Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Breaking: Verdict Reached in Michael Jackson Trial

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • bobby
    replied
    I think basically the rules don't apply if you have that much money.

    Leave a comment:


  • janni-chan
    replied
    Originally posted by Excalibur2004
    amen to that. So let's count what is "legal" for celebs.. Murder, Molestation, Rape.... someone finish this list if I forgot anything
    Not as bad as the other ones you mentined, but: stealing... Queen Ingrid of Denmark was a kleptomaniac (no, I'm not being disrespectful, she was).

    Leave a comment:


  • Excalibur2004
    replied
    Originally posted by JessinMEM
    Wish I was that famous and had enough money to be able to get away with anything, must be nice!
    amen to that. So let's count what is "legal" for celebs.. Murder, Molestation, Rape.... someone finish this list if I forgot anything

    Leave a comment:


  • JessinMEM
    replied
    I'm not suprised at all that they found him not guilty on all counts. I mean...come on....they didn't find OJ guilty....they aren't going to find Michael Jackson guilty either.

    Wish I was that famous and had enough money to be able to get away with anything, must be nice!

    Leave a comment:


  • Kadena_Troop
    replied
    Originally posted by JeffinDEN
    Could be, but being found Not Guilty does not prove innocence either.


    Exactly. Being found Not Guilty simply means there was not enough evidence to prove otherwise.

    Leave a comment:


  • JeffinDEN
    replied
    Originally posted by ADG
    I'll give you a hint "paying someone off" is not a proof of guilt.

    Next?
    Could be, but being found Not Guilty does not prove innocence either.


    Leave a comment:


  • ADG
    replied
    I think the verdict was the right one.

    I would suggest those of you who feel he should have been found guilty present the facts that would indicate a different verdict should have been found.

    I'll give you a hint "paying someone off" is not a proof of guilt.

    Next?





    ADG
    (ps, I don't know whether he molests children or not, but I think the Jury got it right based upon the 'evidence' presented)

    Leave a comment:


  • Kadena_Troop
    replied
    You know, the jury came to the right verdict IMO. The prosecution didn't present their case that well at all. But personally, all facts aside, I think he is a child molestor. And I do think that he molested those boys among others. The prosecution just wasn't able to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. As far as the family being out to get Jackson for all he's worth, maybe they were. But I still see some merit to the boys' claims. I just think that the mother wanted to use those claims to her financial advantage and thats where she went wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • ACman
    replied
    Originally posted by Crunk415balla
    Ya It was pretty obvous the kid was lieing in my opinion
    Those kids were terrible whitnesses. If he did, its sad, I think he did but I dont care. He did it before, why wouldent he do it again?

    Leave a comment:


  • Crunk415balla
    replied
    Ya It was pretty obvous the kid was lieing in my opinion

    Leave a comment:


  • screaming_emu
    replied
    yup...still dont care.

    Leave a comment:


  • bobby
    replied
    haha lmao!

    Leave a comment:


  • Excalibur2004
    replied
    a side note for all of you who believe michael jacksons songs depict his life and "do-ings" might I suggest "Smooth Criminal"

    Leave a comment:


  • mapguy
    replied
    Originally posted by indian airlines
    America we have yet another "scandal" blown out of proportion by the media.
    LOL!

    Leave a comment:


  • B757300
    replied
    Originally posted by ACman
    No CNN's stock just dropped. Nothign for them to report now.
    They still have the missing girl in Aruba.

    But back on topic... Once again justice has been denied by a California jury.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X