unless he has a problem. The one problem is that there is no real evidence(a rape or anything like that), that could dignify anything more just he said/she said testimonial. But I don't know what evidence if any was brought into either case.

I don't have enough facts to form and opinion either way so I'm glad they're taking it to trial

[Shockwave]

Maybe people wouldn't be on his ass if he weren't repeatedly accused with multiple witnesses coming forward. I'm not going to run out and buy a pitchfork and light a torch, but this doesn't mean I'm going to believe him over a credible witness, especially after he's been caught lying.

Bingo.

[optimus]

Like some of you, I'm going to reserve my judgement until the jury comes back with their verdict.

I grew up listening to Michael Jackson and have loved his work througout the 80's and early nineties (the rest has been questionable). I hope he's innocent, but I doubt that he will be found innocent. My theory is that he will be found guilty (whether he did it or not) because:

1. He really did do it. OR
2. He's "weird"

Unfortunately, over the years Michael has put himself into situations that let him get these accusations get bestowed upon him. His antics in the public eye have not gone without scrutney (Like the dangling of the baby and his constant need of children needing to be around him).

I know that he may have had a tough life growing up with a father that was not only physically abusive, but verbally as well, but that shouldn't be an excuse to be a pedophile.

Maybe if he is found guilty he will wake up and find out that he's no longer in Never Never Land and actually grow up...

[Spidey]

http://i.euniverse.com/funpages/cms_content/5367/mjs_fave_things01.swf

[42ndStreetFreak]

HA! That was brilliant!:D

[Mr. HokeyPokey]

Well looks like 95% of you were wrong! Good thing too!

Now maybe my statement of "you shouldn't beleive everything on tv" might stand true. Probably not, people are so stuck in their ways.

I for one am glad he was found Not Guilty... Show's there is justice in this world.

Seriously how are you going to argue a jury finding him not guilty.. no pay off, no settlement.

[jeo4]

Guilty or not, good riddance.

He is pretty much ruined by his own actions and associations. He is now a loser beyond any other. He had the world by the tail and he blew it on his own perverse fantasies.

THAT is what's wrong with America now. We look up to freaks and deviant idiots at times. Freaks and deviants don't deserve recognition.

[Mr. HokeyPokey]

Originally posted by jeo4
Guilty or not, good riddance.

He is pretty much ruined by his own actions and associations. He is now a loser beyond any other. He had the world by the tail and he blew it on his own perverse fantasies.

THAT is what's wrong with America now. We look up to freaks and deviant idiots at times. Freaks and deviants don't deserve recognition.

Mocking me from other posts... wow, still thinking about me that much?

And MJ does deserve recognition because the media has tried to bring him down 2 times now, and each time he prevailed. Sure some of the things he does is a little weird, but i'm sure if you had 500 million dollars people would think you were weird too.

JEO4- How's about you stop trying to argue everything I say just for your sheer hatred for me. BO Lost, it's okay, you don't have to hate the world.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by Mr. HokeyPokey
Mocking me from other posts... wow, still thinking about me that much?

And MJ does deserve recognition because the media has tried to bring him down 2 times now, and each time he prevailed. Sure some of the things he does is a little weird, but i'm sure if you had 500 million dollars people would think you were weird too.

JEO4- How's about you stop trying to argue everything I say just for your sheer hatred for me. BO Lost, it's okay, you don't have to hate the world.

$500 million doesn't make him weird. He's a child-molesting freak. That makes him weird. Can't take what you dish out? I'm not surprised.

This is my opinion. And other opinions are valid just because they don't match yours. If you don't like it, tough shit. That includes every thread where you mouth off at dissenting opinions, not just this one. Your lack of respect in this and other forums is getting tiresome.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by Mr. HokeyPokey
Mocking me from other posts... wow, still thinking about me that much?

And MJ does deserve recognition because the media has tried to bring him down 2 times now, and each time he prevailed. Sure some of the things he does is a little weird, but i'm sure if you had 500 million dollars people would think you were weird too.

JEO4- How's about you stop trying to argue everything I say just for your sheer hatred for me. BO Lost, it's okay, you don't have to hate the world.

Wow, where are you getting the idea that Jeo hates you? He discussed your opinion and showed why he didn't like it. I didn't pick up any animosity.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by MacReady
Wow, where are you getting the idea that Jeo hates you? He discussed your opinion and showed why he didn't like it. I didn't pick up any animosity.

He's convinced of his own opinion, so nobody else here can be right. And heaven forbid if anyone says anything remotely oppositional to him.

Micheal Jackson is a sick fuck in my opinion. There have been no less than two occassions where his deviant behavior has gotten him arrested and made worldwide headlines. And 95 percent of this thread is not wrong just because you don't agree with them.

Just because a jury finds him not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't mean he didn't commit the crime. It just means he got off.

And one other thing, Hokey...this has nothing to do with a singer who lost a game show...that was...what, a month ago?? Nobody cares! The hippy lost to the country girl! Whoopee! She won! Now can we move on or would you like to start a thread about it?

[Mr-Blonde]

NOT GUILTY BY WAY OF CELEBRITY

The guy is a pedophile.

[jeo4]

Well said, Mr. Blonde.

[Mr-Blonde]

MJs former trusted public-relations man, Bob Jones, is about to publish a memoir of his years working for the singer.

Jones was dismissed unceremoniously one year ago by Michael's brother Randy Jackson after nearly 30 years with the singer. His book, "Michael Jackson: The Man Behind the Mask," will devastate Jackson.

Here we go: "Michael had a sinister gift for identifying these boys; it was as if he had some sort of radar. I was continually amazed by how he could determine which of the many children he came into contact with might be 'woo-able,' whose parents could be bought off and counted on to keep quiet about what was going on. I came to understand that Michael manipulated people and events with a great deal of finesse."

Jones details Jackson's trips abroad in the late '80s and early '90s with boys who were essentially his dates, before the famous Chandler family settlement put an end to that.

One kid [name changed], with whom Michael managed to carry on a clandestine relationship for years ... Michael and [the boy] spent nearly all of their time together."

Jones recalls that while traveling, the boy stayed in Michael's room while the boy's parents were treated to chauffeur-driven cars that would take them on shopping sprees and sightseeing tours all day long.

Another boy — one of many described — is Brett Barnes, an Australian who testified on Jackson's behalf at the trial a few weeks ago.

It was Barnes' sister, Karlee, who said during cross-examination that her brother slept in Jackson's bed a total of 365 nights over a two-year period.

Jones, calling Barnes "Damon," writes that during a 1992 Jackson world tour, he often tucked Barnes under luggage so the press wouldn't see the boy.

"All of us, including the State Department official and Jet magazine Publisher Bob Johnson, saw the boy enter Michael's private bedroom numerous times and remain for a long time. Characteristically, Michael did whatever he wanted to — hang the risk."

Jones wrote the book with journalist Stacy Brown, another longtime Jackson family friend who testified for the prosecution.

While Jones' book may be discounted by Jackson's current PR people as the work of a disgruntled employee, I got a different reaction today from an insider who took a look at Jones' copy.

Maybe there was too much reasonable doubt cc. this case but when you add it all up all the various testimonies from everybody out there it's impossible to believe that Jackson is simply the victim of some vast conspiracy. :mad:

[Mr. HokeyPokey]

Originally posted by MacReady
Wow, where are you getting the idea that Jeo hates you? He discussed your opinion and showed why he didn't like it. I didn't pick up any animosity.

It's from other posts, the guy just likes to argue with me.

Mr-Blonde - Nice cop-out.

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by Mr. HokeyPokey
It's from other posts, the guy just likes to argue with me.

Mr-Blonde - Nice cop-out.

Just like the people who completely dismiss the various testimonies out there -- all of them are the ones copping out.

[Mr. HokeyPokey]

But how can you defend the "he's Not Guilty by means of celeberty" when a Trial Jury found him Not Guilty. When they got all the facts from both sides.

You have to remember we don't get to see a lot of the Facts.

[Mr-Blonde]

Do I think that Jackson was guilty of the charges presented in the case? Not sure-- I wasn't on the jury.

Do I think that all of the allegations about Jackson out there are false? Do I think that all of these people are in cahoots to smear Jackson?

Absolutley not.

My arguement is that it's more ludicrous to believe these things then what my stance is, that Jackson has been into little boys for a very long time.

[Shockwave]

From the look of things the guy is beyond broke anyway.

...i saw them all as guilty in this case. I really didnt care either way.

[Scorpio24]

I've read every word of this thread and I still can't make up my mind on the guy. Sometimes I feel the urge to kill rise and I would just love to bump in to him one night. but then other times I feel unbelievably sorry for the guy.

I'm not going to pretend I know to much abouth this case because I delibritley ignored most of it. I'm different to most people I think. Most people see it as Car Crash TV, where you just have to look. I can't look because it gets me so angry when you hear sick things (Allegedly) done to young children. I don't want to know the facts or opinions.

Having said that when I was watching the verdict on CNN last night, two things were clear to me.

1. He couldn't really be convicted as the prosecutions whole case rested on the boys word against MJ's word. No jury in the world would convict someone when there is that much room for credible doubt. Celeb or not. It's why so many rape cases end up with no conviction. If there's no DNA it's just word against word.

2. He had to be found guilty of supplying and plying a minor with Alcahol. He admitted it on tape for fuck sake. I was stunned when he was found not guilty on all of those counts.

The over riding theme for me and a couple of others here I guess!!!

Is that the parents should be up in court and sentanced to solitary for the rest of their lives for failing their children so fucking badly. Not just them all the other dispicable cunts coming out of the woodwork claiming they seen MJ do this and that to the children. FRY THE FUCKING LOT OF THEM.

I don't know if MJ is guilty or not and for some reason I'm leaning the same way as the jury.

Although regardless I think the one thing that comes from all this is that he should not be alowed to have any children to his place and should not be alowed to raise his children. I don't think he's a very good role model for his children even if he is completly and utterly inoccent.

[bigred760]

I think MJ has got some serious problems - emotionally, physically, personally. I agree somewhat with Scorpio24 in that whatever parent accepted money so that his/her kid could spend time at Neverland with the former King of Pop should be taken out and beaten within an inch of their life. What freakin' parent does allows their kids to bought like that?

And while I believed that no 12 people on this planet would convict MJ of the major charges against them; I thought the giving alcohol to a minor was evident and attributed to him by witnesses from both sides, not just the prosecution. I think it was the celebrity status that got him off on that charge.

As for the future, I'm hoping Jackson never appears in public again. Not only is he a freak, but so are most of the fans out there that support him (who apparently don't have jobs or lives because they were out there ALL THE TIME!!!!).

[The Postmaster General]

Well, everyone who is now ready to get onto the "Focus all the hate on the parents" boat, there is still plenty of room, and Tuuka just made margaritas and rum runners. We're setting sail soon.



I think I've figured Jackson out -- He's been paying all the familes off while trying to become more and more white looking. Now that he looks the way he does, he knew he could finally go to trial, because his chance of getting convicted being white is much lower.

(props to David Letterman's Top 10)


I don't think the celebrity thing has too much to do with it. Jackson is now basically only a celebrity because of his weirdness and the child molestation thing. When the hell has he done any music?

[Scorpio24]

I don't want to sound like i'm jumping on the 'PARENT BOAT' because like i've said i stayed away from it all and I stayed away from this thread. But now i've read up on it and made up my mind if I'm coming abord i'd love some doritos.


As for the celeb thing. I think his celeb bubble never burst. He;s always been and always seems to stay the most famous guy on the planet.

[Mr-Blonde]

Just one quick question:

If he loves kids so much and the sleepovers are just innocent fun as he claims why is it only the little BOYS that end up in bed with him?

[Scorpio24]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
Just one quick question:

If he loves kids so much and the sleepovers are just innocent fun as he claims why is it only the little BOYS that end up in bed with him?

Yea i've thought the same question.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
If he loves kids so much and the sleepovers are just innocent fun as he claims why is it only the little BOYS that end up in bed with him?


Well, I don't know about you, but when I was a kid, we didn't have any mixed-sex sleepovers.

What are you suggesting? It would seem more innocent if he had a couple girls thrown in the mix? Good gravy! That wouldn't be right on any level.

Hey, Jackson -- my kid can sleep in the bed with you, but make sure there is at least one girl of equal age sleeping next to my son. I want to make sure there's no hanky panky going on!!!

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
What are you suggesting? It would seem more innocent if he had a couple girls thrown in the mix?

I'm suggesting that Jackson is into little boys. But a lot of people hear are gullible enough to believe his song and dance about innocent sleepover parties and such. So why is it only boys sharing his bed then and not girls also? And why is it exactly that Michael (by his own admittance) is getting these boys liquored up?

Answer: MJ likes little boy pud.

If you don't believe he's a pedophile by now, probably nothing short of a full blown kiddie porn tape starring MJ will ever convince you otherwise. Although I'm sure that MJ's lawyers would try to spin that as something benign also.

[Mr. HokeyPokey]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
I'm suggesting that Jackson is into little boys. But a lot of people hear are gullible enough to believe his song and dance about innocent sleepover parties and such. So why is it only boys sharing his bed then and not girls also? And why is it exactly that Michael (by his own admittance) is getting these boys liquored up?

Answer: MJ likes little boy pud.

If you don't believe he's a pedophile by now, probably nothing short of a full blown kiddie porn tape starring MJ will ever convince you otherwise. Although I'm sure that MJ's lawyers would try to spin that as something benign also.

Or it's YOU that is the gullible one, beleiving everything you hear on T.V.


Answer: America's Justice System found him NOT GUILTY on all counts... pretty good with me, since we are the greatest nation in the world.

FYI - I don't beleive he's a pedo, never did.

[The Postmaster General]

I'm not suggesting what he does either way. I know exactly what you were suggesting. It wouldn't take much thought to get from point a to point b with a comment like that.

But I think you are missing the point --

"Only little boys at sleepovers" is not a good reason to say "Ah-ha! I figured him out!"

Regardless of anything -- Kids don't have mixed sex sleepovers. Period. The fact the Jackson only had boys sleep over proves nothing, and if anything only further validates his claims that it was innocent.

What part of little boys don't have girls over to their sleep overs are you not getting?

I'm not even commenting on whether or not Jackson did anything, or about his sexuality -- all I'm commenting on is that saying that, because he didn't have 10 year old girls in his bed PROVES that he was up to hanky panky -- That makes absolutely no sense.

Believe what you want about Jackson, you're not going to convince me that little kids, or adult weirdos who think they are a little kid, would have mixed-sex sleepovers. That's proposterous, and proves nothing.

And further -- the way you are suggesting -- Mixed sleepovers with little boys and little girls -- Since we are throwing around the word gullible, you'd have to be gullible to believe that ANYONE would be okay with a mixed-sex sleepover at that age.

Anyone else paying attention to this? Am I totally bonked, or the only kid who didn't have girls sleeping next to me when I was 10????

Feel free to think Jackson is a homosexual, but the sleepover thing has less to do with that than so many other things about the man. You are on the right track with the getting them drunk comment. I just don't know what you are thinking in suggesting that there is something wrong with NOT having mixed sex sleepovers. To me, that is like the only place where Jackson showed some level of responsibility. If he had young boys and girls sleeping together, then I think the case against him would have stuck a lot more, as that would just be clearly in the wrong.

What are you not getting about that?

[Mr-Blonde]

More to the point what parent in their right mind would let their little boy sleep in a bed w/ Michael Jackson? Obviously though you guys are true believers in Michael and that's the way you see it. I think that it's a grievous mistake to dismiss all of the other allegations and accusations out there on Jackson just because he beat the rap on this case. Even the head juror said that he believes that MJ is sexually interested in little boys.

Hokey Pokey-- WTF else am I supposed to base my opinions on MJ from other than what's presented in the media? It's not like I know the guy personally or something. Then again neither do any of you who seem to be absolutely sure of his innocence. You seem to take everything that Jackson's PR folks say at face value that these are simply just innocent little parties going on in MJ's bedroom. Your position that everyone who has come out against MJ has got a grudge and that he's just simply a victim of a grand conspiracy is the farfetched one.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
More to the point what parent in their right mind would let their little boy sleep in a bed w/ Michael Jackson? Obviously though you guys are true believers in Michael and that's the way you see it. I think that it's a grievous mistake to dismiss all of the other allegations and accusations out there on Jackson just because he beat the rap on this case. Even the head juror said that he believes that MJ is sexually interested in little boys.



Whoa, whoa, whoa!

Whoa!

What have I said to make you think I don't think this whole thing is fucked, especially the parent's involvement?

You're grouping me into the wrong group, Mr. Blonde. As far as I've been meaning to get across, from day one I've been saying that Points "A" and "B" are of no consequence to me, because my point is Point "C" -- These parents should be on trial, maybe more so than Jackson. If there is anyone who, to me, is clearly guity, it's these parents - of neglect, and exploitation. I've made several comparisons to these parent's throwing their kids to the lions.

Just because I disagree with the stance that things would appear more innocent if there were girls present -- that doesn't mean I disagree with EVERYTHING, does it? No way, man.

I'm just the one who always tends to bring a third perspective into the mix. Lately I've been seeing how that gets me in trouble. :o

[Mr-Blonde]

Sorry to generalize Bubba. I didn't mean it towards you per se but to all of those who profess that MJ is not interested in children sexually. I actually do like it when you "put things in perspective"-- even if I disagree with you. At least there is some real thought behind your statements.

[Shockwave]

I thought it was pretty damn clear they were ALL guilty.

He likes the kiddies, and they were after his money.

[Scorpio24]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
I'm not suggesting what he does either way. I know exactly what you were suggesting. It wouldn't take much thought to get from point a to point b with a comment like that.

But I think you are missing the point --

"Only little boys at sleepovers" is not a good reason to say "Ah-ha! I figured him out!"

Regardless of anything -- Kids don't have mixed sex sleepovers. Period. The fact the Jackson only had boys sleep over proves nothing, and if anything only further validates his claims that it was innocent.

What part of little boys don't have girls over to their sleep overs are you not getting?


What I got out of Mr Blonde's statement and it's definitley something thats occured to me is not that he doesn't have mixed sleep overs. He doesn't have girls over full stop. It's only little boys. Mr Blonde asked why if he loves kid so much is it only boys he has over?

It's a legitimate question. He's not claiming it to be any less or more of a crime. He's just stating that only little boys go over there for sleepovers.

[jeo4]

I'm with Mr. Blonde on this one. I don't have all evidence presented, but I will never believe this guy is innocent. This goes beyond his eccentric behavior and into mental illness. It seems obvious he's covering things up. He dismissed his entire staff. And he's done this before. Many staff members are now saying that his behavior is suspect.

What parent in their right mind would let their kid sleep with another adult? What's worse is he is alone with these children in his room. I would never let my own children spend the night in a room with a strange man. I also wouldn't let them change in the same room while he is changing.

The court system found him not guilty...so what?? Just because a jury says there isn't enough evidence to convict beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't mean he's innocent. It means he beat the system. It happens all the time. my wife is a legal secretary and we have several friends who are attorneys. They all agree he got off, but he isn't innocent.

He's been accused of this twice. He's paid off others in settlements so they would not testify for the prosecution. He isn't innocent by any stretch of the imagination.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Scorpio24
What I got out of Mr Blonde's statement and it's definitley something thats occured to me is not that he doesn't have mixed sleep overs. He doesn't have girls over full stop. It's only little boys. Mr Blonde asked why if he loves kid so much is it only boys he has over?

It's a legitimate question. He's not claiming it to be any less or more of a crime. He's just stating that only little boys go over there for sleepovers.

Mr.-Blonde and I know perfectly well what one another are speaking of. It has nothing to do with what you are talking about, as we've well resolved and moved past. Translation is not necessary.

I'm not saying it's any more or less of a crime. That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. TO ME, mixed sleep overs would appear more about sexuality - how are you NOT getting that from my statements?

If you want to try and tell me that things would appear slighly less suspect had Jackson had 10 year old boys and 10 year old girls all sleeping together -- knock yourself out, because that's your opinion. I respect that, but disagree. Obviously we have different opinions about what constitutes an "innocent sleepover" -- IMO, sleeping over at Jackson's house probably isn't innocent, be it 3 girls 2 boys, or 10 boys, or 5 boys and 2 adult female hookers sucking Jacksons' dick as the boys sleep at the foot of the bed --- It's all fucking weird man. I just don't feel like playing "degrees of weirdness" when there are enought facts showing his weirdness that I already agree with.

Jackson having little boys and little girls all sleeping with him - to me is like 100000x creepier than just little boys. If anything, I think I've made that clear, and it should be you who is trying to explain how a mixed sleepover would be more appropriate.

[The Postmaster General]

Did anyone see that episode of Law and Order?

[Scorpio24]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
Mr.-Blonde and I know perfectly well what one another are speaking of. It has nothing to do with what you are talking about, as we've well resolved and moved past. Translation is not necessary.

I'm not saying it's any more or less of a crime. That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. TO ME, mixed sleep overs would appear more about sexuality - how are you NOT getting that from my statements?

If you want to try and tell me that things would appear slighly less suspect had Jackson had 10 year old boys and 10 year old girls all sleeping together -- knock yourself out, because that's your opinion. I respect that, but disagree. Obviously we have different opinions about what constitutes an "innocent sleepover" -- IMO, sleeping over at Jackson's house probably isn't innocent, be it 3 girls 2 boys, or 10 boys, or 5 boys and 2 adult female hookers sucking Jacksons' dick as the boys sleep at the foot of the bed --- It's all fucking weird man. I just don't feel like playing "degrees of weirdness" when there are enought facts showing his weirdness that I already agree with.

Jackson having little boys and little girls all sleeping with him - to me is like 100000x creepier than just little boys. If anything, I think I've made that clear, and it should be you who is trying to explain how a mixed sleepover would be more appropriate.

WHAT?????

Where the hell did I say a miixed sleepover is more appropriate. I didn't even hint at it.

I made a statement aimed at people who have claimed as a defense that Jackson just loves kids.

He's not into kids he's into small boys.

If you're looking for an argument about what you've just gone on about you're not going to get one from me. I happen to agree with you and most other peoples opinions on here.

Where the hell the degree's of wierdness and blah blah came from as a response to me I have no idea. I made a simple statement. No more no less. If it read to you as some kind of justifaction well there's not alot I can do about that becasue it most definitley wasn't meant that way.

Anyway please accept my most humble of apologies. I can't believe I had the audacity to get involved in a public discussion on a public forum.;)

[The Postmaster General]

My thing is that I just don't think he would get away with having little girls over.

Does that make more sense? Let's start from here, because both of us obviously feel we aren't getting our point across.

Do you see where I'm coming from in saying that I think Jackson just couldn't get away with having girls in his bed? Maybe he likes little boys, yeah - but I don't think the lack of girls in his bed is able to prove that, based on his defense.

I know why that seems strange, but just forcus on the comment that he wouoldn't get away with having little girls there. AT ALL. So, even if this was all innocent - he still wouldn't have the girls there.

I know that having little boys in your bed is strange, but because of the fact that no guy would get away with having little girls in his bed, I don't see how that contradicts Jacksons statements about it being innocent, because even if it was innocent, I still can't see him having little girls in his bed.

If you guys are just trying to prove that Michael Jackson is gay, you had me convinced back in 1984......

And hey, regarding your apology - don't sweat it man. There's worse thing in life than getting caught in a back and forth with BubbaStrangelove. 9 times out of 10 it's just a matter of helping me understand where you're coming from or helping me explain myself better. ;)

[Scorpio24]

Yea like I said i'm not arguing your points i'm with you on them.

All I meant was that some comments I've heard and read that it's just his love of kids as a defence for his actions. I automaticaly thought that it's only boys. And it got me thinking and then when I seen Mr Blonde's comment it made feel like commenting on it because it's what I had also been thinking.

But yes now I've read you're latest post. I agree. There's no-way he could have had little girls over.

I wasn't really seeing it from that point of view.

[The Postmaster General]

And I agree with you about him showing a preference for boys. For being so child-like, he sure has seemed to of sexualized these children into to realizing the liability issues he'd have if there were girls there too. It doesn't jive with his child-like defense.

These parents aren't figuring this sort of stuff out, and that's just weird. I don't know, maybe Jackson really just bonds with boy children more, and that is also a good defense, so it will be the one that gets Jackson off time and time again.

I brought up this Law and Order thing because they did an episode about the subject and it touched a lot on this - some entertainer who had sleepovers and there was suspicion, but the parents weren't fit to advocate for their children, so that blew the case against the accuser out of the water. And by unfit I mean they threw their kids to the lions.

[Mr. HokeyPokey]

There is a HUGE difference having a sleepover with boys, then with girls.

I don't condone his sleepovers what so ever, but if he would have done it with little girls he would have been convicted no matter what. Bottom line.


On a side note - everybody talks about his sleepovers how they are so bad and everything. (which i agree he shouldn't do because he is an adult) But what you don't realize is that his bedroom is seriously bigger then most of our houses. It's has a freaking elavator in it.

[Scorpio24]

Didn't see it myself. But it raises good points.

In the Sun (British Newspaper) today. Raymond Hultman one of the jurors has claimed that Jackson was guilty and that he had dodged a bullet. He has suggested that the parents of Gavin Arvizo wernt exactly credible. He also said that Jackson has a pattern of molesting young boys. But they could not prove the specific allegations.

So it really backs up your point of the failings of the parents possibly hurting the prosecution in these cases.

[Scorpio24]

Originally posted by Mr. HokeyPokey
On a side note - everybody talks about his sleepovers how they are so bad and everything. (which i agree he shouldn't do because he is an adult) But what you don't realize is that his bedroom is seriously bigger then most of our houses. It's has a freaking elavator in it.

Yea but regardless of how big his beedroom is. They end up in his bed. Which is the point.

[Misanthrope]

I honestly do not think he's a criminal. Hell i cant even be sure he's a pedophile either, seems like he just got a media execution until rumors and uncertain facts became fact in the eyes of pop culture.

[lothar36]

Look, there is WAY WAY WAY too much smoke for there to be no fire.
Know what I mean? The guys a freak and should not be allowed near children unsupervised.
And what is up with those LOSERS at the trial. I saw an interview with one gal who quit her freakin job to stand outside the courthouse to "support" him. LOSER LOSER LOSER!!!! Get a freakin LIFE of your own.

[Misanthrope]

The media can make alot of smoke, that means there's a fire? Lucky for him the legal system still has redeeming qualities and doesnt buys into the bullshit smoke created by the press in the first place, and a couple of smart people trying to get a buck out of it too.

[Mr. HokeyPokey]

Originally posted by Misanthrope
I honestly do not think he's a criminal. Hell i cant even be sure he's a pedophile either, seems like he just got a media execution until rumors and uncertain facts became fact in the eyes of pop culture.

Well said.. Now for the second time ever, I actually agree with you 100%

[Mr. HokeyPokey]

Originally posted by lothar36
Look, there is WAY WAY WAY too much smoke for there to be no fire.
Know what I mean? The guys a freak and should not be allowed near children unsupervised.
And what is up with those LOSERS at the trial. I saw an interview with one gal who quit her freakin job to stand outside the courthouse to "support" him. LOSER LOSER LOSER!!!! Get a freakin LIFE of your own.

After the first trial, MJ was the easy celeberty to go for, that is why he got accused of it again. No doubt he is a little weird, but funny how the allogations were made against him AFTER the documentary aired, when everybody thought he was nutzo.

There is NO smoke, and NO fire... 12 people heard all the details from both sides and made their conclusion, HA! In less then a week. Now i'm not dumb enough to quit my job to stand outside a courthouse, but shit... the man is a legend to millions of people and definitally in my eyes. Out of millions and millions of fans, a few hundred isn't very much to be asyou would quote "supporting" him.

Now am I a "loser" for supporting him from the day it came on the news that his ranch was getting searched? I don't think so. I think the LOSERS are the ones who immediately beleive what they heard on TV and assumed he was guilty before even going to court. Now those people my friend, are LOSERS.

Scorpio - They obviously didn't make it to his bed with him, because he was found NOT GUILTY.

[TheDeadWalk]

Supporting him long before a verdict is kinda the same thing in my eyes. It's just a blind justification for what you feel is wrong or right, without any arbitrary sense of judgement.

[Misanthrope]

Originally posted by TheDeadWalk
Supporting him long before a verdict is kinda the same thing in my eyes. It's just a blind justification for what you feel is wrong or right, without any arbitrary sense of judgement.

You're forgetting about innocent until proven guilty apparently.

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by Misanthrope
You're forgetting about innocent until proven guilty apparently.

You apparently didn't read what I wrote correctly.

Watching your television set and coming up with any predetermined circumstance of guilt or innocence based upon the images of your television set is ludicrous in my eyes.

I never thought Jackson was guilty. I never thought he was innocent, either. Why? Because Larry King or Paula Zahn isn't the see-all-know-all of the Neverland Ranch that can give me a predetermined biased un-abitrary outlook of guilt or innocence.

[Scorpio24]

Originally posted by Mr. HokeyPokey
After the first trial, MJ was the easy celeberty to go for, that is why he got accused of it again. No doubt he is a little weird, but funny how the allogations were made against him AFTER the documentary aired, when everybody thought he was nutzo.

There is NO smoke, and NO fire... 12 people heard all the details from both sides and made their conclusion, HA! In less then a week. Now i'm not dumb enough to quit my job to stand outside a courthouse, but shit... the man is a legend to millions of people and definitally in my eyes. Out of millions and millions of fans, a few hundred isn't very much to be asyou would quote "supporting" him.

Now am I a "loser" for supporting him from the day it came on the news that his ranch was getting searched? I don't think so. I think the LOSERS are the ones who immediately beleive what they heard on TV and assumed he was guilty before even going to court. Now those people my friend, are LOSERS.

Scorpio - They obviously didn't make it to his bed with him, because he was found NOT GUILTY.

Have you seen the Bashir interview. He ADMITTED it himself. He sleeps with young kids in his bed. Now I don't know about you but I would say that proves that allegation.

As for your reason that he's innocent because the Jury said so. As I have already quoted Raymond Hultman who was on the jury has said that he was guilty of mollesting kids they just couldn't prove this specific allegation agaisnt him because it came down to word against word. So seeing as they have seen all the facts as you say I think I'll take this guys view of him being guilty over yours.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by Scorpio24
Have you seen the Bashir interview. He ADMITTED it himself. He sleeps with young kids in his bed. Now I don't know about you but I would say that proves that allegation.

As for your reason that he's innocent because the Jury said so. As I have already quoted Raymond Hultman who was on the jury has said that he was guilty of mollesting kids they just couldn't prove this specific allegation agaisnt him because it came down to word against word. So seeing as they have seen all the facts as you say I think I'll take this guys view of him being guilty over yours.

Well stated. It would be completely stupid to assume that he is innocent just because a jury says they "don't have enough evidence to convict" him (their words). He may have been found not guilty, but he admitted he sleeps with boys. His most recent accusers aren't his only accusers. To ignore that is sadly stupid.

It seems like only his whiner fans are willing to blindly yell out "not guilty" and just not accept the possibility that this guy is truly mentally ill. It's stupidity by choice. Watching all these sheep outside the courthouse crying about his innocence, dressing like him, quitting their jobs to go to the case, etc. reminds me that the masses are asses. We can't trust the media completely, but we sure as fuck can't trust him, either. Apparently those people willing to say "I told you so" haven't been paying attention to the behavior of this family, particularly Jacko.

With that said, I'd like to remind everyone that Michael Jackson is a fucking moron. (http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/140274)

[Mr. HokeyPokey]

In the Bashir interview he said he lets them have the bed and he sleeps on the floor, even one of the kids said it.

[Misanthrope]

Originally posted by TheDeadWalk
You apparently didn't read what I wrote correctly.

Watching your television set and coming up with any predetermined circumstance of guilt or innocence based upon the images of your television set is ludicrous in my eyes.

I never thought Jackson was guilty. I never thought he was innocent, either. Why? Because Larry King or Paula Zahn isn't the see-all-know-all of the Neverland Ranch that can give me a predetermined biased un-abitrary outlook of guilt or innocence.

No, i was just saying that the legal system is based on the premise of innocent until proven guilty. Under those ground he is innocent until it can be proven, beyond reasonable doubt, that he is guilty. The guy is a celebrity and has fans, fans always support the celebrity and cheer for him. Its obvious that they are not gonna remain neutral on the issue, not only because the legal system encourages them not to, but because of the fact that they are wel...fans.

To give you an example if someone would make strong accusations against your father you would react in the same way, only until you're totally convinced that the accusations are true you might start considering he is not the person you thought he was.

Would that make you a moron? I dont think so, the only thing you could consider moronic on these people is the fact that they are fans of michael jackson, and thats another discussion entirely.

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by Misanthrope
To give you an example if someone would make strong accusations against your father you would react in the same way, only until you're totally convinced that the accusations are true you might start considering he is not the person you thought he was.

Would that make you a moron? I dont think so, the only thing you could consider moronic on these people is the fact that they are fans of michael jackson, and thats another discussion entirely.

I do see what you're saying, and I agree with it to some extent. However, I do think that having the situation be my father is a huge difference between Pop Celebrity X.

I don't feel that taking a not-guilty side on an issue for Pop Celebrity X during their trial is so much of being on the favor of "Innocent until proven guilty". Why I think it's ludicrous is because most people who take the "he's just a child" or "he would never do that" line, and would still stick up for him even if he were guilty, whether a fan or not. The only reason they do this is because of what they feel they've seen as concrete evidence from watching television or listening to talk radio.

Don't get me wrong, I am 100% for innocent until proven guilty, but the two main sides that seem to conjur up between EVERY celebrity court case is the "Well he MUST be guilty." and the "He MUST be innocent." sides. I just listen to comments on talk radio, television, and read message boards and think "How in the fuck do any of these people know what someone else has done?" Really?!

[PrettyInPink]

Originally posted by Mr. HokeyPokey
In the Bashir interview he said he lets them have the bed and he sleeps on the floor, even one of the kids said it.

Im with you on this one. As I have said in another thread, during that interview it was said he lets the kids sleep in his bed and he sleeps on the floor. I actually remember that quite vividly. MJ nor the child never said they slept in the same bed, they did say the same bedroom. I know it's splitting hairs but to me there is a difference.

[The Postmaster General]

As I have already quoted Raymond Hultman who was on the jury has said that he was guilty of mollesting kids they just couldn't prove this specific allegation agaisnt him because it came down to word against word.


Obvsiouly Huttman walked into the case feeling that Jackson was guilty, but didn't have facts to prove it.

Otherwise, he is saying that the case against Jackson was strong enough to convince a jury that he was guilty, but not strong enough to convict him of being guilty. Huh?

What? Jackson's defense pulled a "Well, there is no doubt that Jackson molests kids, but lets face it - there is no evidence showing he molested that specific kid!"

And then the jury went, "Oh, yeah. He's right. Jackson may be a pedophile, but we'd be doing a great injustice if we didn't let him walk free, so we will vote innocent despite beliving he is guilty."

A jury can vote however they wish, regardless of facts. I fail to see how a man who says he let a guilty man walk free because of a technicality earns so much credit.

If you ask me, a man who is on a jury and becomes convinced of a defendent's guilt, and turns to let that them walk free ---- That's one sick fuck.

Or just someone eating up their moment in the spotlight.

Whether or not Jackson diddles with little piddles --- This guy from the jury is a real asshole. If any more kids are molested, it will be because Raymond is a fucking moron. A jury is supposed to be there to balance out the lawyers, and decrypt their cases as representatives of the general public, not to let guilty people walk free because they don't feel the case was all that strong. That's not a jurys job, despite what the lawyers have brainwashed people into thinking over the years.

Wow, Hultman - way to admit that you're willing to put children at the risk of molestation just because you have no backbone, and can think guilty while saying innocent.

AGAIN, another person surrounding the Jackson case that I see as a bigger social problem than the weirdo himself, regardless of how many kids he did or didn't molest.

The jurors are morons because they admit to believing they are putting children at risk, the parents are morons because they admit to believing they are putting children at risk. Hey - let's focus all that on to the celebrity.

[Scorpio24]

Not to defend the man or anything but in his interview he claimed that the prosecution tried to inject facts from other situations involving MJ and the Judge had them stricken from the record for not being elligible evidence for this latest case. Hultman then said that after what he heard left him in no doubt that he has mollested kids but they just did not have the evidence to convict on his latest case. He may well be just living out his 15mins but that was quite a strong thing to say if it's not true don't you think?

As for the BASHIR INTERVIEW: If I have misquoted then I apologise but I was almost sure that he said that. I just remember me and my missus looking at each other in disbelief. I'll have to re-check. Agian apologies if wrong.

[The Postmaster General]

But my thing is, Scorpio -- to me it's a case of integrity. There was absolutely no reason for this guy to vote "Innocent" -- He could have stuck by his guns and stated guilty. The worst that would come of it would be a split jury and a mistrial.

If Jackson really is a pedophille, don't you think it would be better for the first actual case against him to end in a mistrail than a declariation of INNOCENT.

All this jury did, by not saying Guilty (which BTW is one less syllable to say than Innocent) --- This guy proved Jackson's innocent.

It only takes one juror to keep injustices from happening -- 12 Angry Men, hell All In The Family even did an episode on this type of jury integrity.

There was absolutely no reason for this guy to not say what he believed. To me, saying that he just couldn't prove this case is a cop-out, and probabaly the guy just wanted to go back home. Jurors say what they want. You never hear a judge ask why they voted that way, unless it's just absurd, I'd assume.

In my eyes, it's utterly dispicable to have a chance to send someone you believe is a criminal to jail so they will not harm others, but to not do it for whatever reason.

Sure, he says the judge asked that those facts be striken from the record, but obviously the judge didn't have the jury subjected to Mind Erase from Lucinda. Either the guy shouldn't have run his mouth, or he should have stood behind his words when there was time for him to take action.

[Misanthrope]

So we should convict everyone who is suspected of being a criminal if we are convinced, mostly by opinions and circunstances, that he is guilty? Why dont we do away with evidence all togheter? In fact why dont we execute people right there in the courtroom too? Surely opinions are more important than facts.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by Misanthrope
So we should convict everyone who is suspected of being a criminal if we are convinced, mostly by opinions and circunstances, that he is guilty? Why dont we do away with evidence all togheter? In fact why dont we execute people right there in the courtroom too? Surely opinions are more important than facts.

And surely juries are infallable 100 percent of the time, too. :rolleyes:

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by Misanthrope
So we should convict everyone who is suspected of being a criminal if we are convinced, mostly by opinions and circunstances, that he is guilty? Why dont we do away with evidence all togheter? In fact why dont we execute people right there in the courtroom too? Surely opinions are more important than facts.

So when the head juror says based on the evidence he's seen that Jackson couldn't be proven guilty of the crime at hand but still feels that he is a pedophile and into little boys that doesn't alarm you?

[Mr. HokeyPokey]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
So when the head juror says based on the evidence he's seen that Jackson couldn't be proven guilty of the crime at hand but still feels that he is a pedophile and into little boys that doesn't alarm you?

No - because the majority found him not guilty.

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by Mr. HokeyPokey
No - because the majority found him not guilty.

Not guilty of the crime he's accused of maybe. That doesn't mean he's not into children sexually.

[Misanthrope]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
So when the head juror says based on the evidence he's seen that Jackson couldn't be proven guilty of the crime at hand but still feels that he is a pedophile and into little boys that doesn't alarm you?

1) Being a pedophile is not a crime. Unless you act on those wishes by any means that can affect others i have no problem with pedophiles

2) It doesnt alarms me than the Jury let a man free because they could not prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that he did something against the law.

What you do not understand is that the reverse is also truth: I wouldnt want to be convicted on the account of the poor misguided and biased opinion of a jury member that thought i look guilty. Convicting people on rumors is NOT justice, no matter what the media wants you to believe ( because is in their best interest to promove rumors and gossip anyway, screw anyone who might be affected ).

[jeo4]

Blaming the media for his two investigations in the last fifteen years is dead wrong to me. He got arrested before the media slammed him. He's had a long standing feud with them since the 1980's, but nobody in the media caused his arrests or his trial. His deviant behavior was the cause. He did it to himself. And just because he got off does not mean he is innocent.

[Mr. HokeyPokey]

Originally posted by Misanthrope
Was he found guilty?

In any case way before this trial started everyone had the concept of "Michael Jackson = Pedophile" in their mind and that was because of the media. After he was accused by people of being a pedo then this boy and his mother come out and say "oh yea yea, me too!"

ditto.

Funny how he's found Not-Guilty but yet some of you guys still think he's guilty. Stop listening to the media.

[Misanthrope]

Was he found guilty?

In any case way before this trial started everyone had the concept of "Michael Jackson = Pedophile" in their mind and that was because of the media. After he was accused by people of being a pedo then this boy and his mother come out and say "oh yea yea, me too!"

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by Misanthrope
Was he found guilty?

In any case way before this trial started everyone had the concept of "Michael Jackson = Pedophile" in their mind and that was because of the media. After he was accused by people of being a pedo then this boy and his mother come out and say "oh yea yea, me too!"

Hey it's not just the media but the head juror of the case, many of his former employees, and accusations that go back over fifteen years way before the media frenzy.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
Hey it's not just the media but the head juror of the case, many of his former employees, and accusations that go back over fifteen years way before the media frenzy.

Yep. And the media had little to do with his arrests. I hate the media a lot of the time, but they only reported what they knew. Even so, they didn't influence the police who arrested him.

[Misanthrope]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
Hey it's not just the media but the head juror of the case, many of his former employees, and accusations that go back over fifteen years way before the media frenzy.

If former employee's really saw commit something illegal he would ( or should ) be in jail by now. As for the head Juror there was nothing conclusive beyond reasonable doubt, his personal opinion is just that: an opinion, its stupid to intentionally send people you dont like to jail thats why we have legal systems to begin with.

[Misanthrope]

Originally posted by jeo4
Yep. And the media had little to do with his arrests. I hate the media a lot of the time, but they only reported what they knew. Even so, they didn't influence the police who arrested him.

Again you can be arrested for a number of different reasons, doesnt makes you guilty.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Misanthrope
So we should convict everyone who is suspected of being a criminal if we are convinced, mostly by opinions and circunstances, that he is guilty? Why dont we do away with evidence all togheter? In fact why dont we execute people right there in the courtroom too? Surely opinions are more important than facts.



That's not what I said.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
So when the head juror says based on the evidence he's seen that Jackson couldn't be proven guilty of the crime at hand but still feels that he is a pedophile and into little boys that doesn't alarm you?


What I'm asking is - Don't the head jurors' actions seem a bit odd? Even with OJ, all the jurors said they believed he was innocent. What would a person have to gain by giving an interview like the one this juror is giving? He isn't doing it to raise awareness, I don't think at least. It seems he could take better avenues if that were the case.

Also, if what he was saying were ture -- that they had to strike evidence from the public record, wouldn't this make him guilty of slander by?

All I'm saying is that I question anyone who IMMEDIATELY goes on TV to announce that they believed one thing, but voted another -- That's not how jury's work. I don't understand why you guys are throwing out the fact that this could have ended in mistrial all the same had this vocal juror stood by what he believed - the evidence was a plenty. Nobody asks you WHY you voted one way or another in the process. You take what you're given and form a conclusion. What this guy is saying is that he essentially believes that Jackson actively abuses kids, but not this one time. That makes no sense, and to me he has little credibility for many reason.

There are social problems surrounding this case that are much more within our realm of changing than some reclusive weirdo. That's all I'm on about from the get-go.

[Watur2Phunk]

Prince, you're missing some good pussy

hilarious...

i still love michael

[Scorpio24]

To be honest if I'm asked. I believe MJ is probably a pedophile. I don't think he was guilty of this crime but I think he may well have been of others. He may well not have, but I still believe that he is a pedophile which isnt a crime.

I can't take serious any of his former employee's accounts that they seen this happen. They should be strung up if true. But I don't think that it is.

As for the juror - I know it seems strange that he has come out like this but to be honest my first reaction to it was that he just let a man go he believes to a pedophile with the ability to act and he wanted people to know this. That may be and probably is a gullible view on my part. But that was my initial thoughts.

One thing I disagree on you with Bubba is the conviction of MJ for this case if they heard something dodgy about another case. Where as I can see the morality side of your argument. I still think you cannot convict somebody of a crime you don't believe they commited on this case because they might/probably have done it before.

[Misanthrope]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
... the evidence was a plenty...

Elaborate. Maybe i am uninformed but id like to know all this plently of evidence that actually prove Michael Jackson did molested a child ( feel free to go back to other cases ).

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Scorpio24
One thing I disagree on you with Bubba is the conviction of MJ for this case if they heard something dodgy about another case. Where as I can see the morality side of your argument. I still think you cannot convict somebody of a crime you don't believe they commited on this case because they might/probably have done it before.


I'm not saying he should have been convicted - I'm saying that if a juror felt he was guilty, why would he vote innocent? Then why would he go on TV to tell everyone about it?

My comments have nothing to do with Jackson but with this juror -- Go back to my statement about asking if makes sense to you that a juror would logically beleive that Jackson committed these acts, but not this time.

I am more irked about him going on TV to talk about this than anything else.

And there is a key thing that I keep saying taht no one seems to be reading.

I think there is something wrong with the joblo server or something -- Let me run a test here. Let me know if the following word shows up in my post:

MISTRIAL

Did that word show up. If not, based on what the juror is saying, this is how the case should have ended up.



Elaborate. Maybe i am uninformed but id like to know all this plently of evidence that actually prove Michael Jackson did molested a child

Well, i didn't say evidence to prove he molested a child, I said there was all sorts of evidence -- the trial went on for weeks, I doubt they were all sitting around trying to figure if they should order Chinese or pizza.

What I'm on about is that I've served on a jury, and what this guy is describing sounds like something out of a Perry Mason case or something.

Yes, there has to be credible evidence before someone can be convicted, but jurors don't figure out the technicalities - they decide whether he is innocent or guilty. This juror is saying he felt he was guilty, but that there wasn't evidence to prove it. You with me here. A juror doesn't decide whether or not there is enough evidence - a juror is convinced one way or another.

And you seem to keep responding as if I'm saying Jackson should have been convicted -- that's not at all what I'm saying -- What I'm saying is why would anyone believe the word of someone who has acted in the way this juror has?? To me, he is clearly out for attention. And whether or not he is telling the truth is an aside to his person which appears to lack integrity on the surface. You can't go on TV and talk about evidence that was striken from public record, first of all. Secondly, if he was convinced enough to go on TV and talk about Jacksons guilt -- why wouldn't he have voted guilty? What the guy is saying is that there wasn't enough evidence to convict him, but enough to talk trash about him. He didn't say anything like "Well, I think the mom tried to use Jackson, knowing he was a pedophille" -- No, he didn't. All he did was bad talk Jackson... after voting him innocent.

IMO - if this juror had any credibility what-so-ever, this case would have ended in mistrial. It sounds to me like he is kind of full of it.

[Mr-Blonde]

I think the juror is extremely credible. All he is saying is that although he didn't feel that Jackson was guilty in this particular case, based on the evidence he was presented (past allegations etc.) he feels that Jackson has committed these crimes in the past. There is nothing damaging to his credibility by making these statements. He obviously felt that Jackson was innocent in this case since he didn't vote to convict him, but not necessarily in all the other cases. He's forming an opinion of Jackson based on the evidence that was presented.

[Misanthrope]

I was gonna reply but Mr. Blonde sums it up, thank you :D

[The Postmaster General]

Well hell, I'm just glad to see the two of you agreeing about something Jackson-related for once.

What you guys are talking about in large is the ethics of the whole thing, and you are right.

I'm a bit more on about the psychology of someone who would declare the guilt of a man on public TV while voting them innocent in the privacy of a juror's room. To me, what this juror did wasn't cool, or very civil.

See, you guys are stating that it is unethical to base a decision on evidence that was striken from the public record, and this true.

I am saying that it is unethical to go on TV and speak of evidence that was striken from the public record.

Neither of the two things cancel on another out, but I do find it somewhat odd that the guy is ethical enough to have it one way, but not the other. If he can bend it enough to go on TV and talk about things that were nobody's buisiness to be heard in the context of the case, why not bend it enough to see a man you feel has commited crimes is left with some doubt as to his innocence?

I would never act in an unethical manner, and that would include going on TV to talk about what might have been in the case of a man who has been found guilty.

Again, don't look at my statements as concerning Jackson's guilt, but just as trying to get inside this guy's head. I'm sincerely puzzled by his inconsistencies in following proper conduct. It irks me to see his actions taken at face value.