Sporks-R-Us:  Bastard Hybrid Utensil of D00M!
Front Page · Everything · News · Op/Ed · Ask A Spork · Interviews · Religion · Reviews · MLP · AK5CG · Strange · Cats · Nonsense · Fiction · Dead at 54 · The Pits of Hell · Meta · Vlad's Store · Diaries · Site News
Michael Jackson Not Guilty?

sex
By Reza
from the now-CA-can-fall-in-the-ocean department, Section Complete and Total Nonsense
Posted on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 09:35:07 AM GMT
Ok, we've all heard the news, "Wacko Jacko is not guilty".

But, when you read into the articles you find-

dividing image



Jackson never took the stand but the jury heard him on a videotape making such remarks as "I'm not a nut" and "I haven't been betrayed or deceived by children. Adults have let me down."

Oh grow up!

------------

Although prosecutors did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jackson committed lewd acts on a child, they did expose a weird lifestyle that would make any right-minded person ill.

A grown man doesn't sleep with boys -- period. Despite the overwhelming vindication on molestation charges, the jury's verdict should not be interpreted as a mandate for Jackson.

Like we didn't already figure this out?!

-----------------

Several witnesses testified they saw or had been the victim of improper touching by Jackson, an effort to show Jackson had a history of abuse. The defense suggested the witnesses either had a grudge against Jackson or made the claims under tough questioning.

Suggestions =! proof

-----------------

Juror No. 1, Raymond Hultman, 62, said in a later interview at his home that he believed Jackson may have molested at least two boys -- but not the accuser. "That's not to say he's an innocent man,'' Hultman said. ''He's just not guilty of the crimes he's been charged with.''

Guilty, just not this time. Hmmmmmmmmmm...

I'd like to thakn Google News (news.google.com) and the Chicago Sun Times (www.suntimes.com) for the *text bites*.

< U.S. Constitution: Dead at 218 | OMG HA HA HA THES SI TEH F"UNNAY!!!!!!onethousandonehunderdeleavn!! >
Menu
· create account · faq · search · mission · topics

Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password:

Related Links
· google
· Chicago
· More on sex
· Also by Reza

Display: Sort:
Michael Jackson Not Guilty? | 6 comments (6 topical, 0 hidden)
He's not called Wacko Jacko for nothing! (none / 0) (#4)
by Reza on Wed Jun 15, 2005 at 05:40:57 AM GMT

So today (actually later yesterday) his lawyers publish an official statement that he won't be allowing anymore children to sleep in his bed because it opens him up to false allegations.

FALSE allegations?  It was determined that he HAD abused/fondled/made his own/marked his territory/molested children, just not in this specific case.  

In this case the jury didn't like the kid's mom and family...doesn't mean that the poor kid wasn't taken advantage of...the question in this specific case is was it Wacko or was it his family that did the abusing here.

When Michael Jackson was actually writing and performing good (decent?) music...back in the 80's...things were different.  NOW, he's just a freak.

/end editorial comments

:-)



Innocent until yadda yadda (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by Beef on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 06:02:24 PM GMT

Several witnesses testified they saw or had been the victim of improper touching by Jackson, an effort to show Jackson had a history of abuse. The defense suggested the witnesses either had a grudge against Jackson or made the claims under tough questioning.

Suggestions =! proof

Burden of proof is on the prosecution. Suggestions can lead to reasonable doubt. The defense doesn't have to prove anything. Sorry, that's the way our legal system works.

--
Be conservative in what you do. Be liberal in what you accept from others.



I beg to differ........ (5.00 / 3) (#3)
by xxxxxxxxxx on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 07:18:43 PM GMT

where I work, I have seen many guilty until proven innocent and we are talking hundreds!

Sure, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, but if you have someone as well known as Michael Jackson, well, you know he might be perverted but he isn't stupid.  There was no proof, because most or all had been destroyed.  You can only produce what there is to produce.  

If you are a big name and have money and worth much more money free than incarcerated, then odds are you going to go free.  It isn't about whether he was guilty or not, its about money.

[ Parent ]



And why not? (5.00 / 2) (#5)
by l33t j03 on Fri Jun 17, 2005 at 04:55:54 PM GMT

Why shouldn't a person be able to buy his way out of jail?

I have yet to be exposed to a really convincing explanation of why, when it will buy better health care; schooling; food; water; alcohol; sanitation and working conditions, why money shouldn't buy justice (or keep it at bay).

Keep in mind that I just got back from Liberia and I'm really down on humanity.

Pain is weakness leaving the body.
[ Parent ]



Welcome back from civilisation! [n/t] (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by Bold Marauder on Fri Jun 17, 2005 at 05:37:59 PM GMT



--
.-=Welcome to the Vaginal Grid=-.
[ Parent ]


yeah, it kinda makes me sick that he got off! (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by xxxxxxxxxx on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 03:57:50 PM GMT

Just because he feels adults have let him down makes me even more suspicious!  Kids dont' let him down in how many ways???  Makes one wonder!

When kids have sleepovers, they don't usually sleep in the same bed even, it isn't like its something that is done regularly.  MJ just likes little boys and likes sleeping with them and he is one sick person if you ask me.

He will be hit up again with this, sex offenders don't change, they get worse.



Michael Jackson Not Guilty? | 6 comments (6 topical, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

SRU - Embrace the Spork! SourceForge Logo Powered by Scoop
Inspiration
I have more humility in my little finger than you have in your whole ____BODY!
- from "Cerebus" #82

Please buy the stuff we sell on ebay.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 2003-2006 The Management

create account | faq | search