Michael Jackson?

J

jejquade

At the Start
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
249
Location
Portsmouth, Hampshire
Do you think he's innocent or guilty? I believe regardless of the verdict we can't takeit as the truth either way. The mother of the child in question is a money grabbing bitch, who's tried toget money out of celebrities before.

I hope Michael is innocent i believe he is ill, but i don't think he is a pedophile.
 
I'm not sure what you mean exactly.

Are you saying if he is found guilty you still believe him to be innocent? And what do you mean "he is ill". In what way do you mean?

The prosecution had enough to bring him to court, but that doesn't always mean he is guilty. Of course, Merlin will disagree with that.

It will be interesting to see the defence case.
 
The defence case, as it always is in similar circumstances, is to attack the witneses for the prosecution on the basis that mud will stick and influence the jurors. This tactic seems to have already influenced jejquade, who seems to be a fan.

My opinion is that he is guilty but is odds on to be acquitted. I have not been taking note of all the detailed evidence but I find it very difficult to believe that the boy's family has been coached in acting ability enough to present the evidence that they have. In addition, he has admitted to paying off previously thodse who wanted to bring cases of child molestation against him - not only the much publicised 1993 multi-million settlement to Jordan Chandler but also now it appears $2m to the son of Neverland Ranch employee in 1990.

And, as Rich Little says: "He has a funfair in his back garden, for f*ck's sake!"
 
I am not disagreeing with you here Brian, before you think I am.

If he is acquitted, what do you think will lead the jury to arrive at that verdict?

I take it you have been following Sky News reconstruction? If so, everyone on there are actors, which might go so far to explain the confidence behind each "witness" testimony. Don't you think it is a bit too perfect (the performances by the actors in their relevant roles) for it to be a true reflection of the trial? I know they are using the exact transcript from the trial, but I feel it is being performed in a different light than what is really happening in court. Everyone just seems so relaxed and sure of themselves and I put that down to them being actors.

If you have ever been in court, and I am sure you have (not implying anything here :D) then you know that virtually NO ONE relaxes on the witness stand (except accused person's who are guilty, expert witnesses who belittle everyone and police officers)
 
I also think he is guilty and that he will be acquitted because his defence team will be better than the prosecution team.

That was why the people in the UK always got George Carmen to defend them, he didn't come cheap but he was good.
 
What will the basis of the jury's decision be, if he is acquitted?

If you and Brian think he is guilty (and you are perfectly entitled to think that), why?
 
I think he's ill in the fact that he views himself as a child and therefore associates with children. But to take that to the level he abuses them i need to see some good evidence to make me believe that. Not just circumstancial nonsense.
 
Alan Morgan, God rest his pro-capital punishment soul, once said -

If he wasn't Michael Jackson, World-famous pop star, and instead was Joe Public and had publicly admitted sharing his bed with children not related to him, he would have been jailed a long time ago.

He does have a point, it can't be acceptable behaviour. Even if there is no sexual motive, it gives rise to those with sexual motives to do so and claim "it's a beautiful thing!"

(P.S. Joe, I hope your surname isn't Public :D)
 
Phil. I don't know what directions the judge will give the jury but I think his defence will certainly give reasons for doubt.

Honest Tom's username is testimony to his passing a polygraph test so he speaks from experience ;)

Lets cut the cr*p and use body language.. or a shorter route, if they cannot look you in the eye, GUILTY :P
 
They'll be convicting people on the basis of their poker tells soon..

"He blinked! Burrrn hiim!"
 
I don't know of anyone else in the world who has paid many millions of dollars to people to prevent them taking him to court for child abuse. Add that to the claims of the boy involved in the present case and those of his brother and the other members of his family and you'll see why it was one of those rare (non-betting)occasions when Alan and I agreed.

He is odds on to be acquitted, in my opinion, because, like O J Simpson, another innocent man, he has gathered the best possible defence team that money can buy.

I won't argue that he isn't unwell - but I think that anyone who has the same feelings about children as I believe that Michael Jackson has is suffering from a type of sickness.
 
what physical evidence is there? And whyon earth would a mother send her kids there on their own, when there's a possibility tat he could harm them, even if he didn't he's still a stranger. If Jackson gets convicted for child abuse then so should the mother !!!!!!!!!!!!!

:angy: :angy: :angy: :angy:
 
Hi Brian,
do you have access to inside information?

Or are you just having a guess.

I don't reckon that you know any more than anyone else not involved in he case. :D
 
Back
Top