#245775 by shintu (Power User) at 2005-06-14 12:47:55 (8 years ago) - [Report]
not guilty ofcourse may be his fame is the cause for all
long live michael
#245886 by unknown[18471] at 2005-06-14 13:51:11 (8 years ago) - [Report]
Not Guilty ! damn people only want money Now they have to work for their money lazy bitches, and they should torture them
#245915 by unknown[3295] at 2005-06-14 14:07:26 (8 years ago) - [Report]
boogiepimp wrote:
hes guilty plain and simple paedophile
^^
#245923 by unknown[306] at 2005-06-14 14:14:36 (8 years ago) - [Report]
Not guilty, I would have taken the vast amount of money he bribed me with...
#245939 by unknown[48179] at 2005-06-14 14:27:51 (8 years ago) - [Report]
not guilty... stupid gold diggers
#246043 by unknown[91892] at 2005-06-14 16:04:47 (8 years ago) - [Report]
I can't say because I ain't familiar with the case and haven's seen/heard evidences/witnesses..
#246070 by unknown[3818] at 2005-06-14 16:26:56 (8 years ago) - [Report]
i think he did something.. they cound't just make this up, maybe not exactly what hes was accused of, but something happend, im sure of it
#246133 by unknown[42372] at 2005-06-14 17:03:15 (8 years ago) - [Report]
Anders wrote:
i think he did something.. they cound't just make this up, maybe not exactly what hes was accused of, but something happend, im sure of it
Hmm, well ofcourse they could make this up, how many cases hasn't just been plain lies?
And no I wouldn't say he is guilty since he is free of charge so everyone saying he is quilty needs to cool down, he has been freed which means that he is innocent. I cant even get it how you can actually say that he is quilty?! What do you base that on? That he got accused of it or what since there is no proof for it, anyway, there will always be people beliving the opposite, but then again people keep on beliving elvis is still alive...
#246248 by unknown[19808] at 2005-06-14 17:56:34 (8 years ago) - [Report]
Yes he has made some good music back in the 80s. I find him accountable for his insanity. Reading limited news articles on this case I would have found him guilty. I think he will be watched very close and will fine himself in a similar situation in the near future and will not be so lucky 3rd time around.
#246328 by unknown[70595] at 2005-06-14 18:30:35 (8 years ago) - [Report]
I'd say not guilty, it's clear people are just after michaels money. Imean; how many people suddenly started remebering they got molested by michael when they were a kid?? And they suddenly remembered when michael was on trial and not before?? Ha... Leeches.
I'm happy he's not guilty by court. Only wonder who will be next to sue him now...
I respect that guy for being able to go through all of this without breaking down. I think I would have.
#246396 by unknown[88803] at 2005-06-14 19:08:45 (8 years ago) - [Report]
i followed the case with some interest and tbh i thought not guilty
as for the others easy way to make money
i expect they tried that approach got nowhere and went to police
cant see him doing it for other sick / dying kids which is a shame
also it may stop other celebrities helping sick kids in the future
#246468 by unknown[78265] at 2005-06-14 19:56:05 (8 years ago) - [Report]
JACKSON IS NOT GUILTY!! YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
#246564 by unknown[3818] at 2005-06-14 20:57:31 (8 years ago) - [Report]
MaximusIII wrote:
he has been freed which means that he is innocent. I cant even get it how you can actually say that he is quilty?!
just because he got freed doest mean hes not guilty...
but anyway, im not saying hes guilty of everything he got accused of...
but something hapend, and it got exaggerated
I hope he becomes a recluse now, walking around naked in his house and talking to himself and pissing in bottles like that guy in the Aviator.
hahaha
well, he sure is weird! You got that right!
#247032 by unknown[91766] at 2005-06-15 00:33:58 (8 years ago) - [Report]
i feel it needs to be pointed out that whoever created this poll was foolish. not only is the wording of the question juvenile, it is in itself juvenile to ask such a question here, since it is safe to assume that none of us here sat through the whole trial. we simply do not know anything about the evidence presented except the bits and pieces that we have heard in the media. it would be foolish to base our own "verdicts" only on that. it is also amazing to see that most have voted "guilty" in this poll. did the trial have a special TB user jury or something??? if the creator of this poll really witnessed the trial or has read transcripts, i stand at least partially corrected. otherwise i maintain my position that making such a poll does not show even a bit of common sense, not to mention making a judgement based on what you've seen on foxnews or read on the net.
personally, i feel i can do nothing but trust the court's decision. and even if it one day turns out that jacko did indeed commit at least some of what he was charged with, i will have peace of mind, because i did not condemn him based on bullshit. saying that "well if so many ppl are accusing him, he mustve done something" is like saying "everyone should commit suicide, because so many people do it". or like someone on another forum has said, "hes guilty, guilty i say, i am shouting so loud that he must be guilty". if you base your opinion on practically no concrete information, the probability of him being guilty is equal to that of him being not.
i stress that i am not his fan. he is weird, to be frank, but that is not enough for me to condemn him.
/edited
#247055 by unknown[902] at 2005-06-15 00:57:05 (8 years ago) - [Report]
brohan wrote:
If you was on the jury on the Michael Jackson case, how would you of voted?
#247060 by unknown[17187] at 2005-06-15 01:01:53 (8 years ago) - [Report]
fedaykin wrote:
i feel it needs to be pointed out that whoever created this poll was foolish. not only is the wording of the question juvenile, it is in itself juvenile to ask such a question here, since it is safe to assume that none of us here sat through the whole trial. we simply do not know anything about the evidence presented except the bits and pieces that we have heard in the media. it would be foolish to base our own "verdicts" only on that. it is also amazing to see that most have voted "guilty" in this poll. did the trial have a special TB user jury or something??? if the creator of this poll really witnessed the trial or has read transcripts, i stand at least partially corrected. otherwise i maintain my position that making such a poll does not show even a bit of common sense, not to mention making a judgement based on what you've seen on foxnews or read on the net.
personally, i feel i can do nothing but trust the court's decision. and even if it one day turns out that jacko did indeed commit at least some of what he was charged with, i will have peace of mind, because i did not condemn him based on bullshit. saying that "well if so many ppl are accusing him, he mustve done something" is like saying "everyone should commit suicide, because so many people do it". or like someone on another forum has said, "hes guilty, guilty i say, i am shouting so loud that he must be guilty". if you base your opinion on practically no concrete information, the probability of him being guilty is equal to that of him being not.
i stress that i am not his fan. he is weird, to be frank, but that is not enough for me to condemn him.
/edited
i sat and watched the hole tril and saw all the evidance so i am sure he is guilty and he should be bloody shot hes a paedophile
#247061 by unknown[91766] at 2005-06-15 01:04:24 (8 years ago) - [Report]
i believe you, boogiepimp i believe you watched the holetril and saw all the evidance.
#247082 by unknown[66491] at 2005-06-15 01:24:27 (8 years ago) - [Report]
The only reason he was aquitted is because he's white.
#247200 by unknown[28343] at 2005-06-15 03:18:01 (8 years ago) - [Report]
nstutsman wrote:
The only reason he was aquitted is because he's white.
HAHAHAHAHA
#247243 by d1e1m (Power User) at 2005-06-15 04:12:29 (8 years ago) - [Report]
He's been aquitted so he's innocent as found by the court of law. You can only trust a child to be honest when no outside influences have manipulated and come on, can you really trust the lawyers and a money-grabbing parents not to push the kid a-la-Freud. If he was convicted and truly did it, shoot the f**ker just like any pedophile deserves. Honestly, the prosecution's case was too weak to remove any reasonable doubt. Plus, the journey contained plenty of people (parents, retirees) who you'd a felt would have instantly convicted if they felt he was guilty. They took a vote and came up not guilty for very good reasons.
#247351 by unknown[15440] at 2005-06-15 07:08:30 (8 years ago) - [Report]
Gort wrote:
Pedofiles are mentaly ill and have zero control over themselves wich is why I think they should be put away for life cause the chance of repeating what they have done are ridiculously high.
Pedophilia is not a mental illness. It is a sexual orientation like any others, though a lot more rare. Pedophilia is not an act either, and pedophilia is not illegal. Pedophiles, despite popular misconception, do not have a total lack of self control. Sure there exists pedophiles with no or little self control, but such people exist in any group (also heterophiles and homophiles). Most pedophiles keep their orientation a secret and participate in society like any others, though often living alone and lonely. Most could never imagine hurting a child (including sex). If you want to put all pedophiles away, you'll better start building more prisons (and changing some laws).
There, just trying to stem the tidal wave of falsity
(Power User) at 2005-06-14 12:47:55 (8 years ago) - [
paedophile
^^
Michael Jackson
(Cavia porcellus) at 2005-06-14 22:03:29 (8 years ago) - [
(Power User) at 2005-06-14 23:40:58 (8 years ago) - [
