krypt0nian
Banned
Innocent man = Not guilty.
He is guilty of nothing more that extremely poor judgement.
Go Michael Go!
He is guilty of nothing more that extremely poor judgement.
Go Michael Go!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Breaking News on MJackson on ABC right now
- Thread starter themadcowtipper
- Start date
- Status
Lemurnator
Banned
Anyone who thought he was going to be found guilty in this trial is a loon. The prosecution was a joke and the case should have never made it to court with all that was and wasn't known.
Molestation charges are very hard to prove I believe and that's a shame, and I believe that this woman has ruined any chance for future trials to be taken seriously.
I think MJ is a child molester, and I think that anyone who would let their kids spend the night with MJ in the first place is automatically crazy enough not to be taken seriously by a jury. I think that's why MJ hangs out with those troubled kids in the first place.
Molestation charges are very hard to prove I believe and that's a shame, and I believe that this woman has ruined any chance for future trials to be taken seriously.
I think MJ is a child molester, and I think that anyone who would let their kids spend the night with MJ in the first place is automatically crazy enough not to be taken seriously by a jury. I think that's why MJ hangs out with those troubled kids in the first place.
Lemurnator said:
Are you saying future molestation cases around the country will be harder to prove because of this case? I don't believe that for a second. Pat LaLama was running that line and there's simply no proof that one case is going to have that much of an effect. Did murder charges become harder to prove because OJ or Beretta(sp?) got off?
Or are you saying that future charges against Michael would be harder to prove?
The biggest problem for the prosecution was lack of evidence and a crazy as a loon mom... the conspiracy charge hurt them the most IMO because it put the mother and her past conduct in the forefront. Her past conduct, and her past coaching of the children almost immediately creates a "reasonable doubt".
what is pissing me off to no end right now is wtf happend to innocent until proven guilty? by the media MJ was guilty before the case and now even after the case there is so much negativity towards michael right now that its sickening. fuck the media. I cannot believe this. MJ will never be left alone and that sucks.
SolidSnakex
Member
Barnimal said:
But he's weird man! He's freaking weird! So he's guilty.
What drives me to no end about this stuff is the unfair treatment that MJ got. I truly hope he didn't molest that child, and that's all I really care about in all of this. But, you see, because Mr. Jackson is an eccentric celebrity, people are like "oh, it's just MJ, he always sleeps with kids in his bed." If some random 40 year old man was caught sleeping with kids in his bed, I don't think it would be "oh, he's just eccentric," the guy would hve his balls in a juicer. Even if he was completely proven innocent of doing anything wrong, the guy's life would change, everyone would label him as pedophile, and whatever. People read the headlines, not the retractions. But Michael Jackson is going to have people championing his innocence for the next bunch of months.
Doesn't seem fair to me.
I'm not bothering to read all this thread, so if someone said something like this earlier, sorry.
Doesn't seem fair to me.
I'm not bothering to read all this thread, so if someone said something like this earlier, sorry.
i could slap this bitch on court TV. whats screwed though is as far back as i can remember MJ has always gotten flack. i remember in 2nd freaking grade 20 some years ago "i pledge allegence to the flag michael jackson is a f*g". he's always been under the microscope. wether it being accused of being gay to molesting kids. if i were him i'd just disappear off to some country where no one knows him if thats even possible. he has given so much to the world in the form of music and he's treated like a monster. imagine how that must feel.
SolidSnakex
Member
You can tune into Scarborough Country and watch him cry. He's been whining over MJ being guilty for months.
Nancy Grace comes through again
"Michael Jackson found not guilty by reason of celebrity!"
Nancy Grace comes through again
"Michael Jackson found not guilty by reason of celebrity!"
Barnimal said:
I understand your anger. It doesn't help that MJ's behavior has been suspect, though. That's the real tragedy here--instead of getting to the bottom of this issue we got a free freak show. While I personally have a hard time seeing him as a molestor, the views of folks like Ignatz are completely valid.
Mike needs some help, but unfortunately I doubt that this case could be the wake up call. He's been in his own universe for too long and he needs some up to snap him out of it. I actually hope the rumour about him selling Neverland is true. That's the first step.
I'm not watching any of this post-trial coverage, but I'd like to chime in with the Nancy Grace hate. What an obnoxious bitch. We get it, you're angry and the only way you can win arguments is by being pissed off and yelling at other people! You try and act all elitist and pissed off to make it seem like you know what you're talking about but you never fucking do.
Acknowledging that if I choose to watch television news it's usually CNN, Nancy Grace is the worst fucking thing to happen to that network in its history. It was bad enough when just did guest spots on some of the programs, but now she's officially on the payroll.
The sooner her career disappears, the better. Or send her back to the sensationalistic bullshit that is Court TV.
Edit: Heh, and for the above, I'm primarily familiar with her from a pizza parlor I used to frequent that always had Larry King on TV with her as a guest
Acknowledging that if I choose to watch television news it's usually CNN, Nancy Grace is the worst fucking thing to happen to that network in its history. It was bad enough when just did guest spots on some of the programs, but now she's officially on the payroll.
The sooner her career disappears, the better. Or send her back to the sensationalistic bullshit that is Court TV.
Edit: Heh, and for the above, I'm primarily familiar with her from a pizza parlor I used to frequent that always had Larry King on TV with her as a guest
Escape Goat
Member
krypt0nian said:Innocent man = Not guilty.
He is guilty of nothing more that extremely poor judgement.
Go Michael Go!
He could be guilty. But until prosecution can prove it he is presumed innocent!
midnightguy
Member
It's not Nancy Grace, it's Diane Diamond that I cannot stand
(even though I feel that MJ should have been convicted)
(even though I feel that MJ should have been convicted)
how is this porn?
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...102-6479907-5376921?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
why the fuck do they keep calling it porn???
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...102-6479907-5376921?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
why the fuck do they keep calling it porn???
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
borghe said:
Oh yeah, no question. And I would not have it any other way. Our legal system is set up that way for a reason.
My main hope from all of this is that (assuming I am right) he not have access to kids if only becuase the suspicion has been raised and parents won't trust him. If I am wrong, that's bad, but I'd rather err on the side of caution.
The Chosen One
Member
I agree. I liked his last album, but rejecting The Neptunes was a HUGE mistake. MJ's album sales would have done far better if he had the Justin Timberlake songs, "Like I Love You" and "Rock Your Body" as lead singles. All those Rodney Jerkins produced tracks on MJ's album were a bust because none of them made at it as a single.
I honestly don't understand how Invincible was the most expensive album ever made. But yeah, MJ needs to come up with a new album that's better in touch with popular music. Also, his music videos should be 100% animation features because his physical appearance is becoming more jarring by the day.
As for the verdict, I don't understand how any could be surprised. Any sane person who followed the trial could plainly see that the prosecution put up a weak ass case. They were basically hoping Jackson's weirdness would do their work for them. Sorry prosecution that's not how the law works.
Kobun Heat said:
I'm not clear here, because 1, I'm wondering what makes him "an obvious child molestor", and 2, you haven't made this tie, but are you saying that you want Michael Jackson to go to jail when there doesn't seem like sufficient evidence to send him? Should he perhaps be sent to jail, because it's what a lot of people (maybe even the majority) think he did? The evidence in this case compared to the OJ Simpson trial is drastically less convincing.
I'm glad the system works the way it does. It's appropriate that if they can't prove he did it that he walks. (and for the record, I'll say that I don't think he bought his way out of this one... he's probably got a high-priced defence team, but I'm not sure the prosecution presented a great case to begin with).
Personally, I don't pretend to know what Michael Jackson has or hasn't done with kids. In my heart, I think it's about 50/50 -- that he's a creep or just this weird man-boy. I don't pretend to know, although it's one case where I'd like to, because I think this case brings out some strange element of human nature in its viewers -- people have determined that this guy is a sicko who got away with it, or he's some angel who is vindicated. Me, I guess it's over, but that's about it.
Also, Manabyte is right on double jeopardy. I've been murdering people and robbing banks in California for the last six years. It's really cool, the cops'll catch me and when they realize it's me, they'll stop apprehending me, and we'll just share a hearty chuckle.
"Hey SickBoy!"
"Hey boys, just had to pop off a few more random people today, and my bank account was getting low."
"It's OK, man, you know we can't touch you!"
"Not unless I start shooting at you! Oh! Bang bang!"
"Hahahaha!"
"Seeya next week!"
"Bye SickBoy!"
The Shadow
Member
Socreges said:
Kobun Heat
Member
I'm responding here because I don't want people to think that I somehow want the jury verdict thrown out and the guy sent to jail. Yes, I do believe in trial by jury, presumption of innocence, reasonable doubt, and all that.SickBoy said:
I think it would be better for everyone (especially the 13-year-old boys who live in the vicinity of Neverland Ranch) if he had been found guilty, however.
Kobun Heat said:
What. The. Fuck. Kobun Heat, you're a rational guy, so what the hell made you come up with that sentence? Are you suggesting that MJ goes around the neighborhood and picked up young boys without permission or something? If you look at the facts of the matter, he only takes in children along with their families, and at the complete trust and consent of the parents. If they didn't think he was a danger to their children, and now the court fails to prove reasonable doubt that he is in fact a danger to children, who the fuck are you to judge?
milanbaros
Member?
Only a few people rely know whether he is truely innocent or not but in the eyes of the law he is and I think thats fair considering the absence of any hard evidence, it was a joke of a trial.
brooklyngooner
Member
As others have written, this is a curious thread. Some seem to foam at the mouth for his incarceration, some seem as rabidly defensive. I guess you can never discount the power of celebrity.
For what it's worth I agree with the sentiment that he couldn't be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt based on what the prosecution offered. I also agree with the observation that it's misguided to believe he was proven innocent. I also believe he has molested children in the past and will continue to do so as it is a compulsive behavior for which he needs serious treatment.
In my girlfriend's internship clinic the other day one of the more senior faculty of the program said the need to have children sleep in his bed is rather indicative of an underlying pathology that either has or will manifest itself in more serious ways.
For what it's worth I agree with the sentiment that he couldn't be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt based on what the prosecution offered. I also agree with the observation that it's misguided to believe he was proven innocent. I also believe he has molested children in the past and will continue to do so as it is a compulsive behavior for which he needs serious treatment.
In my girlfriend's internship clinic the other day one of the more senior faculty of the program said the need to have children sleep in his bed is rather indicative of an underlying pathology that either has or will manifest itself in more serious ways.
Where was all this righteous "we must protect the children" anger when all these Catholic priests were quietly settling their cases?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Why do you automatically assume that those who have been on Michael's side since the beginning are simply there because of the "power of celebrity".
Inquiring minds want to know.
brooklyngooner said:
Why do you automatically assume that those who have been on Michael's side since the beginning are simply there because of the "power of celebrity".
this is what bothers me.. you are probably referring to people like me as rabidly defensive. I have been oin the "he's innocent" bandwagon since the first "evidence" started popping up at the grand jury indictment. my basis on his guilt or innocence in the trila, and why I found the trial so damn interesting, is really at the end has nothing to do with his actual guilt or innocence. it was about the fact that in this system you are innocent until proven guilty, and there was nowhere near enough evidence to prove him guilty. I like to think I am a pretty fair and straightforward guy. had they had any physical evidence, even circumstantial physical evidence, I would have been more inclined to accept that he could have been found guilty. had they had more consistent statements and accounts from the boy and his brother, I would have been more inclined to accept that he could have been found guilty. had there been more consistent statements from those who knew the boy, had the mother not had a past filled with attempted scams and cons, I would have been more inclined. If this was a case of a strong christian family who everyone loved and thought was the greatest family in the world and they came forward with this without any evidence whatsoever, I would have been more inclined.brooklyngooner said:
but the case was what it was. and under that circumstance I don't see how anyone who knew or felt he should have been found not guilty on lack of evidence is being fanatical or affected by his celebrity. for me at least, it has nothing to do with his celebrity. it was about the case at hand. hell, if the case was more "interesting" i.e. there were actually more consisten testimonies or some physical evidence, I probably wouldn't have been as interested. court cases don't interest me that much. but this wasn't a court case.. this was a DA who OBVIOUSLY has a grudge against jackson (obvious because he actually made the decision to go through with a case with no evidence). this was a family who, despite whether it happened or not, had targetted michael jackson and arguably put their kids in this position knowingly and willingly.. no, not a court case.
brooklyngooner
Member
DarienA said:
I didn't write I thought everyone was. I think some are. It happens all the time. I don't think all who think he didn't molest kids are starry-eyed. I just think some spend their time tickling their nuts to scratch and sniff Thriller cartoon books and wouldn't ever believe the guy whose dances they mimicked in their mirrors at eight years old would be capable of grasping boys under their underoos.
borghe: I was harsh in my comments earlier in the thread. I wasn't warranted and I owe you an apology for it.
That said, I do think some of the people are working overtime to defend him. Jackson wasn't going to do time with all the money he has. Maybe you feel this was a hatchet job on a guy who has a right to hang his infant off balconies and pour money into escapist facsimilies of theme parks and you're probably right. I just think he's the wrong guy to get the synapses frying over when people with far less money get railroaded all the time.
The fact remains Jackson himself ratcheted this up to full-tilt boogie when he slept in beds with kids.
SolidSnakex
Member
Kobun Heat said:
Why's that? Is Michael suddenly going around snatching kids off the street now?
Really though... why aren't Pat LaLama, Marcia Clark, Nancy Grace etc... all railing at how the Catholic church as quietly covered up and settled just HUNDREDS of molestation cases?
Where is the concern for the children's welfare there?
Where is the concern for the children's welfare there?
That is NOT what was "proven beyond a reasonable doubt." He was acquitted of specific criminal offenses because of a reasonable doubt in the mind of the jurors, based on the evidence presented. The purpose of the trial was NOT to determine whether or not he is a danger to children.duckroll said:
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Darrien-- that's a damn good point.
Do The Mario
Unconfirmed Member
Can people get fuckin real about MJ, I mean for over a decade with the backing of multi millions of dollars he has been absolutely grilled and scrutinized.
What does the prosecution have to show for this decade of investigation?
Also WTF is up with all the Jacko avatars, talk about jumping on the band wagon.
What does the prosecution have to show for this decade of investigation?
Also WTF is up with all the Jacko avatars, talk about jumping on the band wagon.
jinx is of course correct. how many sexual predators out there were at one time (maybe even the first time) let go on acquittal? or mistrial? being acquitted of these charges does not guarantee one is harmless, it means the jury didn't feel there was evidence there to prove his guilt.
that being said, I don't think he is a molestor, but this case (or any case) doesn't really prove that in a general context.
that being said, I don't think he is a molestor, but this case (or any case) doesn't really prove that in a general context.
The Shadow
Member
loxy said:
More like hits the nail on the head. You don't even know the definition of the word "trolling", son.
themadcowtipper
Smells faintly of rancid stilton.
MSNBC report MJackson's Off the Wall Cd has risen in sells 120%
Tommie Hu$tle
Member
I think what hasn't been said in all this is intellegence that the jury has displayed to me in their interviews. All of them seem like they were there to do the job of proving the guilt or innocence of the defendent based on the merits of the case.
They don't seem like glory hounds eager to make a quick buck off of MJ's celeberity. If anything I think this case is a victory of juries.
They don't seem like glory hounds eager to make a quick buck off of MJ's celeberity. If anything I think this case is a victory of juries.
themadcowtipper
Smells faintly of rancid stilton.
Not according to MSNBC....many times they questioned the jury's intelligenceTommie Hu$tle said:
themadcowtipper
Smells faintly of rancid stilton.
Havent read this whole thread so not sure if it was posted or not, but look what I found
Damn MJackeson you could atleast paid for the kid's braces....
Damn MJackeson you could atleast paid for the kid's braces....
SolidSnakex
Member
These news networks have got to be jumping with joy that they've got this Natalee Holloway case to follow so they don't have to talk about Michael anymore. Almost every anchor seemed depressed yesterday.
- Status