Mike is innocent......the jury has spoken

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why are we so sure that he is guilty?
Did he get off because he's a rich celebrity, or was he accused because he's a rich, and very strange, celebrity?

Or is it simply because he is so obviously feminine which obviously means gay, which obviously means a pervert?

The fact that the 1108 witnesses that were brought in all denied misconduct or that the complainants were discredited means nothing when the image of the prancing sissy boy has already convicted him of anything unseemly that he may be accused of.

But we know from what we heard in between the moments of our lives know that the little queer is guilty.



He is a very strange and very stupid man, but the 12 people who were intimately more familiar with the case than 99.999999% of the world did not believe the charges against him.
 
I'm worried about the message this sends....

Will prosecutors be gun shy about prosecuting high profile (rich) homosexual pedophiles? I hope not, but I worry about what kind of animals will be emboldened by Jackson's acquittal...

This is not a good time to be a male child in California.
 
As to "only the wealthy" getting off;
Click to expand...

I do not blame the jury however again if he had a court appointed lawyer
like so many poor do he would be in cuffs now, sorry but money is GOD
and the wealthy do in fact get away with murder. :barf:
 
I feel sorry for the victims that no one believed and still don't believe. No doubt, they'll be the future offenders in keeping with the pattern. My sympathies to the families Jackson (and now the jury) hurt.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
I agree with joab. Instead of asking what convinces these guys he's innocent lets ask what should convince them he's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? The case was weak.

Because this guy is so weird he was already considered guilty by the court of public opinion for the most part. Nevermind those jurors who sat through all that testimony, read through 90 pages of instructions from the judge, and spent hours and hours discussing whether each charge merited a conviction. Nah we know so much more than them because we heard bits and pieces of news blips about him and of course we remember that documentary where he says how he loves kids. Must be a raving homo pedophile! GUILTY!
 
That tune from "Thriller"--can't get it out of my head:

"Just Beat It, Beat It, Beat It, Beat It
No One Wants To Be Defeated
Showin' How Funky Strong Is Your Fight
It Doesn't Matter Who's Wrong Or Right
Just Beat It, Beat It
Just Beat It, Beat It
Just Beat It, Beat It
Just Beat It, Beat It"
 
You know, you're right. It's not as unbelievable as my initial disgusted response indicated.

We have to go along with the jury's findings. However, a jury does not determine guilt or innocence. Nor does a jury uncover the truth. A jury determines how a court will proceed. Guilt and innocence is determined by the acts one has done or not done. For every person who has stated that Jackson is innocent, or that there is reasonable doubt, I have but one question. Would you let your ten year old son spend the night at Jackson's home? Ever wonder why no little girls with cancer spend the night in his home? The wheels of justice have turned and spit Jackson out into the street. He has been found not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That does not equate to innocent.
 
Would you let your ten year old son spend the night at Jackson's home?
Click to expand...

No, but that has nothing to do with the matter at hand. He was entitled to a jury trial, and the prosecution was unable to build a solid-enough case against him. End of story...unless you'd prefer a legal system where the defendants are judged by how icky the accusations are, and whether a mob decides their fate rather than a jury.

In a society where it is up to the state to prove someone's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, some guilty folk may sometimes go free. The alternative is a mob, a rope, and a tree. While such justice may be more palatable to some, it's not a society I'd care to live in. When you leave the question of guilt and innocence up to the emotions of the majority, you may catch more guilty guys, but only at the price of hanging innocents as well.
 
Therein lies the rub Marko.
When it comes to the safety of our own children, we use a different standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt." If we use this more stringent standard for our own children, should not a court system use it for the protection of all children? The price of this verdict may very well be the molestation of more innocents. Who really knows but Jackson and the boys? I don't know, it's just one thing I'm pondering tonight.

We have men, including priests imprisoned for the same type of accusations, with no physical evidence. It's hard to say that the location and fame did not play a role.

edited to add: or perhaps location and obscurity played a role in the convictions of these other men.
 
Everybody has a hot button issue, one where they are willing to throw away the rule of law, and grab the pitchforks and torches.

Your emotions lead you down a path to the logical end that a mere accusation of child molestation should mean conviction. Are you sure that it would be worth the innocent lives destroyed "if it only saves one child"?

If I ever caught someone in the act trying to molest or harm my child in any way, I would kill them as swiftly and surely as stepping on a cockroach.

That said, even the most vile and loathsome piece of trash has a right to his day in court and a jury of his peers....especially the most loathsome offenders, because if you make an exception for some acts, then you have surrendered the principle of equal protection under the law, and exchanged it for a shifting standard that's set by the opinions of the majority.
 
Would you let your ten year old son spend the night at Jackson's home
Click to expand...
No, because I believe that he is a homosexual, I would not let my 10year old daughter spend the night in the home of asingle straight man or gay woman.

Ever wonder why no little girls with cancer spend the night in his home?
Click to expand...
Maybe because he identifies with little boys because just possibly he really is that emotionally retarded 43 year old that longs for his lost childhood that some say he is.

Nor does a jury uncover the truth
Click to expand...
No but they decide which truth is more believable

The guy could be a raving pedophile or he could be a misunderstood pampered rich kid.
 
When it comes to the safety of our own children, we use a different standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt."
Click to expand...
Careful what you ask for, XB. Our demand for less than what the Constitution demands becomes someone else's tomorrow....and on down the line. Before you know it, new standards for accused "terrorists", "UnAmerican" Speech and incitement to THINK ......your own words on this Board would make the grade, given a 3 degree shift in public opinion.

We decry this type of attitude when we're in the line of fire; don't embrace it for others.
Rich
 
Marko, Rich, Gentlemen, you are of course, correct.

I would like to be so idealistic as to agree with and resolve to accept as truth any verdict rendered by a jury. However, I cannot. In a justice system where innocent men serve time and guilty men go free, it is difficult not to examine the effectiveness of our system.

I'm going to bug out, because I do want to reach my 1000th post here. :)

Thanks for the intelligent and rational sounding board.
 
Charley Gibson of ABC stated as I have heard before....... Finger prints on pornographic magazines were found to be both of Jackson's and of a young childs too........same magazine..... :barf: Sorry, that just makes me ill....I suppose the defender of Mr. Jackson could say that means nothing....some way the boy just picked it up some other day and time.....bla bla bla :barf:

Mike's First known mess cost him a lot of hush money to some folks........

Second known mess cost him a lot of money to a good legal team......

I wonder what the third strike (mess) will cost or will it?????

I am with most of those whom say money can build bridges, buy carts, horses and men, but a day will come and all the money won't make any difference if he has done anything against God's law......... He will answer to the highest court......
 
I would like to be so idealistic as to agree with and resolve to accept as truth any verdict rendered by a jury.
Click to expand...
XB-
"Justice" is SELDOM the same as "Truth".
Justice is only the best Man can do under a set of rules to protect other Men (and Women).

Truth is far different...it's easily arrived at (and quickly perverted) by such systems as the the Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials and the Pogroms. We simply need to decide as a society if we prefer "Justice" or "Truth As Demanded By The Majority".

Be REAL careful what you ask for in that regard.

Me? I really do believe that 12 Fellow Citizens take an oath with full intent to do it right; spend a year away from jobs and family; and give back the Very Best I Can Hope For, within the context of laws intended to protect the innocent as much as the guilty. I don't believe they're fools; blinded by celebrity; blinded by color....or anything else. They felt they couldn't jail a fellow citizen based on the State's evidence.

I'm not happy about the result. But I'd rather have it come out this way than based on an "I watched 3 hours of Fox News" Poll.

I'm going to bug out, because I do want to reach my 1000th post here.
Click to expand...
Last I checked, people don't get bounced for unpopular views around here. Only for policy disregard. You're still WAY on our side of that line. :)
Rich
 
Truth is far different...it's easily arrived at (and quickly perverted) by such acts as the the Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials and the Pogroms. We simply need to decide as a society if we prefer "Justice" or "Truth As Demanded By The Majority".
Click to expand...
I would disagree Rich. Truth as stated by you above is opinion. Opinion is not truth.

Truth is unchangeable. Truth is what happened, not what the majority think happened. Truth is sometimes self evident, and other times indiscernable. It remains, however Truth.

Perhaps I am getting to philisophical. However I have to hope that in a case like this that there is a higher power than Man who has the ability to see the truth and judge the guilty without error. I cannot clearly see the truth in this case, but not being able to clearly see the truth does not mean that it does not exist.

It is only when Man tries to pass judgement based on Truth that Truth becomes perverted into witch trials.

edited to add: oops, I think we are in agreement on this Truth thing.......... :p
 
It is only when Man tries to pass judgement based on Truth that Truth becomes perverted into witch trials.

edited to add: oops, I think we are in agreement on this Truth thing.........
Click to expand...
You just got my point. ;)
Your "Truth" may not be my "Truth". So we satisfice for justice based on the law....not always Justice with a capital "J", but far better than the alternatives.

Had the Jackson Trial occurred in the 70's, before 24/7 news, most of us would assume the Jury did what I believe they did; served the law. Today, we each have just enough info to be dangerous.

And that's just, well, "Dangerous".
Rich
 
""What was it that convinced you that Michael was innocent?"

Oddly enough, none seemed able to name anything that stood out as the lynch-pin of the defense's case."

That's called reasonable doubt.

No one thing has to stand out. A series of reasonable doubts, combined with the poor performance of the prosecution, is what delivered the innocent verdicts.

"If I had gotten non-answers like what I heard on the radio awhile ago, I would be inclined to believe that the jurors were leaning on their opinion of the defendant, rather than the evidence as presented."

If that were truly the case with Jackson, I have no doubt at all that the jury would have convicted him in a couple of hours. Jackson has a long history of negative publicity that stems from his eccentricity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top