So guys, what do you think about the Not Guilty verdict? Do you think that Michael Jackson is innocent or guilty of a crime that has been covered? Personally, i believe that Michael Jackson is guilty of at least one of those charges. In short, i believe he got away scot free.
Ciao,
Tim
MAI STATI IN B
Can´t believe he got a verdict NOT guilty for all the charges!
I, like Tim think that he was guilty at least one of these charges [below]. According to evidence it´s obvious, but in america...everything is possible. First OJ, then Robert Blake and now MJ.
Conspiracy to commit child abduction, false imprisonment, extortion (COUNT 1)
Committing a lewd act on a child under 14
COUNT 2: Molestation incident alleged by accuser
COUNT 3: Molestation incident alleged by accuser
COUNT 4: Molestation incident accuser's brother says he witnessed
COUNT 5: Molestation incident accuser's brother says he witnessed
Attempting to commit a lewd act on a child under 14
COUNT 6: Accuser's allegation Jackson tried to get the boy to masturbate him.
Administering alcohol to enable child molestation*
COUNT 7: Related to alleged molestation in Count 2
COUNT 8: Related to alleged molestation in Count 3
COUNT 9: Related to alleged molestation in Count 4
COUNT 10: Related to alleged molestation in Count 5
*Includes lesser offense of furnishing alcohol to a minor
Only in america...
Peppino Prisco: "La gioia più grande? Scontata. Il Milan in B. E per ben due volte: una... a pagamento e una... gratis. Sono dell 'idea che una retrocessione cancelli almeno cinque scudetti conquistati e che la vittoria di una Mitropa Cup elimini i residui"
Peppino Prisco: "Io non rubo il campionato, e in Serie B non son mai stato"
I truly think he is guilty and I even made up a cheap punch line:
"Galliani in charge of Lega Calcio? It's like having Michael Jackson as a Boy Scout, you know some abuse will happen"
I think he was guilty. Interresting watching today on Larry King on cnn 2 of the jury members said they though he was guilty but couldn't convict cause the accuser and mother wasn't credible that gave reasonable doudt.
Forza Inter per sempre!!!!
Jose responding after the derby:"We could only have lost by having six people on the park, as even with seven, we would have won. "
New Domain name www.forzainterforums.com
Yes, that was truly shocking. They based their entire decision on the mother's lack of credibility although they thought he was guilty.Originally Posted by Stefan
Interestingly, nearly half of the Americans polled by CNN said they disagreed with the verdict, with only 34% of those polled said they agreed. | Source
Ciao,
Tim
GUILTY FOR SURE, I can't believe the District Attorney couldn't put him away.
To me, there is absolutely no proof that he did anything with the children besides "touch them. The man isn't guilty if you ask me.
He's a weirdo, and any parent that allows their kids to sleep over is obviously gold digging. MJ is free, and needs to seek help, but I blame that parent for this whole mess.
Just my $2 cents.
Nulla è impossibile per questa Inter
There is absolutely no proof that he is innocent, either. Moreover, you have even mentioned that he is a weirdo. As such, how can you not suspect him the least bit of commiting a crime against a child?
Ciao,
Tim
Innocent until proven guilty.
Nulla è impossibile per questa Inter
You are a genrous man
Jokes aside, in America, it's not whether you are guilty or innocent, rather it is whether your lawyer is good or bad.
OJ Simpson, Blake, and now MJ, clearly you can see that truth is always lost. This is sad really, because I am sure all those guys did what they they were accused of and got off lightly.
He's a freak of nature, true. But given the absolutely lose nature of law in US where one just sue another for fun, fame & fortune; you have to also give him the benefit of the doubt.
I have no interest in this case whatsoever so I do not know any testimonials or evidence but I say there's a 50-50 chance of him being guilty or innocent.
Handyo
What you mean by "touch them? Don´t you think the way and the places he touched them is illegal?
If MJ is so innocent like you say, then how come you blame the parents? For what?
To me MJ was guilty until proven innocent. They never proved he´s innocent, but what´s new is states. You´re free to go MJ and remember to continue what you were doing. There´s nothing wrong with that MJ. Go on now...
Few examples why i think he´s guilty.
- Middle age man sleeps with young boys. Strike one.
- Middle age man gives alcohol to kids plus takes/watches pictures with them [you know what pictures]. Strike two.
- Middle age man has an alarm bells in his bedroom. He sleeps with young boys and he has alarm bells in case someone is coming. Strike three. Over and out!
Peppino Prisco: "La gioia più grande? Scontata. Il Milan in B. E per ben due volte: una... a pagamento e una... gratis. Sono dell 'idea che una retrocessione cancelli almeno cinque scudetti conquistati e che la vittoria di una Mitropa Cup elimini i residui"
Peppino Prisco: "Io non rubo il campionato, e in Serie B non son mai stato"
He's a f-cking freak but there's no evidence that he's guilty. Therefore I have no reason to believe that he is guilty, other than the fact that he looks like a complete freak, which isn't adequate in my opinion.
and guys... please get rid of the Michael Jackson avatars... they look freaky.
lol on the front of the sun today.. there was a huuuge picture of jacko with the quote "Jacko's vow.. no more boys in my bed" ok, so it's a tabloid & stuff.. but still.. no more boys, just a slight implication there.. ugh i think the mans guilty of at least one of those things, the fact that he touched a boy like that in the first place is enough.. he's freaky!!
the OJ trial was a bit diff though.. that was a case of the jury wanting to get back at another jury decision.. but yeh, if he wasn't jackson, was just any old guy who couldn't afford the best lawyers in the world, he'd have been found guilty for sure..
Tim, I'm a bit surprised to read this post. Proving to be innocent? What kind of society would ask you that? We're not in Medieval times anymore, when people would finger point someone saying "She's a witch!", and she had to prove her innocence or be shoved off a cliff...There is absolutely no proof that he is innocent, either. Moreover, you have even mentioned that he is a weirdo. As such, how can you not suspect him the least bit of commiting a crime against a child?
Ciao,
Tim
Michael Jackson has huge problems in his personal life. He's been the greatest artist of my generation, and he deserves respect for that.
His "problem" is that he has friends that are minors. This is a delicate and difficult situation nowadays. I'm sure that all MJ actually did was sleeping on a bed with a child sleeping next to him.
But today, you can't hit a child without risking to get thrown in jail. At the same time, you can see 10 years old girls going around with a mini-skirt and a thong (some parents should get their freakin heads banged against the wall!).
People who accused Jacko are ridiculous and pathetic, sure lady, you sent your child to MJ's house, did you know the guy? Did you trust him?
Jackson is weird, but this is not of our business. The fact that he's a celebrity makes people think that they have the right to judge him and his choices in life. Newsflash: you don't know him, you have no such right.
The trial against him has been a total farce, and I'm glad it's over, and he was cleared of all charges.
In the US people just love to create and destroy stars. The hell with them, I'm not going to join this circle of people who think they're so great that they can judge people they don't know by getting info off scandalistic papers and sources like that.
They're just bored people with nothing to do all day, looking to find people more miserable than them to feel better. Screw you!!
I'm talking about a part of the American public here, by the way, not you guys.
In conclusion, being weird doesn't mean you're a child molester, a society that condemns on allegations should be bombarded, and there's no such thing as proving your innocence, they have to prove that you're guilty, unless you live in a communist state.
22/04/07
18/05/08
16/05/09
16/05/10
22/05/10
18/12/10
29/08/09 Milan 0 Inter 4 Thiago Motta, Milito (p), Maicon, Stankovic - Dominated and outclassed
Materazzi World Champion
Yeah, which is wrong to do. An adult man should never sleep in the same bed with a kid that's not directly related to him, or a son of a dear friend etc.
But to invite kids to an amusement park and then sleep in the same bed with them, that's going too far.
Who in the world likes to do these things except for twisted men? It's okay to be weird, but being weird and creepy is really creepy. There are men who like Star Wars and camp for it, some men collect garabage for fun etc. etc. etc.
These things are okay, and you can find others sharing the same thing. But I have never heared of an adult man who enjoys sleeping with minor boys that he knows casually except for child molesters.
If michael jackson was soo innocent he wouldn't have payed off a previous family.
Forza Inter per sempre!!!!
Jose responding after the derby:"We could only have lost by having six people on the park, as even with seven, we would have won. "
New Domain name www.forzainterforums.com
But Frisko, the case against Michael Jackson wasn't a one off thing. He has had previous records of having intimate contact with children that may or may not have led to sexual relations. The fact that he enjoys spending so much time with kids and even sharing his bed with them just doesn't sound right, does it? You have to look at it not just from Michael Jackson's point of view, but that of the accuser, the poor unfortunate kid. The court may have acquitted Jackson of all charges, but that doesn't mean he isn't guilty at all. It simply means that due to certain situations, the case against Jackson cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
I believe Jackson is guilty because i am more likely to believe in the kid than the man himself. As you can see, depending on whose version of the facts you choose to believe in, you will either be accusing him of being guilty or knowing that he is innocent until proven otherwise.
I'll try to come up with some better material tomorrow. It's 6am here and i'm falling asleep...
Ciao,
Tim
Yeah, the poor kid is probably told by his parents to go over-board about Michael Jackson's weird lifestyle.
The point stays, there was no evidence that MJ commited anything remotely close to raping. He may have "slept" with the child and touched him, but once again, I'm sure the justice system worked and made the right decision.
It's not a matter of having a good or bad lawyer in this case, IMO.
Nulla è impossibile per questa Inter
Which is a crime. If you bring a girl to your room, and touch and 'sleep' with her without her consent, isn't that considered sexual assault? You don't have to force her for sex for it to be considered sexual assault.
And why would a man sleep and touch a boy that isn't close to him?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote