Michael Jackson verdict (MEGAMERGE)

chewy

as innocent as hell i say, i don't what evidence they planted at his ranch!


I know he's innocent until proven guilty but this is just hypothetically, and I didn't give option C, hes just plain mad, cos that doens't cover whether he molested children or not

koneko

There is no point in discussing this. None of us are privvy to any vital information or evidence, and it won't change the outcome in any case.

I think he's a bit innocent and a bit guilty, ie he might not have done this specifically but the man is dodgy as hell (based on some of the stuff he's said himself).

McGintyMcGoo

Wow, do we really get to decide if he's innocent or guilty using this poll? When do we send the results over to the California court room?

He deserves a fair trial, but if he's innocent, he will be branded a child molestor in the publics eyes anyway. If he's proven guilty, then I hope he rots in hell.

PS I am a MJ fan!

Housi

It would be nice if he was innocent. It won't be an enjoyable feeling knowing that the man I've loved as a child and into my twenties gets his kicks out of touching kids. Hope it's all a load of made of b******s.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

it's possible he molested a few children, but he is well ****ed up in the head himself.. he might not have fully understood what he was doing, or been able to help himself, blah blah blah.

it's not as simple an issue as most people like to think, and the media frenzy this trial is going to bring will surely only help matters

pollyantic

Innocent or guilty the man was up for this before and should never have let himself be put in the same position. For that reason i believe their is something wrong with him.
Worse again are the parents of children who allowed them to stay with not just a strange man, but a man who had been accused of this sort of thing before.
These people are not fit to be parents and should be locked up.

SantaHoe

Well considering he's technically innocent until proven guilty, this poll is a no-brainer really

_blank_

SantaHoe wrote:

Well considering he's technically innocent until proven guilty, this poll is a no-brainer really

I was just going to say that.

If innocent, I hope the people who are accusing him in the wrong should be punished if it transpires they were lying.

If guilty, then he should have his balls hacked off with a spoon.

dahamsta

Housi wrote:

It won't be an enjoyable feeling knowing that the man I've loved as a child and into my twenties

ROFL. Weren't you a bit old by then?

yaledo

chewy wrote:

as innocent as hell i say, i don't what evidence they planted at his ranch!

I'd say its none of my business, nor is it interesting

Big Ears

He has the mind of a 4 year old , is that the kind of thing a four year old does , but theres no doubt his mind is ****ed up so you never know .

Nuttzz

Guilty of gross stupidity

Blub2k4

When did fact ever bother the outcome of a US trial, look at what happened to OJ.
Personally I think that there is a combination of things and the worst of them is MJ not being smart enough to see that his actions and what he says dont paint him in a very good light if you look at him with the cynical sick eyes of the rest of the world. His innocence is obvious on one level, although naievety would be a better description in this case.
It is unfortunate that a man who loves little boys (in the platonic and not the biblical sense) cannot innocently act out this love without the world pointint their finger and saying...perv, but the world is a sick place and unfortunately people judge MJ by their own standards and according to those there is only one thing he could have had on his mind.
He may be guilty, maybe not, I dont think that the truth will come out of this trial.

Ms Beanbag

I'd say hes as guilty as hell. The cops found a load of 'adult content' on his computer. His defence says any1 could have accessed the computer, which sounds like total BS. It was his own personal one.
Also if he was innocent why did he pay off the other kid 10 yrs ago..
Anyone who has that much surgery that they look like a mutant and have a zoo and funfair in their backyard aint very well.
The kids were the only ones who treated him with respect so he took advantage of it.

aidan_walsh

With so much of this kind of speculation and media hype, there is no chance in hell of him getting a fair trial... Its not like they can find a jury that wouldn't have heard about it, or have an opinion based on what they have seen or read...

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Ms Beanbag wrote:

I'd say hes as guilty as hell. The cops found a load of 'adult content' on his computer. His defence says any1 could have accessed the computer, which sounds like total BS.

well.. he IS an adult isn't he?

Also if he was innocent why did he pay off the other kid 10 yrs ago..

because
to quote terry pratchett " a lie can run around the world twice before the truth has even got it's shoes on".. or something to that effect

[/quote]

Anyone who has that much surgery that they look like a mutant and have a zoo and funfair in their backyard aint very well.

you are a very beautiful, wonderful person. I sense no bitterness, jealousy or hatred in you. Go now, and know peace.

The kids were the only ones who treated him with respect so he took advantage of it.

the kids, and his millions upon millions of fans.

PaddyjDunne

dirty squealing paedo that deserves to be repeatedly kicked in the bollocks until they bleed, then dip them in a cup of salt while jabbing him in the eye with a pointy stick..................in my opinion anyway. Regardless of the verdict, if I ever saw that wanker I would kill him.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

then I hope you'll be arrested, executed and publically humiliated for such a horrible, horrible crime as murder.

sick ****

(edit)

not neccesarily in that order of course..

theCzar

He's probably guilty of child molesting, but i doubt he ever saw/meant it that way. This whole ordeal is sad either way.

CodeMonkey

He's probably innocent of child molesting, but I doubt he ever saw/meant for people to think he's a child molester. This whole ordeal is sad either way.

If there's an overwhelming evidence that he is innocent, those people who are convinced already that he is guilty will just scream foul play and the trial was fixed etc.

[Jackass]

Blantently GUILTY, he's a legend (musicaly) and all that, prob would have been the Elvis of our generation before all this...probably still will be....but he admits sharing a bed with children, he thinks he's peter pan, he built a house purely for the reason to invite children around, when he was accused of this before he paid off the kid, and bought his silence so it wouldn't go to court (if i was accused of this i would insist it go to court to clear my name), he admits to getting children drunk, and giving them wine in coke cans (probably a healthy dose of rohipnol to boot), he lives in lala land, he hasnt any clue of the real world, he's been the most famous man on the planet since he was six!!! He probably didn't even realise he was doing anything wrong! (if and when he's found guilty)
On a side note,i see this all the time.... i dont understand why, if people dont like a thread/dont find it interesting they feel the need to post it, as though poeple want to know and care...if the thread is called "do you like this thread", then that would be ok..it's the mods job to decide what's appropriate for discussion...when i see a thread i dont like/think is uninteresting, i tend to just not post in it......
:rolleyes:

joejoem

So guilty. A legend gone wrong.

StupidLikeAFox

Im inclined to believe hes guilty, but in his own warped mind he sees nothing wrong with what he did, which is really sad and pathetic

Only Human

First things first:

koneko wrote:

None of us are privvy to any vital information or evidence, and it won't change the outcome in any case.

I think thats where your wrong. I have read all of the leaked files and madeup my own mind. I recomend you (not directed at you but at people in general) do the same if you make judging comments. So far from what ive read it seems to me that the acuser and his family are a pack of liars. The have changed their story numerous times anbd have a history of acusing people for money, including security gaurds at a mall in which she used her children as tools to say they were assaulted and sexualy harassed.

Ms Beanbag wrote:

The cops found a load of 'adult content' on his computer. His defence says any one could have accessed the computer, which sounds like total BS. It was his own personal one.

Just because he acts like a child sometimes dose'nt mean he is one! he is 46 years old. Correct me if im wrong but isnt the legal age for buying such material 18?

Ms Beanbag wrote:

Also if he was innocent why did he pay off the other kid 10 yrs ago..
The kids were the only ones who treated him with respect so he took advantage of it.

Back in 1993, Jordie chandler described Michaels genetalia in which he included he was circumsized. Michael was then subject to a cross examination of his genetal area and guess what, he was'nt circumseized! Michael who is a highly sensitive person just couldnt take it all, he wanted to get on with his life so he paid the boy off in order to get on with his life.
Also note about the case in 1993 the boy testified under the influence of drugs that have a history of creating false memories, The boys parents were devorced and michael entering the acusers as a fatherly figure provides perfect motive for extortion from the father in order to get his son back.
Not only that but when the boy testified police officers resigned from the case because they thaught it was scripted and would be laughed out of court.

Michael has admited publicly on television that he lets children sleep in his bed with him. This actualy puts him in a vunerable position. The timeline of this case is also questionable. According to the boys testimony the molestation started after the bashir documentary in 2003. After that documentary was aired investigations were launched by child services , and LAPD. Both came up with nothing and during this investigation the boy and his mother actually said that he was incapable of molesting a child. The mother admited that he was a fatherly figure. According to the boys story michael was molesting him during this on going investigation!?!?!
He must have suddenly remembered.

DubGuy22 wrote:

he admits sharing a bed with children, he thinks he's peter pan, he built a house purely for the reason to invite children around,

Is any of that illegal? Ive never heard of anyone getting arrested under Article 29 of the Impersonating Peter Pan Act.

DubGuy22 wrote:

he admits to getting children drunk, and giving them wine in coke cans (probably a healthy dose of rohipnol to boot)

Actually i think you will find that you are wrong. Ne never once admited to giving alcohol to children. He has a force of security gaurds all over Neverland to prevent that kind of thing. He drinks red wine out of coke cans to protect his image. Giving alcohol to a minor is one of the charges against him which he has pleaded innocent to. You are infact an idiot.


I know Karen Faye, Michael Jacksons makeup artist and best friend over the last 24 years. She has told me herself that Michael Jackson is incapable of doing such horific things to children. He loves children and always will. It is through them that he is inspired to write such fantastic music.
To say if he will get a fair trial or not, I realy cant. With the scrutenising media airing such documentarys that were as heavily edited such as "michaels boys" shown on channel 4 about six days ago i realy dont think it will make it easy for the defence. I can not say that he is 100% innocent because you realy never know. Judging on what I have read, judging on FACTS I believe he is 100% innocent.

Red Alert

It's a sad state of affairs, but anyone who wants to share a bed with little boys just is either bad (or hopefully mentally ill). I think he's seriously screwed up, not least with the whole Peter Pan thing. It's hard to believe that the music which was around when i was 4 or 5 that i really liked was made by this man.

Incidentally, is MJ still in people's/DJ's/shops/pubs' etc. playlists?

Only Human

Red Alert wrote:

It's a sad state of affairs, but anyone who wants to share a bed with little boys just is either bad (or hopefully mentally ill). I think he's seriously screwed up, not least with the whole Peter Pan thing. It's hard to believe that the music which was around when i was 4 or 5 that i really liked was made by this man.

Incidentally, is MJ still in people's/DJ's/shops/pubs' etc. playlists?

I think people get confused when Michael said he is peter pan. I think what he meant by this is that everything he stands for, peter pan stands for. He sees the Magical side of everything. i.e. He takes inspiration from everything and turns it into something creative.
He Loves just about everything Disney. Due to his bad childhood which consisted of constant work and the fact that he has been taught that it is alright to lie if it affects his image he has made his own fantasy world where he can't be hounded by the media and press and where he can re-live his lost childhood. If thats what he wants to do let him do it. If he wants to say hes peter pan let him, that doesnt have any influence on whether he is a child molester or not.

chewy

most people who think he is guilty seem to think ah sure he wacko or simple or something and he didn't fully know what he was doing, well then he's he can plead insane and that's techically not guilty afaik...

never mind democracy
i don't know if there any such thing as a fair trial anymore, you can see the enjoyment the police are getting out of this too, with all their press conferences anytime he sneezes.

he a rich successful talented black man, and numerous people must have wanted to take him down and he was....

it really doesn't help when he reacts to the crowd outside the courtroom ( the clip there repeatedly playing),

Only Human

chewy wrote:

most people who think he is guilty seem to think ah sure he wacko or simple or something and he didn't fully know what he was doing, well then he's he can plead insane and that's techically not guilty afaik...

never mind democracy
i don't know if there any such thing as a fair trial anymore, you can see the enjoyment the police are getting out of this too, with all their press conferences anytime he sneezes.

he a rich successful talented black man, and numerous people must have wanted to take him down and he was....

it really doesn't help when he reacts to the crowd outside the courtroom ( the clip there repeatedly playing),

I dont know if anyone was watching the ITV 24hour news when he came to court to day, but i also know the girl who was comentating on it. Her name is ankia and she featured in a documentarycalled "Whacko about Jacko" that was aired a while ago about Michaels fans. she said it best today. That clip is a perfect example of the media blowing things out of proportion. he got on top of the van and tapped his foot and waved to the fan who have traveled from across the globe to support him and show their love.That was over a year ago, the media still go on about it if it were yesterday and make it out like it was a dance routine or something!

mycroft

chewy wrote:

as innocent as hell i say, i don't what evidence they planted at his ranch!


I know he's innocent until proven guilty but this is just hypothetically, and I didn't give option C, hes just plain mad, cos that doens't cover whether he molested children or not

Take a bow chewy a new low in your inanity and stupidity.

What evidence do you have it was planted? Anything?

I mean this is just desperate.........

The_Conductor

I have no idea whether he innocent or guilty- and have declined to vote in this poll. I do not think that living in his Neverland Ranch is natural, nor inviting kiddies to sleep over etc. But then again, I do not think Michael Jackson is natural. Imagine growing up as he did? He didn't have a childhood himself- perhaps his ranch is an attempt to live the childhood he never had? I don't know. I'm not judging him. I'm not apothetic- I just don't have facts, and I like to deal in facts, not innuendo.

Let him have his trial- whatever the outcome of it may be. I'm glad I'm not on the jury.

Dr Bolouswki

Red Alert wrote:

It's a sad state of affairs, but anyone who wants to share a bed with little boys just is either bad (or hopefully mentally ill)

I used to love getting into bed with me da when I was a kid, and i know plenty of me families and mates kids who love getting into bed with grown-ups - in these 'enlightened' times you have to think about it before you let them - and generally you don't let them. That doesn't neccesarily make it the right decision, just the prudent one for the prevailing climate. Which is quite sad really.

We're so busy trying to protect innocence, that we've almost taken it away.

I hope he's not guilty. For the kids' sake, and also his own.

ArthurDent

At the very least he's a very warped wee man, that shouldn't be let have access to a goldfish let alone kids (his or anyone else's).

TBH the other set of people that should be up there on trial are the parents of the kids that were allowed stay at his ranch. I mean wtf were they thinking? Would you let your kids near someone that looked and sounded like him never mind any possible accusations of perviness.

Only Human

ArthurDent wrote:

At the very least he's a very warped wee man, that shouldn't be let have access to a goldfish let alone kids (his or anyone else's).

TBH the other set of people that should be up there on trial are the parents of the kids that were allowed stay at his ranch. I mean wtf were they thinking? Would you let your kids near someone that looked and sounded like him never mind any possible accusations of perviness.

Yeah your right. He shouldnt be a father because of his love for children. I have been told that he is an EXCELENT father. Its all in his biography by J.R.Taborelli. Its an unofficial biography and completely unbiassed. I recomend it to anyone here who wants to know what their talking about.
Its no more than €11.00 for anyone who'd willing, or interested inreading.

mycroft

Only Human wrote:

Yeah your right. He shouldnt be a father because of his love for children. I have been told that he is an EXCELENT father. Its all in his biography by J.R.Taborelli. Its an unofficial biography and completely unbiassed. I recomend it to anyone here who wants to know what their talking about.
Its no more than €11.00 for anyone who'd willing, or interested inreading.

Uh huh whatever to those people on this thread

1. everything you've read is biased and skewed by one side of the other.

2. The truth will never air out of this trial, jackson's lawyers will not be interested in proving their clients innocents they'll be too busy forcing the juror into a verdict of reasonable doubt, they'll cast inneudo and cast doubt at the reliability of witnesses. They'll be less interested in proving their clients innocence than then forcing the juror to face that the charges can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Final result will be similar to the OJ aquital an innocent verdict tarnished by the tactics of the defense councils tactics. It will leave Jackson free but the tactics utilized will tarnish his career/life forever

magick

Originally Posted by Housi It won't be an enjoyable feeling knowing that the man I've loved as a child

LOL the irony !

Only Human

mycroft wrote:

Uh huh whatever to those people on this thread

1. everything you've read is biased and skewed by one side of the other.

2. The truth will never air out of this trial, jackson's lawyers will not be interested in proving their clients innocents they'll be too busy forcing the juror into a verdict of reasonable doubt, they'll cast inneudo and cast doubt at the reliability of witnesses. They'll be less interested in proving their clients innocence than then forcing the juror to face that the charges can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Final result will be similar to the OJ aquital an innocent verdict tarnished by the tactics of the defense councils tactics. It will leave Jackson free but the tactics utilized will tarnish his career/life forever

Alot of the things I have read are Legal documents that have been released and made world news and others are leaked documents. Documents leaked by the District Attorney to Diane Diamonde, a reporter who has devoted her career to brining down Michael Jackson. She uses the same reports that I did to build my own opinion. They are very much unbiased. They are court documents. Ill admit that some of the things I have read are biasses but then I have also made my opinion on seeing some of the biassed stuff againts michael e.g. thesmokinggun.com where the testimony of the accuser was leaked and published. Note the video shown on www.mjjsource.com dismissing some of the false rhumours in these doccuments.

Courtfilings:
http://mjjsource.com/main/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=40&func=selectfolder&filecatid=25

JohnK

I personally think he’s innocent but at the same time I don’t think that’ll make any difference. As some of the other posters have pointed out, his reputation is already destroyed and even if there is overwhelming proof that this was all an attempt at extortion* people will still say he is guilty.


* This is what I think its all about. Its all down to Money, plain and simple.

stagolee

gotta agree with mycroft here, as in most celebrity trials the real truth will never come out due to the outcome of the case resting more on legal tactics than evidence of inoccence or guilt.
as to wheather he is actually guilty? well i have no real idea of the evidence either way so i couldnt even hazard a guess

[Jackass]

Only Human wrote:

I think people get confused when Michael said he is peter pan. I think what he meant by this is that everything he stands for, peter pan stands for.

LMAO!! Ya, i look up to snow white and the seven Dwarfs, i believe in their stance on global warming and the issue of third world debt.

only human wrote:

Is any of that illegal? Ive never heard of anyone getting arrested under Article 29 of the Impersonating Peter Pan Act.

No, but it proves he's mentally unstable, and capable of harming children as he is not in touch with reality, hasn't a clue of the laws of the actual real world, but the laws of a fantasy land, and his home is actually desinged to intice little children to want to stay. Would you consider it normal if your father slept in bed with lots of four to six year olds, who he doesnt even know the parents for at least 10 years...and he builds a home designed to invite over and intice children to his home?

As for the first child he mollested (allegedly), that brought him to court, and why wacko jacko didnt insist he clears his name in court, instead of buying his silence, because once the accusation is made, if he never clears his name, and he makes sure it dosent go to court, of course that will insinuate he was guilty...but i'll tell you why he did that...not because peter pan told him to, but because his legal advisers told him to because of the overwhellming evidence against him, he would have gone to jail!! He didnt just buy his silence, he bought his freedom, as for your lame argument he paid him off because "he couldnt take it anymore" ,lol, a compelling legal argument im sure. You also refer to the kid saying MJ is circumsized when he's not..i doubt the kid has seen to many d!cks, so it would be easy to noy be able to tell the difference, also, you say he was on drugs....i'd probably be a drug addict too if i was emotionally abused by his parents when he was a kid (which you refer to) and sexually abused by whacko.

only human wrote:

I know Karen Faye, Michael Jacksons makeup artist and best friend over the last 24 years. She has told me herself that Michael Jackson is incapable of doing such horific things to children.

well if she sais so!! Jesus, do the court know about this? call the district prosectution, tell them to drop the case!!! you have un-disputeable evidence!!!! You've proved he's innocent!!! YEAY! now you can go over and have a party with MJ in never land, and leave any young relatives you have to stay the night, and pick them up the next day!!
/me wonders why a woman would defend her top client who's probably single handedly made her a multi-millionaire with his make up demands.....

Look, bottom line, the guys an absolute fruit cake, with absolutely no comprehession of the real world...and he has sex with children...and when the case is over, im going to bring this thread back up and see what you have to say
Dont call me an idiot again...you're defending a child mollester...........

slappy hayden

innocent until proven guilty

Only Human

DubGuy22 wrote:

No, but it proves he's mentally unstable, and capable of harming children as he is not in touch with reality, hasn't a clue of the laws of the actual real world, but the laws of a fantasy land, and his home is actually desinged to intice little children to want to stay. Would you consider it normal if your father slept in bed with lots of four to six year olds, who he doesnt even know the parents for at least 10 years...and he builds a home designed to invite over and intice children to his home?

I'd like to know how it PROVES he is mentaly unstable. He sees similaritys between himself and peter pan and al of a sudden hes a lunatic. Neverland was designed to appeal to the child, the child within everyone. As I have said before he had missed out on his childhood. Wheter or not he wants to build a theme park in his back garden at the end of the day is none of your buisness. The things that lure children to his house are not in his bed.

DubGuy22 wrote:

but because his legal advisers told him to because of the overwhellming evidence against him, he would have gone to jail!!

What evidence? when I said he was on drugs I meant he was on drugs during the testimony. There is more evidence indicating innocence than there is guilt.

DubGuy22 wrote:

well if she sais so!! Jesus, do the court know about this? call the district prosectution, tell them to drop the case!!! you have un-disputeable evidence!!!! You've proved he's innocent!!! YEAY!

Think of your best friend. Some one you have known for a very long time. Now imagine someone accusing him/her of something you know is false and that anyone who knows him/her knows that he/she would never do.
That is the situation between Karen and Michael. I never said this is evidence. I take her word for it. Her discriptions of michael are that he is a very down to earth same guy, once you see past all the rumours.

DubGuy22 wrote:

Look, bottom line, the guys an absolute fruit cake, with absolutely no comprehession of the real world...and he has sex with children...and when the case is over, im going to bring this thread back up and see what you have to say
Dont call me an idiot again...you're defending a child mollester...........

I take back calling you an idot, its just frustrating with the situation I'm in. I have been a fan for as long as I can remember, and i think most fans will agree that when someone insults MJ we take it very personally as we fell he is a part of us. I dont defend child molesters.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Look, bottom line, the guys an absolute fruit cake, with absolutely no comprehession of the real world...and he has sex with children...and when the case is over, im going to bring this thread back up and see what you have to say
Dont call me an idiot again...you're defending a child mollester...........

exactly. personally I find the whole idea of a trial offensive, he is a monster and he doesn't deserve a chance to defend himself.

slappy hayden

Mordeth wrote:

exactly. personally I find the whole idea of a trial offensive, he is a monster and he doesn't deserve a chance to defend himself.

that is such a contradiction if the shoe was on the other foot you would want your day in court

Drapper

slappy hayden wrote:

that is such a contradiction if the shoe was on the other foot you would want your day in court

Why is when its a celeb they are guilty until proven innocent and the case of an unknow he is innocent until proven guilty """ think about it !!

Give the guy a break !!!!

Not an MJ fan but a humanist !!!

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

two things

slappy, learn to recognise sarcasm.

drapper... I think that's what slappy was saying too :0

Zulu

Guilty.
Answer this - if he's innocent, when would he have paid off the first time round.

Assumning that WAS a mistake. Why would he have a hidden childs bedroom off his own? He is a grown man. He has to take responsibility. He MAY be innocient. OJ was ... wasn't he?

Only Human

Zulu wrote:

Guilty.
Answer this - if he's innocent, when would he have paid off the first time round.

Assumning that WAS a mistake. Why would he have a hidden childs bedroom off his own? He is a grown man. He has to take responsibility. He MAY be innocient. OJ was ... wasn't he?

Where did you hear that. The sun?

Blub2k4

Scandalous how a man can love children, lock up all Grandas, the pedos!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ClareBear

I hope Michael Jackson is innocent....the whole thing makes me sad either way.

Zulu

Only Human wrote:

Where did you hear that. The sun?

Which fact didn't you like?

Only Human wrote:

I know Karen Faye, Michael Jacksons makeup artist and best friend over the last 24 years. She has told me herself that Michael Jackson is incapable of doing such horific things to children.

She knows this of course, because she is a make up artist, and a friend ...a make up artist and a friend :rolleyes:

Incrediably rapists, murders, and peodaphiles tend to all have family and friends who say their loved ones are "incapable" of such crimes.

Drapper

Zulu where are you getting your info from ? please share ?