{Breaking News}Michael Jackson verdict


Is he Guilty  

404 members have voted

  1. 1. Is he Guilty

    • Guilty
      192
    • Not Guilty
      212


Recommended Posts

wrong....

they found him not guilty....

there is a difference....

586064579[/snapback]

LOL. Yeah if you listen to any number of after-verdict interviews with the jurors you will quickly realize that many felt very put-off by Jackson's behavior, and went so far as to say that his behavior needed to change and was inapropriate... BUT they couldn't see a clear line of evil behavior that could be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt". Therefore they acquitted him, even though personally they felt that we was "not innocent".

Like OJ, most folks know Jackson isn't completely "innocent", even if he was found "not guilty".

I would never let my kids stay with him. This cloud seems to be stuck to him, and after a while one has to think "where's there's smoke, there's fire".

Why the hell you accept a settlement if some1 molested your kid???

If he indeed molested that kid back in 1993 he would be in JAIL but they took a settlement...what does that tell you?

\/  :sleep:

586060401[/snapback]

It tells me that they didn't really care about justice or that they didn't think they had any evidence that could prove he was guilty...

Thank God he is guilty though - I for one don't like the idea that he has been abusing parents trust and sleeping with children.

It seems like a lot of people here wish that had been the case??!

Fans and loyal subjects identify with an idealised abstract of their beloved and refuse to believe anything which might tarnish their shiny picture.

Our stupid cult of celebrity is at fault, both for creating the monster, and for blinding us to behaviour which would be so obviously sick if it were being displayed by the ordinary man next door.

586060807[/snapback]

that speaks volumes, well- stated (Y)

It tells me that they didn't really care about justice or that they didn't think they had any evidence that could prove he was guilty...

Thank God he is guilty though - I for one don't like the idea that he has been abusing parents trust and sleeping with children.

It seems like a lot of people here wish that had been the case??!

586064649[/snapback]

They did have evidence, but the jury did not think it was legit. I am astonished at the fact you say he is guilty. The jury found him not guilty on all 10 charges, and he is innocent UNTIL proving guilty.

It must feel good to post that you think he is guilty while sitting in front of your computer, obviously ignoring the fact that these people on the jury were IN THE COURT ROOM listening to the actual case as it happened. Whoever doubts the jury obviously has something against Michael, be it either a dislike for his music or maybe you just think he looks odd. Yeah, that's nice, but keep in mind this jury knows their stuff. They wouldn't have deemed him innocent if they didn't think it was right, especially not on all ten charges. It's not hard to see that these kids, or rather the parents of these kids, are just out to get his money. Welcome to sue-happy America.

I find it intriguing how some people can be so certain that Michael Jackson is guilty, even after he was proven not guilty by jury who were presented with every possible evidence and proof existing from both side and had chance to carefully go over those evidences.

Are there any reason behind claiming he is guilty other than that he looks and acts a bit weird?

While I'm surprised that he's free of all charges (I thought at least one or two would get him), the fact is that the decision was made by people who obviously know a lot more details about this case than I do, and that I should respect it.

I just hope that Tom Sneddon guy will finally retire and stop trying to hunt down someone whom he barely knows, unless he actually finds some convincing evidence against Michael Jackson.

All the outcome means is that there was not enough evidence to prove that jackson did these things.

It does not mean that he did not do them, only 2 people know that.

I am not saying whether he did or did not. I am just pointing out that we will never know for sure what he did/didn't do. The best we can do is rely upon the word of the jurors (who in my opinion were not 100% reliable - from post verdict interviews).

All the outcome means is that there was not enough evidence to prove that jackson did these things.

It does not mean that he did not do them, only 2 people know that.

I am not saying whether he did or did not.  I am just pointing out that we will never know for sure what he did/didn't do.  The best we can do is rely upon the word of the jurors (who in my opinion were not 100% reliable - from post verdict interviews).

586067556[/snapback]

Exactly,

Many people are actually upset because they beleive that the prosectution was too hasty and didn't assemble "Beyond a reasonable doubt" evidence. I 100% agree with them as well. Considering the mother's reputation and his previous testimonies, all of it was a hodgepodge of slightly (yet doubtful) allegations.

Now if Michael was guilty (Although I think he's innocent). He is incapable of being tried a second time.

Sorry if this was repeated but i just have the sort of time to rummage through 12 pages of an assortment of opinions and actual facts... :/

I do feel that the jury rushed, and by their own admissions let personal feeling come into it.

586067599[/snapback]

Well, if they could add there personal feelings in they would. They were given a like 90 something page of instructions all of which I believe had to be signed by all, and if you do add personal feelings in the verdict the judge would have cought it and would have had a mistrial. I beleive they deliberated, what 38 hours I believe? Thatsa hella long time if you ask me.

Unbelievable if it was anyone else they would have been found guilty  :no:

586059614[/snapback]

If it was anyone else this case would never have made it to court to begin with. The entire case stinks and should never have been allowed to go this far. What a waste of public money and time for one man's vendetta.
sleeping with young boys isnt illegal ??:xx? sorry but your legal system is f**ked up

- watching fox news at the moment

586059921[/snapback]

And what country did you say you are from? Because, I am sure there is no country where just sleeping with young boys is illegal. Because if it were, then there must be billions of parents, siblings, aunts and uncles that need to be locked up too.

There were some jurors that in fact thought he was guilty but they did not believe the mother which raised reasonable doubt in the merits of the case. They had said if it wasnt for the mother they may have chosen guilty.

There were some jurors that in fact thought he was guilty but they did not believe the mother which raised reasonable doubt in the merits of the case.  They had said if it wasnt for the mother they may have chosen guilty.

586068227[/snapback]

IF ANDS & BUTS, uffff. The fact is he was found NOT GUILTY, get over it guys.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I and many others did not vote to get out of the E.u because of Putin or Farage, we did so for our own reasons. You don't have to tel me what my own did or did not do when it comes to the E.U. The EEC is or was the European Economic Community, a different beast to what the E.U is now.The EEC was a mainly about trading, the E.U have gone far beyond that and as I have said before, is now more of a United States of Europe. The U.K did not vote to join a United States of Europe. Anyway, they did not want us in there in the first place, Charles de Gaulle stopped us joining as he claimed we didn’t agree with the core ideas of integration. He was not wrong and that is why we voted out of the E.U when the time came. I was not old enough to vote the first time. My only regret is that we did not have the referendum years ago and got out years ago. If we rejoined, we would have to agree to join the Euro and no doubt Schengen, agree with freedom of movement, we have enough problem with people coming over here as it is. i have no problem with people coming over here if they work and don't try to push their way of life onto us. The E.U has a currency, freedom of movement, an anthem a flag, a parliament, well they are there, not sure if they do anything. Don't sound like something that is just for trading. Oh yeah, also wanted a euro Army. How many stupid rules have the E.U made that we had to follow? I doubt I will see the Uk rejoin the E.U, which suits me. Oh yeah, my partner is Polish, she came over here before Poland joined the E.U and she got fed up of people just coming over here with ease, while she had to struggle. She is now a British citizen and have been for a fair few years
    • Saluton, Paŭlo. Dankon pro la ĉefartikolo. Ĝi estis interesa. Mi esploros pli pri la aplikaĵo kaj ĝia koncepto. Kompreneble, se vi konas min entute, vi scias, ke mi dirus, ke viaj artikoloj bezonas iom da redaktado! Mi ĉiam faras tion, ĉu ne? Ekzemple, la artikolo foje mencias koncepton antaŭ ol difini ĝin, ekzemple, relajsoj.
    • Screamer is 50% off on Steam, making it £24.99 here in the UK: https://store.steampowered.com/app/2814990/Screamer/ You might remember the series from the mid 90s / early 2000s, this new game is also by Milestone who created the older games.
    • U.S. partially reverses Anthropic AI ban for Mythos but keeps Fable 5 off the market by Karthik Mudaliar Anthropic says that the U.S. government has finally allowed it to restore Claude Mythos 5. But of course, there's a catch. The rollout is again for a limited set of U.S. organizations that operate and defend critical infrastructure. The company announced this in a post on X (formerly Twitter). This does not mean that Anthropic's latest frontier models are back to normal availability. Fable 5, which was a tuned version of Mythos 5 for public release, remains unavailable. Anthropic said that it is still working with the government to expand Mythos 5 access and make Fable 5 available again, but there's no timeline. Reports from Bloomberg and Reuters say that this decision actually came through a letter from the U.S. Commerce Department. According to Reuters, this would allow more than 100 companies and institutions access to Mythos 5. Reuters also reported that Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s letter removes the need for export licenses for approved companies’ non-US citizen employees, as well as Anthropic’s own non-US citizen employees, while restrictions remain for organizations outside the approved list. Anthropic isn't alone with this kind of controlled rollout. OpenAI's newest model family, GPT 5.6, was announced just yesterday, but isn't available for everyone yet. In its announcement, OpenAI also said that access to these models is initially limited to a select group of trusted partners and organizations, with broader access planned later this year. Both of these cases show that frontier AI launches are no longer just ordinary product releases and more like slow and vetted deployments shaped heavily by the U.S. government.
    • Sol, Terra, Luna - aren't those the names of failed crypto coins? 🤣🤣🤣
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      499
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      156
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!