Michael Jackson Trial
Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:16 pm
Not guilty on 10/10 verdicts. WOW!!! I do think he did molest a child but i believe the mother did it knowingly to get money. 
Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:20 pm
wtf
at least get him for showing up to court in pajamas and dancing outside on top of the suv
I wanna see him do community service
at least get him for showing up to court in pajamas and dancing outside on top of the suv
I wanna see him do community service
Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:21 pm
pfft I figured he woulkd at least have got an alcohol offence. Damn reasonable doubt 
Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:23 pm
Piece of shit bell, was watching it on court tv, but it craspped out, got thunderstorms here right now, but just passed.
Well, i though he was going for sure.
What ever.
Fu!!, storm's here agian, gotta turn my $$ hardware off..
Well, i though he was going for sure.
What ever.
Fu!!, storm's here agian, gotta turn my $$ hardware off..
Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:47 pm
Interesting.
I think those fans that were crying and making out with eachother and celebrating were scary.
I think those fans that were crying and making out with eachother and celebrating were scary.
Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:52 pm
The lady letting the doves go is obviously normal.
Someone who thinks sleeping with little children and sodomizing them is perfectly fine, too, is normal.
Someone who thinks sleeping with little children and sodomizing them is perfectly fine, too, is normal.
Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:01 pm
I guess when you can pay people off you can get away with murder. They had more evidence on michael than Scott Peterson and yet he is screwed.
Mon Jun 13, 2005 6:13 pm
Come on, the prosecution presented a SHITTY case. All it was was 1 woman, who tried to sue JC Penny for BS reasons and her son, both were found to have NUMEROUS problems with their testimony.
Jack-o's a Wack-o but there was no paying anyone off here.
Jack-o's a Wack-o but there was no paying anyone off here.
Mon Jun 13, 2005 6:31 pm
I really didnt see anything that pointed to evidence. Just a lot hear say from prosecution. All their testifiers were either discredited or changed their stories during the cross. Just so happens Mikie had a better lawyer and the DA really didnt have a case. Also all the evidence of the mother exploiting money from JCP and trying to get money from Stars just seemed to really discredit them. I still think the mother knew what he would do and put him in that situation just to extort money.
Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:18 pm
i am sorry for your justice:roll:
Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:47 pm
Originally posted by EZC
I really didnt see anything that pointed to evidence. Just a lot hear say from prosecution. All their testifiers were either discredited or changed their stories during the cross. Just so happens Mikie had a better lawyer and the DA really didnt have a case. Also all the evidence of the mother exploiting money from JCP and trying to get money from Stars just seemed to really discredit them. I still think the mother knew what he would do and put him in that situation just to extort money.
I completely agree. A lot of people that are pissed about this result are comparing it to the OJ case and fail to recognize that this case really had no evidence (the OJ case, on the other hand had ample evidence). And I recall those troopers that went into the Neverland ranch saying that Michael Jackson was toast and all the media hyperbolizing stories and such.....yet these guys coupled with forensics couldn't find a shred of convincing evidence. I'm POSITIVE that if there real evidence existed it'd be all over the media...but all that seemed to exist were stories that were built upon exaggerated possibilities.
Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:49 pm
I guess u really can buy your way out of anything if you got the money.
Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:41 pm
Originally posted by Davis
Piece of shit bell, was watching it on court tv, but it craspped out, got thunderstorms here right now, but just passed.
Well, i though he was going for sure.
What ever.
Fu!!, storm's here agian, gotta turn my $$ hardware off..
Bell satellite sucks. I have channels 200-999 and they're all crap.
Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:51 pm
Bell is alright. Got some alright stuff. Its NO DTV.
Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:18 am
Originally posted by Siren
I completely agree. A lot of people that are pissed about this result are comparing it to the OJ case and fail to recognize that this case really had no evidence (the OJ case, on the other hand had ample evidence). And I recall those troopers that went into the Neverland ranch saying that Michael Jackson was toast and all the media hyperbolizing stories and such.....yet these guys coupled with forensics couldn't find a shred of convincing evidence. I'm POSITIVE that if there real evidence existed it'd be all over the media...but all that seemed to exist were stories that were built upon exaggerated possibilities.
California is one of the only states in the US that allows cases such as this one (i.e. allegation of molestation) to be grounded without "proper evidence" but rather on "hearsay" and verbal accounts.
Believe me, I don't say that in Jackson's defense, just in defense of the law. I think he's a freaking whackjob that needs some serious psychiatric help. "Peter Pan syndrome" my ass. Dude's a freak. And yes... star power goes a long way in protecting said celebrities. If he were Joe McAverage, he'd have been convicted, no doubt.