micheal jackson

**Carlos_E** · 06-13-2005, 03:35 PM

Guilty or not ... it is not right for a 46 year old man to be sleeping with children that is not their own. The parents are to blame for letting their kids do this. I want to see the parents taken to court for bad parenting and child neglect!!!

**WildCh1ld** · 06-13-2005, 03:46 PM

I think he's just a "SMOOOOTH CRIMINAL"..........

But I'd beat his a$$ cause he sleeps with kids...

**nsa** · 06-13-2005, 03:46 PM

Child endangerment.

**bignatt** · 06-13-2005, 03:59 PM

whoever lets their kids over there needs to get skaooed around anyways its not like this shit is big news

**stocky121** · 06-13-2005, 04:02 PM

i carn't believe he got off with it again

**WildCh1ld** · 06-13-2005, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by stocky121

i carn't believe he got off with it again

Exactly "AGAIN"

**MBaraso** · 06-13-2005, 04:07 PM

This case was weak...That's why he got off. Did he do it? Probably but the prosecution didn't make the case.

**nsa** · 06-13-2005, 04:09 PM

He probably did it to one of the kids in the past, but the case this time around was so weak he was bound to get off, the mom coached in a prior lawsuit against JC Penney's which settled out of court. Obviously the mom is just out for money.

**MatrixGuy** · 06-13-2005, 04:09 PM

Come on, i know he's looking a little strange and the way he acts around kids is a little gay but i really didn't think he ever did anything "bad" or illegal...just the music titles....can beat a little "beat it"

**ollie1** · 06-13-2005, 04:11 PM

At the last draft you guys thankfully got OJ back and we got stuck with colin powell and condoleeza rice now dont go throwing MJ at us too we want better draft picks

**MatrixGuy** · 06-13-2005, 04:20 PM

Just listening to Jackon's Number one's. whooo hooooo

**Sage** · 06-13-2005, 04:25 PM

wow.............but, somehow i suspected he was not going to be found guilty...............after all this he better come to his senses by selling the Neverland and stop with all the Peter Pan shtick...................

**BOUNCER** · 06-13-2005, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by Carlos_E

If he was Black it would be different. Another White man gets off again.

**stocky121** · 06-13-2005, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by MatrixGuy

Just listening to Jackon's Number one's. whooo hooooo

you sick **** and to think i used to like you

jj bro

**Carlos_E** · 06-13-2005, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by ollie1

At the last draft you guys thankfully got OJ back and we got stuck with colin powell and condoleeza rice now dont go throwing MJ at us too we want better draft picks

ROTFLMAO!

Colin isn't that bad. Condoleeza Rice on the other hand...

**BOUNCER** · 06-13-2005, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by Carlos_E

ROTFLMAO!

Colin isn't that bad.

Riiiiiiight, lets not mention the satellite photos of chemical plants in Iraq then.

**alphaman** · 06-13-2005, 07:10 PM

Originally Posted by nsa

the mom coached in a prior lawsuit against JC Penney's which settled out of court. Obviously the mom is just out for money.

Exactly. We don't know if MJ did anythimng, ever. Only him, the kids, and God know that. What we do know is that he's become a huge target. He did it to himself by having children sleep in his bedroom and settling the first child molestation suit, instead of fighting for his innocence. Since that first suit he's had 8-10 lawsuits against him, going at a time!

Bottom line- He's an easy target, and these scavengers know it. Don't think that mother didn't know exactly what she was doing. The sick part about it is that she knew there was a possibility that her child would be molested in that environment, and she put him in there to get the money anyways. She should be strung up in the street for pimping her son out.

**Jantzen4k** · 06-13-2005, 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by Carlos_E

Guilty or not ... it is not right for a 46 year old man to be sleeping with children that is not their own. The parents are to blame for letting their kids do this. I want to see the parents taken to court for bad parenting and child neglect!!!

agreed 100%

this trial & jury is a joke, not one count guilty?

**nsa** · 06-13-2005, 07:23 PM

Were you following the trial? Do you know how weak of a case they had against him? They had no evidence of anything wrong going on. He may have done something in the past but this case was weak as h3ll, and thats why he got off.

**WildCh1ld** · 06-13-2005, 07:55 PM

MICHAEL JACKSON

**abstrack** · 06-13-2005, 08:58 PM

i want to see the parents fry and child protective services come and take those children away. Those parents are just as looney as MJ.

**Andresfgiraldo** · 06-13-2005, 11:20 PM

I just find it hard to believe that he wasn't even found guilty for giving kids alcohol, i mean that's pretty clear cut, especially when their were plenty of eyewitnesses. Personally i think the jury was afraid what would happen to them if they found him guilty, you think they get anything under the table, i wouldn't put it past him, i mean who wouldn't buy their freedom if they could

**MatrixGuy** · 06-14-2005, 01:55 AM

Originally Posted by stocky121

you sick **** and to think i used to like you

jj bro

You have one first prize in our competition. A trip to Neverland with the boys.

**hellapimpin** · 06-14-2005, 03:04 AM

i dont know if he is guilty, but he does fit the profile of a petofile to the 10th degree, and even if he is a big kid, he needs to grow up, cuz people are going to try and get over whenever they can. so if he is not guilty he is just plain crazy and needs to get to realize the reality of things, and if he is guilty then he is crazy and phuckin gross.

**stocky121** · 06-14-2005, 03:54 AM

Originally Posted by MatrixGuy

You have one first prize in our competition. A trip to Neverland with the boys.

i'am a winner

**PrimoPup** · 06-14-2005, 05:05 AM

• "Another case of a white guy getting preferential treatment" •

**Kelvin** · 06-14-2005, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by Carlos_E

If he was Black it would be different. Another White man gets off again.

Ouch!!!!! Love it!! Trust me, if we/they really did perceive of him as being black, there would be no bail, the trial would last only a week and a half at most, and his butt would be thrown in jail.

**alphaman** · 06-14-2005, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by Andresfgiraldo

I just find it hard to believe that he wasn't even found guilty for giving kids alcohol, i mean that's pretty clear cut, especially when their were plenty of eyewitnesses. Personally i think the jury was afraid what would happen to them if they found him guilty, you think they get anything under the table, i wouldn't put it past him, i mean who wouldn't buy their freedom if they could

There obviously wasn't enouhg evidence, or the jury deemed the witnesses to be unreliable.(maybe they were gonna get something under the table).

**hellapimpin** · 06-14-2005, 02:30 PM

lol...well recently it seems the black man has been getting off. but i think they are going to use r-kelly as an example..even cochran before he died wouldnt take his case.

**Luminaire** · 06-14-2005, 05:35 PM

The thing that bothers me about commentary in the Jackson case is that, aside from the analysts and people who followed every minute of the trial, the vast majority of the people on this board have no idea what they are talking about. They may have heard a few minutes of commentary or watched the E! re-enactments of the Michael Jackson trial but they damn sure didnt sit in a jury box for months and deliberate for 7 days over the evidence and materials they were presented with. They have a pre-conceived image of Jackson, either that he did it or he didnt, and that is the bulk of which they formulate their opinions around. I myself idolize Jackson as a pop icon, and my bias in this respect somewhat dictates that I believed he was not guilty. You cant say the prosecution didn't do enough to prove Jackson guilty, on the contrary they really pulled all the stops with this trial.

**alphaman** · 06-14-2005, 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by Luminaire

The thing that bothers me about commentary in the Jackson case is that, aside from the analysts and people who followed every minute of the trial, the vast majority of the people on this board have no idea what they are talking about. They may have heard a few minutes of commentary or watched the E! re-enactments of the Michael Jackson trial but they damn sure didnt sit in a jury box for months and deliberate for 7 days over the evidence and materials they were presented with. They have a pre-conceived image of Jackson, either that he did it or he didnt, and that is the bulk of which they formulate their opinions around. I myself idolize Jackson as a pop icon, and my bias in this respect somewhat dictates that I believed he was not guilty. You cant say the prosecution didn't do enough to prove Jackson guilty, on the contrary they really pulled all the stops with this trial.

No doubt, that prosecutor has been after MJ for 10 years! I'd say he had a huge interest and plenty of time to do his job.

**nsa** · 06-14-2005, 10:37 PM

Bottom line is he was acquitted, whether you like him or not. The jury that was actually there seeing everything, voted and came to the conclusion that he was not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.