Support NeoGAF

[borghe]

Seriously, is this the most bullshit trial ever? The judge is now allowing them to consider past ALLEGATIONS, NONE OF WHICH EVER WENT TO COURT, to determine if Jackson simply seems like the type of person that could commit the alleged charges.

We joke constantly about the court of "public opinion", but now jackson is LITERALLY being TRIED in the court of public opinion. It is no longer about facts (per the judges instructions) but instead on what the jury feels he is capable of.

This trial is possibly the biggest fucking sham I have ever heard of. The fact that it has made it this far is almost entirely inexcusable (almost), but the fact that now the judge is allowing past allegations to be weighed as to if jackson is capable of doing something like this, and that the Bashir interview in which the family praises jackson is disallowed from being considered in any way other than how it could have damaged or influenced jackson, is a fucking joke. the judge has always seemed to have a mildly clear head about these proceedings, but this is just inexcusable.

oh well, by next week this will all likely be over one way or another. I suppose the good news is that when he actually is acquitted, there will be a public record of him being acquitted of child molestation. It pretty much makes all the past allegations moot at that point.

 

[Cherubae]

On the other hand, the judge is also allowing the witness' past criminal activity in for concideration as to whether they told the truth on the stand

 

[enjoy bell woods]

Why are you so invested in this case?

 

[SolidSnakex]

On the other hand, the judge is also allowing the witness' past criminal activity in for concideration as to whether they told the truth on the stand

That'll be especialyl nice because of their loony mom. According to the womans paralegal during her JC Penny case she'd sent her kids to have acting lessons so they were able to be taught easier on how to follow and repeat what she says.

 

[silver]

Why are you so invested in this case?

It's Michael Jackson, the fucking King of Pop. That's why.

 

[enjoy bell woods]

He's sort of made a point of defending Jackson after every major - frequently minor - turning point in the case.

 

[Nintendo Ate My Children]

It's Michael Jackson, the fucking King of Pop.

Haha, 20 years ago maybe.


Also, Michael Jackson fucks little boys. Deal with it.

 

[Prince of Space]

What? Another rich, black person?!

 

[themadcowtipper]

It's Michael Jackson, the fucking King of Pop. That's why.

Correction, it is the Alien Michael Jackson... the real Michael Jackson was abducted sometime between the late 80's and early 90's...this one is a fake...

 

[SolidSnakex]

Haha, 20 years ago maybe.

He made Smooth Criminal, so he stays the King of Pop forever.

 

[galeninjapan]

I cant belive people actually care about this. Frankly Im getting sick of it on the news. Jackson is an alien deal with it.

 

[themadcowtipper]

I cant belive people actually care about this. Frankly Im getting sick of it on the news. Jackson is an alien deal with it.

Correction, it is the Alien Michael Jackson... the real Michael Jackson was abducted sometime between the late 80's and early 90's...this one is a fake...

All we need is Manabyte to confirm...

 

[DarienA]

He made Smooth Criminal, so he stays the King of Pop forever.

He also made Moonwalker.. one of the greatest musicals evah!

 

[Tazznum1]

He allowed the past aligations in weeks ago. Remember the other little boy that he molested that testified. He was the cleaning lady's son.


This is not news. This is olds.

 

[themadcowtipper]

He also made Moonwalker.. one of the greatest musicals evah!

They should rerelease the game......

 

[Smiles and Cries]

Mr. One Love Glove to grab dez nuts 4ever!

 

[ManaByte]

Either way he's going to jail for a year. The judge says he's being charged with giving "Jesus Juice" to a minor, which will give him 12 months in jail.

He'll flee the country and go hang out with Roman Polanski.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Either way he's going to jail for a year. The judge says he's being charged with giving "Jesus Juice" to a minor, which will give him 12 months in jail.

He'll flee the country and go hang out with Roman Polanski.

People on the Abrams Report think that's the only thing he'll get charged with, but he won't do any jail time over it according to them.

 

[ManDudeChild]

Either way he's going to jail for a year. The judge says he's being charged with giving "Jesus Juice" to a minor, which will give him 12 months in jail.

He'll flee the country and go hang out with Roman Polanski.

So the booze was confirmed to be both given to the kids, and given by Jackson?

 

[samus4ever]

"He made Thriller"

 

[borghe]

I take interest in the case, not jackson (though I have voiced my opinions on jackson as well previously). I take interest in the case because it really is a text book example of some of the worst legal proceedings in the history of the american judicial system. and every news report released goes to show how much more comical the proceedings become every day. this is a fucking CRIMINAL TRIAL that is solely based, 100%, on what the jurors think about the characters of the accuser and the defendant. a case where past cases, some unrelated (and this goes in the mother's favor also) and some that never even existed can be brought into deliberations. I mean as I said before, basically you have a kid saying this happened, the prosecution saying Michael is a piece of shit so he had to have done it, the defense saying the boy and his family are a peice of shit and there is no way it happened, now decide. This isn't a trial, it's a fucking exit poll.

So the booze was confirmed to be both given to the kids, and given by Jackson?

And on this topic.. lol.. No, there is no evidence that Jackson ever gave the boys alcohol. The crux of the argument is that Jackson KNEW the boys had alcohol and never reprimanded them for it. This is why it was taken out of the molestation (plying) part of the case and moved as a separate misdemeanor offense (contributing to delinquincy). They can circumstantially prove that he knew the boys had alcohol, but can't prove (even circumstantially) that he gave them anything. I can actually agree with this charge if Jackson did in fact know they had alcohol and didn't punish them or tell their mother to punish them. though anyone who thinks he will get 12 months on the charge is an idiot. I know everyday joes who have been convicted of this and gotten under a $1000 fine. Jackson won't serve a minute of jail time on it.

 

[DarienA]

Either way he's going to jail for a year. The judge says he's being charged with giving "Jesus Juice" to a minor, which will give him 12 months in jail.

Your tag has never been more appropriate... a year? Hardly.

 

[ManaByte]

Your tag has never been more appropriate... a year? Hardly.

http://www.thisislondon.com/til/jsp/modules/Article/print.jsp?itemId=19000439

The 46-year-old singer was told by trial judge Rodney Melville that he is to be charged with giving alcohol to a minor.

It is a lesser offence than the one he was originally accused of - plying a young boy with drink in order to sexually abuse him.

The jury only has to accept that the star gave Gavin Arvizo alcohol, which the trial has heard Jackson call "Jesus juice", to find him guilty.

The new charge, a misdemeanour rather than a felony, carries a sentence of up to 12 months in Santa Barbara county jail.

 

[Cherubae]

He allowed the past aligations in weeks ago. Remember the other little boy that he molested that testified. He was the cleaning lady's son.

He testified that MJ was tickling him. OHNOOOZ!

I won't be the first to think current MJ is a little eccentric, but the amount of nonsense 'evidence' is crazy. How many other criminal trials in the US get sent to the jury with evidence like this? I hope I never get on the bad-side of a crazed prosecutor.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

maybe im just demented, but i want to see MJ be found guilty just to see how he would freak out.

 

[borghe]

yes, it carries up to a twelve month sentence.. but it will never be applied. I have never seen a first time contributing tmisdemeanor result in jail time. and for those wondering, back when you and your friends are all around 18-22 and you all get busted for drinking on the beach or at a house, someone is walking out of there with a contributing ticket. And out of the MANY tickets a lot of us received at one time or another, none of us spent any time in jail (as part of a sentence). and yes, in WI it is punishable by up to a year also.

It should also be noted that while the paper is using a sensational headline to paint this as a bad "OMG HES TEH EVAL!!", this is a HUGE blow for the defense team, as it is a felony dropped to a misdemeanor.

I also love "The jury only has to accept" ... lol.. "accept". like it is the truth and they just need to see the light.

the one thing I will say is this is the only charge jackson has any chance of being charged with, and I bet you this charge is cleared also. the two boys said jackson gave them alcohol, yet everyone else testifies that they only ever saw the boys with alcohol when they were running around unsupervised. It could be argued that while Jackson knew that they had alcohol, it wasn't jackson's job to reprimand the boys, it was the parents'.

 

[borghe]

He allowed the past aligations in weeks ago. Remember the other little boy that he molested that testified. He was the cleaning lady's son.


This is not news. This is olds.

no, the new part is the instructions to the jury on what they can consider while deliberating. past complaints are allowed as evidence to suggest a motive (also called the Jackson Law), but that doesn't at all make it ok for Melville to allow the jury to consider that, esepcially when three of the past five reported cases have all come forward and said nothing has ever happened. It's like Melville is saying, "I know you heard the then boys say nothing happened, but you can still consider the fact that others said it did happen."

Where is any of this based in fact? That is my problem, and the new information being that the jury doesn't have to consider ANY facts whatsoever in their deliberations.

 

[Matrix]

maybe im just demented, but i want to see MJ be found guilty just to see how he would freak out.

I have visions of him crying if he's found guilty and while rubbing snot from his nose...it just falls off and he doesnt put it back on.

 

[ToxicAdam]

In this day and age of DNA testing and the like .. they better come up with some damn hard evidence. This horseshit of he said she said isn't enough to convict a man. No matter how bizarre he is.

 

[DarienA]

http://www.thisislondon.com/til/jsp/modules/Article/print.jsp?itemId=19000439

key word's being UP TO.... he's not getting a year bud.... and have we heard any proof that he GAVE the stuff to the kids? I don't know.. not that I remember... link?

I have visions of him crying if he's found guilty and while rubbing snot from his nose...it just falls off and he doesnt put it back on.

I have visions of him turning in to that Metal robot then ship from Moonwalker... screaming NOOOOOOO firing his weapon and blowing the courtroom to bits... then flying away...

 

[themadcowtipper]

maybe im just demented, but i want to see MJ be found guilty just to see how he would freak out.

here is what will happen

 

[dskillzhtown]

MJ made some good music in the past, but that does not excuse the fact he is crazy. If he did the molesting or not I am not sure, but I am sure that he has excersised some poor judgement in dealing with kids. Even if he is found innocent, he needs to get some help to get back to reality. I would think that is obvious to even the casual observer of this trial.

 

[borghe]

and have we heard any proof that he GAVE the stuff to the kids? I don't know.. not that I remember... link?

no. the only "proof" that he ever gave anything to the kids is their word. The alcohol incidents that were otherwise testified to all involved the kids being alone, unsupervised, and caught with alcohol.

as I understand it, that is where the new charge comes from. That is was testified to that he (Jackson) was told the kids had alcohol and that sneddon then asked if it was known if he did anything as a result of finding out and the witnesses saying they didn't know or not that they know of.

So essentially he is being charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor on the basis that the alcohol was available and he (allegedly) took no action once it was discovered. It is up to jury to decide if he was in fact responsible for the kids getting at the alcohol.

 

[ShadowRed]

He's sort of made a point of defending Jackson after every major - frequently minor - turning point in the case.

I don't know maybe he believes Micheal is innocent.

Haha, 20 years ago maybe.


Also, Michael Jackson fucks little boys. Deal with it.

Excuse me when has there ever been evidience or a charge of Micheal "fucking" little boys?

 

[ghostface]

Haha, 20 years ago maybe.


Also, Michael Jackson fucks little boys. Deal with it.

I'll bet you a cookie that you don't know jack shit about this trial.

 

[borghe]

I don't know maybe he believes Micheal is innocent.

well, I do believe he is innocent, but at this time that really isn't the point. this trial should have never made it to jury deliberation. there is no proof whatsoever in these allegations except for the boys' words. there isn't even coorboration from any other witnesses in the entire fucking case on the boys' stories. all of the testimony has been that michael allegedly molested OTHER boys (3/5 of which have come forward and testified that he in fact did NOT molest them), that he is in financial ruin, that his associates tried to detain the family without a single shred of evidence or testimony supporting that he even KNEW of such a supposed detainment, let alone any sort of participation. The jury is essentially being told "Ok, you guys know the rumors, now decide without one single ounce of evidintiary proof if you believe the rumors are true."

he could have raped the boy 16 times over at this point and there is STILL no reason this case should have gone to jury deliberations. in relation to this case, there is two boys' testimony that say they witnessed something actually happening and not a single other bit or evidence or testimony to coroborate it. so fine, it goes to jury. but now the jurors are being told that the testimony isn't the only thing to consider here. they are to consider all past allegations also, some of which have been proved to be false by the supposed victims themselves, and to consider what the jury believes to be his character..

eh, I am rambling now.. it just frustrates me to no end. if this were any typical person (weird to say) this case would have been thrown out ages ago. but it is a high profile case that could make a lot of careers, so it is allowed, no, encouraged, to go on....