Title: Michael Jackson Not Guilty
Description: How do we all feel?
sparkly - June 13, 2005 09:27 PM (GMT)
I must admit, as soon as I looked online just now and saw he was found not guilty on all charges, I went "oh good". Even tho I dont know for 100% if he done it or not, i'm assuming not goin by the verdict, i'm happy for him.
How does everyone else feel?
Love4Lops - June 13, 2005 09:50 PM (GMT)
I'm not really sure. The thing that stands out most to me is that so many witnesses (140 I heard) said MJ committed those acts...how 140 people could all be lying, IDK. Oh well - everything is different in the celeb world. Maybe he really is innocent - I guess we'll never know :wacko:
Cinnabun - June 13, 2005 09:54 PM (GMT)
im like going nuts here! LOL.. i cant believe this! well i can since hes liek the prince of pop or whatever! but i mean like AHHHHHHHHH i cant even think of the words to say!! lol i was like cussing at the TV and yelling at them! and just AHHH! lmao
Delphinum - June 13, 2005 10:14 PM (GMT)
I'm pleased... perhaps he can now pay off his debts and maybe that image that we had in the 1980s wasn't so skewed afterall... I've always felt sorry for him somehow.
I wonder if the parents of the kid will now have any repercussions. :confused:
The other thing is, you can only value witnesses with good character, etc... how do we know that all the 140 were of good character? I'm sure that if told "Oh you'll make a few thousand if you go against MJ and the papers will want your story." some people would jump at the chance, morally right or not. :confused: People can only be people.
Lanna - June 13, 2005 10:19 PM (GMT)
I'm not sure how I feel. :confused: I dont think anyone will ever really know if MJ did it except MJ and the boy. We may never know.
The jury consisted of conservative people so maybe there wasnt as much hard evidence as I though?
Delphinum - June 13, 2005 10:21 PM (GMT)
Debbie Row was the prosecution's star witness... I think that was a boo boo! :confused: I think that ruined their case completely.
Lanna - June 13, 2005 10:26 PM (GMT)
You may be right Ang.
I think the boy's credibility was shot after they introduced evidence of fraud in the past. They could have said they werent after money until they were blue in the face but the fact is they have been in the past. They lied then....they may have been lying now?
Walking Mushroom - June 14, 2005 07:45 AM (GMT)
I guess if there isn't enough evidence to prove his guilt, the "past" will just have to fade whether he did do it ........or not. I don't really catch up to whats happening, but someone told me that after the case was closed, he came out of the courtroom saying something along the lines "Whats wrong with sleeping with boys anyway?" Is this right? My appologies if im incorrect. But I still think he's a bit of a sleeze.
sparkly - June 14, 2005 08:51 AM (GMT)
I'm not sure if that is correct or not, I havent heard but he isnt on the same planet as the rest of us, thats for sure. He does live in his own little world and is very naive in his thinking.
I think he is just a lost little boy who never grew up, its sad in a way but if thats how he wants to live, in Neverland then thats up to him, he never had a proper childhood, maybe hes making up for it now, I wish I didnt have to grow up!
But he has got to understand tho that just because he thinks its ok to sleep in same bed as boys, he must know that most people will find this odd cos of all the horror stories you hear!
He seems to think the world is not harmful in the slightest and that bad things dont happen ;)
Delphinum - June 14, 2005 09:19 AM (GMT)
Naive is definately the word here... He doesn't realise it's wrong because he hides himself from the real world... hopefully with the sale of Neverland going through, he'll now have to live in the real world and accept that it is WRONG to sleep with children.
He is the same age as my dad but acts like he's about 10... He's lived in a 'yes Michael' world throughout his life so of couse his views are skewed.
If there wasn't enough evidence to convict him in this case (which the prosecution must've been through with a fine toothed comb for months, so it's not like it wasn't thorough), and with the family's previous fraudulent background coming to light, I don't think he did do it. Just another case of people cashing in on fame. :tsk:
Sunshine - June 14, 2005 03:35 PM (GMT)
I always doubted the accusations made against MJ - but then, I thought OJ was innocent, too! <_<
MJ most definitely isn't playing with a full deck of cards, but I'm having trouble seeing criminal intent. He is terribly naive and probably not too bright, either.
But what gets my back up most, is the parents of these children. Who in their right mind would EVER let a child stay with a stranger? And if there had EVER been any suspicion, wouldn't you as a parent make SURE you stayed 2 feet behind your child at all times?
I think you're absolutely right Ang, it's all about money and how much worldly posessions they could get out of a relationship (whatever kind it may have been) between their son and MJ.
becc_boland - June 14, 2005 03:50 PM (GMT)
I still think hes guilty sorry. Look at the Schapelle Corby case compared to his who was the guilty one? thatz just my point of view tho
rabbitrae - June 14, 2005 03:57 PM (GMT)
Delphinum - June 14, 2005 05:47 PM (GMT)
Sorry, but who is Schapelle Corby? Was that not the drugs case girl?
Cinnabun - June 14, 2005 06:40 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (becc_boland @ Jun 14 2005, 10:50 AM) |
| I still think hes guilty sorry. Look at the Schapelle Corby case compared to his who was the guilty one? thatz just my point of view tho |
I think so also.. this one person i was talkign to, was saying that he thinks that Michael has Mutiple Personaltys.. since he never really had a real childhood.. so he just thinks he mental instabile.. but i still dont think that gives him the right to do what he did..
slrabbits - June 14, 2005 07:48 PM (GMT)
I never really followed the case.. I could care less. Celebrities can almost always get away with anything, there was no way he would have been convicted, guilty or not. I'm just sick of that being all they ever talk about on the news anymore. :wacko:
Walking Mushroom - June 15, 2005 06:58 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (slrabbits @ Jun 14 2005, 07:48 PM) |
| I never really followed the case.. I could care less. Celebrities can almost always get away with anything, there was no way he would have been convicted, guilty or not. I'm just sick of that being all they ever talk about on the news anymore. :wacko: |
I agree, .. he does have a load of cash. Makes me think, well why would a family be so confident that they could just take this issue to court and claim their son was molested a while back ago? With all his fan support and $$ ka-ching $$ he can just buy his way to "justice"... i mean good lawyers. But hey, what would I know.. :wacko:
bunnylover52691 - June 18, 2005 03:20 AM (GMT)
I don't know what to believe but I think it is really easy to say he is innocent. And I heard everybody thinks he has all this money but after spending it all on the theme park and other stuff he is in big time debt. I am just a kid though.
floppy - June 24, 2005 02:52 PM (GMT)
Personally i think he paid someone off and got off. I dont think hes a criminal.. I think he is a sick person who needs alot of therapy and had a really hard crazy life. he needed therapy a long time ago. I actually feel bad for him. He needs help and doesnt understand that some things are just no acceptable behavior. but i dont think he malisiously did anything to hurt anyone. He is just sick and needs help. Its sad. I used to love him when i was little and think hes very tallented. He just needs alot of therapy...
mrose_s - July 17, 2005 04:16 AM (GMT)
i think he is guilty as all get out