Category: Let's talk
well the trial is over and Michael jackson was found not guilty on all charges. now whether or not people think he did it (and quite frankly I don't), in the eyes of the law, he didn't do anything wrong. so what will become of him now
the problem for him now is that his career is up the spout. noone will want a commercial relationship with him any more, and those who do will be among the bravest of the lot. There are those who I have spoken to, who have said "oh Michael Jackson's guilty, he must be!" Why must he be guilty? Just because someone has a somewhat unusual lifestyle, and talking about enjoying sleeping with children is rather unusual, if not offencive, why should he be guilty. some ppl do make judgements on the most flimsy of evidence. The thing is, we hear about the sensational bits, but not about the meat of the case, the meat is waht matters in legal cases. I just hope mr jackson is very careful after this.
you're right. i never believed he did it, and as I have said before, if all these alagations had been made in the past, if they had grounds, then criminal charges would have been brought before now. the sad reality though, is that, this being america, the arviso family can probably still take out a civil case against him and sue him for millions!
I think in the end, hadn't the mother of the accuser have her child lie to authorities, or have the child do acting. And the mother has a bad rap for lying and wanting money. I think the mom wanted celbs to feel "sorry" for the child because he has cancer and that making them feel sorry for him would mean dollar signs in other words money. And now that poor kid is gonna go through life in hell because of his mother's greed. Having someone feel sorry for your disability or your illness is just sickning. I hope the mother gets fined or goes to jail for lying like that. I'm not a fan of Jackson, never will be because he's "wierd" But I think he deserves to have his life back now that someone to this level stooped to this level for money and fame. And it backfired big time.
I always believed that MJ was not guilty from the beginning. I think that the reason that this issue was so heavily publicized in the first place is because of the fact that MJ is a celebrity. I have said right from the beginning that this whole case was about money.
I never believed he was guilty to begin with. Wasn't Michael Jackson accused by the same people before? I don't know ... I think America's sue happy and all the general public cares about is money. Greedy, selfish bastards. --Allie
hmm. everyone who has posted here said not guilty. So here I go to be different. He is guilty as sin. Here is the solution to beating the system in the U.S.: hire a high profile attorney, pay tons of money, be rich and famous, and play the race card and you are free! There were many problems with his trial: 1. the jury should have been sequestered; they were influenced by biased fans and media. 2. Bad prosecution. 3. I personally believe they feared for their lives if they convicted him. Needless to say, Michael is finished. He is broke after this trial, 75% of America believes he is guilty, and he has no hope. And maybe, I know this is wrong to say, but he might get caught in the act and the District Attorney can bust him again. He will pay one day.
Well, I don't know all the meat of the case either but sleeping with children, alone, is rather odd. You'd think he'd let the parents in and whatnot, if for no other reason than to save his own skin and reassure the parents ad public. It's just so secluded, like he's got something to hide. Nevertheless, certainly since he's a celebrity, plenty of people could've just wanted his money and lied to get it. Where's the real hard evidence? That's the problem with the case.
ok, firstly, the prosicution's case was bad because the evidence was flawed. Virtually every single one of the witnesses was discredited, even the prosicution became annoyed with Janet Arviso and she was their witness! Secondly, if they were going to find him not guilty anyway, they wouldn't have taken out the case against him in the first place. This case has cost a huge amount of money, and if they already knew the outcome, all the D A had to do was to say there was not sufficient evidence to prosicute. They wouldn't put on a trial just for show. And a high profile lawyer? well ... he was the one who defended mike tyson so ... we all know where he ended up. And there is one other thing, as much as I don't necessarily believe it is right that a 46 year old man should share a bed with a 13 year old child, the fact is, that child's mother allowed it to happen. If anything did happen, she should be held as much accountable as anyone, because it could be said she knowingly put her child in a situation where he could have been subject to abuce.
I don't think he necessarely did it, but I do think he's a bit strange. He seems like he's a bit off his rocker, but I really don't think he would ever go that far. Not to mention, the media makes everything to be worse than it really is. It's hard to say what happened, and I'm pretty sure we'll never know anything. Only the people that were involved know, and now I think that everyone should just let the topic rest. I don't mean the board topic, but the actual topic. That's all I've heard about in the last while haha
That b*stArds as guilty as sin give him toi us and we'll dole outa suitable punishment this means that the next time he tries to "make friends with a child" inverted commas.. the family will be put off trying to prosecute, the useless jury have handed this filthy paedophile a licence to abuse!
nothing sell records,like controversy, some record actually execs wish for it...so his fans will buy his crap with renewed zeal just wait and see..whenever Msanson was embroiled in some nonsense,usually created by the christian community, his record sales went thru the roof
The D.A. hinted that he is not done with M.J. so maybe he might receive what he deserves someday? Know telling what the DA has up his sleeve. He has it out for M.J. Lastly, you know what guys, the fact you guys justify sleeping with a 13 year old when there is no blood kin or such, makes me wonder about you guys. The guy needs serious help. And fyi, the jurors said this morning they believe he might of done it, but remember the U.S. law requires to be "beyond a reasonable doubt" and they said they believed in this boy's case there was some doubt. He is guilty, you know it, i know it.
actually no i don't know it. and no i don't condone him sleeping in a bed with 13 year old children, but the child's mother allowed it to happen, she obviously didn't have issue with it at the time ... and those of you who say he's guilty, no one seems to be able to say why they think he's guilty. is it because the media says so? let's not forget that the media will turn things the way they want them to go ...
So we prefer to believe that a multi million dollar pop star is guilty of such a crime rather than a boy from a family that scammed 160000 dollars off of a retail chain claiming false abuse and sexual harrasment and opened a donation acccount for the son's cancer even if the treatment was fully paid by social security is making up stories for the family's capital gain. Sure, sharing a bed with a 13 year old is a bit strange, to say the leats, but that does not have to lead to a sexual abuse and the boy seemed to have been quite content with it as well as was his mother, the boy even claimed to have been held hostage but when asked why he didn't try to leave he said he didn't want to because staying there was too much fun and his mom could come see him any time. I am thorroughly convinced after reading the summary of the trials as protrayed by cnn and bbc that MJ is innocent of these claims, I'm sure he needs help because he is a bit weird and after all those law suits thrown at him must be a very sick man (as wwould we all from the stress these accusations must cause) but I certainly hope this particular family will never gain a cent from the money he made from himself.
Cheers
-B
Well, just a thought, but if the child was abused, perhaps in a certain way, it felt good. Wrong, but good.
I was glad he was innocent. I think hes probably a nice guy.
He is weird but he is not evil. In his mind all he was doing was have some friends for a sleep over. In his mind he is a teenager like those boys. I am sorry for himm but I am glad that the jury did not lock him up. That would have been very unfair. Star
Hmm, he might like it, but it is wrong. You know it is not normal for a 13 year to like sleeping in a bed with a 46 year old guy and getting cookies and milk and such. And, no i don't believe everything the media says. Weird, that is a light way of putting michael jackson. I will end with a statement I like, "If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck, sounds like a duck, it probably is a duck." take it as you may.
Far too many mothers are the last to know.He is a paedophile and there should be a sex offenders register in america,as here is in britain.Every man/woman/and teenager, convicted of a sexual offence, is automatically registered though sadly, many slip through the net..I wonder if the jury let the b*st*rd off scot free due to his recurring health problems..I hope whatever he has, comes back times 3...
...............
1800: Where do you get thse ludicrous ideas. It definately does NOT feel good at all,often the child is terrified and feels filthy afterwards they are consumed by feelings of self hatred and often attempt suicide..you have no feckin idea what you are talking about...I know victims of child sexual abuse and they have been through hell!.
ok, let's say for argument's sake that he did it in the past, and those kids he paid off really were mollested by him. now, this was quite high profile at the time, everyone who reads the news knows that michael jackson paid off a kid ssome years back, so, bearing that in mind, would you, as a responsible parent, let your child go and stay there and sleep in his bed? I think not! so, if a parent willingly lets her child go and sleep with someone who has previously been accused of sexual abuce, and something happens to that child, that parent should be held just as much accountable as the person who committed the act!
I couldn't agree more and maybe the trial was about money but the fact remains that he can only show affection through abuse, that is disgusting and he should be treated accordingly..plus I cannot understand why the blackmail wasn't dealt with more seriously,here he'd have been in prison before you could quote the opening lines of thriller
<grin> he probably went home and listened to some of his own hits including "Smoth Criminal" and "Bad" .. it's not as if he didn't tell the world back in the 80s <grin>.
But, seriously, we actually have a sex offender registry in the States and it's gtting quite efficient I've heard and peadaphiles are dealt with harshly in this country, fortunately and deservedly so. The problem in this particular case there is no doubt in my mind that the motive for the accusations was financial and I doubt he did anyting inappropriate with that person. It doesn't mean he didn't do something inappropriate with some child but he could afford to fend it off, just oike OJ Simpson was found not guilty despite all the evidence against him, we all know if he did not have such good legal team he would've been executed by now, there is no question of it. But like someone said here, I think Jackson does not have evil intensions and somehow I doubt things turned sexual with him, I think he's just a very messed up individual wanting to be 12 again with sleep overs etc, due to the youth he missed out on, unfortrunately I think that tendency and his welath are messing up others lives which it shouldn't but so it goes. Either way I'm sure his professional career is pretty much at an end and this will have damaged his reputation even further and I doubt we'll ever be seeing much of him again.
Cheers
-B
What I mean is that, in a forbidden way, to some children, it might feel good to them physically. Of course, that does not eliminate all the horrific complications Goblin mentions, which is why it's wrong to abuse children like that!
well, sugarbaby, you must look at this way, the mother is very poor, she evidently does anything and everything for money. Maybe she doesn't no better than to let her kid sleep with somebody who has sexually abused boys in the past. Maybe she thought to keep getting benefits (financial and such) from M.J. she had to do this? Don't say it is far fetched. Remember, this trial was also about holding the family against their will. Paying someone off is more or less an admission of guilt to me and thus believe he should be treated like any other pedifile. He isn't above or any better. If it was you abused, a pay off wouldn't be a good enough solution. This must stop one day.