#251972 by unknown[75601] at 2005-06-17 17:20:15 (8 years ago) - [Report]
Skevast wrote:
YEH WHAT A FUCK THERE IS SOMETHING STRANGE ABOUT HIM, GIVE HIM 20 YEARS, OR LETS SHOOT HIM AND SAVE THE STATE SOME MONEY.
LET'S SHOOT ALL STRANGE PEOPLE, THEY COULD TURN OUT TO BE PEDOFILES.
I KNOW GIVE AWAY GUNS TO EVERYBODY AND IF THERE IS SOMMETHING FISHY LETS SHOOT SOMEONE, IF EVERYBODY THAT HAVE A GUN SHOOT SOMEONE WE SHOULD KILL SOME PEDOFILES OR?
WE SHOULD'T BE SENTIMENTAL YOU CAN'T MAKE AN OMELETT WITHOUT BREAKING SOME EGGS...IF YOU SHOOT 100 PEOPLE YOU MAYBE KILL 98 INNOCENT BUT WE SHOULD BE PLEASED BECASUE WE GOT 2 THAT COULD TURN OUT TO BE PEDOFILES..
AM I RIGHT OR AM I RIGHT
Seriously, wtf is wrong with you, If you read a little about him or if youn perhaps had seen the documentery about Michael you would have shoot yourself for sying that.. His a gorwn up, (ok with that) BUT inside his just a fucking "normal" freakin' KID!!! THAT MEANS: his still in a age where he has friends, where they sleep in the same bed, where they hold hands, and give eachother hugs.. Michael is the KING of pop, have could he manage that if he was/are/where a chil abuser?.. FFS think just a little through what your're saying abouot other ppl before you spit out in a discussion.. plz.. Theres no mean to rud or anything, but i like Micahel and his music, and i feel sorry for him that he was abused as a kid..
But I really hope the parrents of those kids are feeling pitty, and dum.. They where just out to get a quick buck! But hey.. see where that ended up!!.. I gotta say its freakin' awful that some ppl are that sick and FU**ED up in theyre head that they can go do something like that.. And I KNOW that thoose ppl "voting" or saying that his guilty, they just dont like his music, orr they are just DUM;!! Think about it, if you where in Michaels position(abused as a kid etc.) would you then go do those horrible things to others?
Michael Jackson,, Go ON!!!
#252334 by unknown[27] at 2005-06-17 23:02:03 (8 years ago) - [Report]
LEAVE MICHAEL ALONE
#252336 by unknown[19808] at 2005-06-17 23:03:20 (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
You are talking out your ass. I made this poll up the staff just put it on the site, and it was a good thing to do as many users were making posts at the time about this subject. Juvenile? I think you need to think harder, this is obviously a hypothetical poll as the fist word in the poll points it out. “IF”
#252452 by unknown[91604] at 2005-06-18 00:36:04 (8 years ago) - [Report]
he wasnt charged guilty though, he was charged not guilty.
but anyhow, something is fishy about the whole thing. You can sing about how not guilty he was in this instance all you want, but there is plenty not right with this guy and child molestation could very well be something that he likes to do.
YEH WHAT A FUCK THERE IS SOMETHING STRANGE ABOUT HIM, GIVE HIM 20 YEARS, OR LETS SHOOT HIM AND SAVE THE STATE SOME MONEY.
LET'S SHOOT ALL STRANGE PEOPLE, THEY COULD TURN OUT TO BE PEDOFILES.
I KNOW GIVE AWAY GUNS TO EVERYBODY AND IF THERE IS SOMMETHING FISHY LETS SHOOT SOMEONE, IF EVERYBODY THAT HAVE A GUN SHOOT SOMEONE WE SHOULD KILL SOME PEDOFILES OR?
WE SHOULD'T BE SENTIMENTAL YOU CAN'T MAKE AN OMELETT WITHOUT BREAKING SOME EGGS...IF YOU SHOOT 100 PEOPLE YOU MAYBE KILL 98 INNOCENT BUT WE SHOULD BE PLEASED BECASUE WE GOT 2 THAT COULD TURN OUT TO BE PEDOFILES..
AM I RIGHT OR AM I RIGHT
or we can talk in all caps and act the fool like you?
face it, jacko's got alot more going on than a lack of melonin, and if you had any sense you wouldnt be screaming acting like i have something against the strange. Try and think for a second about someone with a high public image, wealth and power. Now try and wrap your brain around the fact that his public image is more fucked up than Mike Tyson, a man who's IQ is so low he probably doesnt even understand the concept.
I am sorry for the caps I just didn't like your side of view (It smells It's brown it must be shit) . I dont think Mike Tyson was guilty either but he was stupid not paing enough for the best lawyers. I don't think a man in Mike Tysons possition have to rape a woman. She was not hurt or enything just her word against his word and some crying from her side mowed the jury. After the trial she sued Mike Tyson for 90% of the money he had left.´
One of her friends even sold a story to some papers about her telling that she fucked Mike Tyson only to be able to say that he raped her. She denaid it though and it is impossible to prove that she was lying, even if she would tell all her friends that she was.
some people think that people like Michael got away with it because he was famous but iI think he would't have this problem if he didn't was famous. Al the crap magazines playing with his life, they actually had to get people not reading magazines for the Michael jackson Jury just to have an opened mind. Because the magazines turned everything around, Michael even fucked his monkey regulaly if you should believe the magazines.
You actually have to be a celebrity to know what crap the magasines are writing. It's not about the truth it's just about selling more numbers.
So we that reads this shit every day should'nt even open our mouth because 80% of our info is false.
Even I laugh when I hear or read a Michael Jackson joke, and there are a lot of them but in the end I understand that it's a Joke and nothing else
like this one " When the boat started sinking the Captain said: - Save yourself! - But what about the children?, said Michael. - Fuck the children!! - Do we have that much time? "
The thing is that it's totaly impossible to clear his name no matter what even if he is 100% innocent there would always be this jokes about him. This people scared him for life destoyed his name and destroyed him even that he was found not guilty.
I dont think anyone of you would like this sick pedofil jokes about them, I wouldn't want my name to have enything to dom with with tihis type of things.It is the most Horrible crime known to mankind.
Do you understand that this sick people ( the family) even wanted money to help Michael clearing his name after the Bashir movie. They wanted money to tell the truth and it was not enough that Michael promised before everything with Bashir ever happened that he would pay for the childrens collage education and a house for the family, it was not paying them of it was something he wanted to do for them, he didn't need to clear his name back then..
Bashir should ben hang upside down with his nuts in a meathook, he just wanted to make some mone out of Michael and turned the movie his way around. And even according to the blod sucking family nothing happened before the Bashir movie, And I am sure that it was the movie that gave the family the ide to scrue Michael, even the Blood sucking Lawyers stod in line to help the family because they knew they could get some money out of it.
I think Bashir is the guilty one and if we should condem someone we should condem him. Because the trail and everything was Bashirs fault, he made the family cash hungry they knew knowing Michael they could get something but betraying Michael the could get everything.
Bashir should pay the 960 millions Michaels deffence costed him, if he could not pay he should pay with his nuts....
#252870 by unknown[29964] at 2005-06-18 08:56:11 (8 years ago) - [Report]
you know what else people say about shit? that their own smells like roses, ahem.
anyhow, you talk alot about how if someone isn't a celebrity they shouldnt even open their mouths? sorry, but that's just mildly inane. That's implying that being a celebrity makes you above any other person, the very problem with this. The jury wasn't famouse, do they have the right to even judge jackson by your logic? They dont know what being FAMOUS is like!
and you fail to realize being a celebrity and enjoying wealth and fame comes with a little something called "resonsibility". If you knowingly act eccentric or loony after working a job where public image is important you should know the concequences, it's the price of celebrity.
Michael isn't always the victim of the mean ol' press, if you think that i can only wonder how big your creepy shrine is.
#252938 by unknown[68651] at 2005-06-18 10:50:14 (8 years ago) - [Report]
NOT GUILTY
#253607 by unknown[17200] at 2005-06-18 20:07:56 (8 years ago) - [Report]
Guilty as hell his sexual preference is young boys and he likes to share his bed with young boys...
would any of you defending him let him share a bed with your kids Would ah f**k we have ways of dealing with peeps like him where i come from rich or noo,and its nothing to do with being weird ah ken loads of weird folk and none of them share there beds with young boys
Just ma 2 cents
#253660 by unknown[15440] at 2005-06-18 20:52:30 (8 years ago) - [Report]
HIBBY wrote:
Guilty as hell his sexual preference is young boys and he likes to share his bed with young boys...
None of that is illegal. You can't jail people just because you don't like them.
#253787 by fr3aKy (Power User) at 2005-06-18 23:03:18 (8 years ago) - [Report]
not guilty, just moneyhungry idiots bullshitting around.
case closed.
#254120 by unknown[91360] at 2005-06-19 03:34:26 (8 years ago) - [Report]
yeah and OJ didn't do it either.....the people of California will not convict a celeb no matter what the evidence shows...Robert Blake got off too... Scott Peterson is in jail with less evidence than they had on wacko jacko the pedo end of story...Mike Tyson made a mistake and committed his crime in Indiana..dumbass
and it really scares me that 32% of the people here think he is not a pedo.. he will do it again
#254304 by unknown[41770] at 2005-06-19 08:21:09 (8 years ago) - [Report]
He is definately guilty in some form of child molestation and ppl. just can't see through his fame for what he really is. Evidence of child molestation is very hard to uncover and usually consists of testimony from the children molested. Can't you get that? There is not gonna be some DNA evidence or other kinds of physical evidence in these kinds of cases.
Ask yourself this, if this was your neighbour (an average Joe) behaving like Michael did, would he have been convicted.
And please don't label me as a Michael Jackson hater cause I'm not.
#254314 by unknown[79699] at 2005-06-19 08:28:05 (8 years ago) - [Report]
DannyLB wrote:
Guilty on some charges.
#254455 by unknown[15440] at 2005-06-19 11:16:49 (8 years ago) - [Report]
ezeddy2 wrote:
and it really scares me that 32% of the people here think he is not a pedo.. he will do it again
Being a pedophile is not a crime, and is not illegal. I don't care if he is that or not, it doesn't mean he molests children. Most pedophiles don't, and some non-pedophiles do. Abuse has nothing to do with sexual orientation. If you're a male attracted to females, are you unable to sleep in the same bed as a woman without soliciting sex from her? (if yes, know that most people aren't like that)
#254489 by unknown[82625] at 2005-06-19 11:46:09 (8 years ago) - [Report]
he has done it for years but parents still let there kids go there sure the 4k i wouldnt. all down to money in the end as always!!! GUILTY!!! i say
#254612 by unknown[17200] at 2005-06-19 13:14:29 (8 years ago) - [Report]
haakon wrote:
Being a pedophile is not a crime, and is not illegal. I don't care if he is that or not, it doesn't mean he molests children. Most pedophiles don't, and some non-pedophiles do. Abuse has nothing to do with sexual orientation.
What a load o sh*te what planet you on..
Illegal Immoral and very wrong
#254617 by unknown[15440] at 2005-06-19 13:19:02 (8 years ago) - [Report]
HIBBY wrote:
Illegal Immoral and very wrong
You're entitled to believe having a pedophile orientation is immoral and very wrong (although that's a strange stance since nobody chooses their sexual orientation), but I'd like to see you point out the law that says it's illegal.
Child sexual abuse is of course illegal, immoral and very wrong, but if you thought I disagreed there, I suggest you read more throroughly the next time.
#254621 by unknown[88372] at 2005-06-19 13:20:48 (8 years ago) - [Report]
Dont buy the fucking tricks that media trying to bullshit u with.
When should u learn that hollywood and media is pure evil that should have died long time ago.
they are just a bunch of brainwashing fuckers who do way worse crimes then michael would would ever think off.
#254648 by unknown[17200] at 2005-06-19 13:47:06 (8 years ago) - [Report]
Main Entry: pe·do·phil·ia
Pronunciation: "pE-d&-'fi-lE-&
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin
: sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object
Having sex with children is illegal Hakkon...... there is no proof he done it ill give you that the case put before the jury was pish.
But i believe he is guilty of many other cases of sex with under age boys that he grooms at neverland over a long period of time.
He is a pedo, he likes to get underage boys drunk and then take them to bed,not normal practise
Haakon i read fine and i meant no offence to ya wasnt questioning your own sexual preference
#254679 by unknown[15440] at 2005-06-19 14:15:37 (8 years ago) - [Report]
HIBBY wrote:
He is a pedo, he likes to get underage boys drunk and then take them to bed,not normal practise
He was found not guilty on the count of serving alcohol to minors. It's fine if you disagree with the jury, although I think they had more information than you do. And to reiterate, "not normal" is not a criminal offense. (By the way, a dictionary is not a law book; I am well aware of the linguistic definition.)
And you can call my sexual orientation into question any time you want to, only people who are unsure of themselves find that offensive
He is definately guilty in some form of child molestation and ppl. just can't see through his fame for what he really is. Evidence of child molestation is very hard to uncover and usually consists of testimony from the children molested. Can't you get that? There is not gonna be some DNA evidence or other kinds of physical evidence in these kinds of cases.
Ask yourself this, if this was your neighbour (an average Joe) behaving like Michael did, would he have been convicted.
And please don't label me as a Michael Jackson hater cause I'm not.
An average Joe wouldn't have any money that evil people wanted so the aligations would be more belivable, it has nothing to do with fame but the thing is that the mother and the children (yes, all of them) lied on other trials against other people the sister aligated her father for molesting her and later on confessed that it was a fantasy. And I think it was clear that there was evidence that Michael was not impresinating them on neverland where they never knew what the time was and the funny thing is that neverland has a clock that you can se from the sky. The thing is they could have escaped anytime even called the police but they never did and they never told anyone outside the lying family before now. The thing is that there was prof that the brothers has stolen vine from Michaels vinecellar and they lied about so many thing the jury couldn't know what was true or not.......
So the thing is not that Michael was famous but the family had no credibility and lying once and twice could result in a third and fourth lie.....
#255043 by unknown[17200] at 2005-06-19 18:42:40 (8 years ago) - [Report]
Haakon think well need to just agree to disagree eh...
Came across this funny as hell........... hxxp://www.liquidgeneration.com/poptoons/michaeljackson_smoothcriminal.asp
#255086 by unknown[15440] at 2005-06-19 19:04:00 (8 years ago) - [Report]
HIBBY wrote:
Haakon think well need to just agree to disagree eh..
The question was "do you tink he's guilty". You said yes, you think so, because his sexual preference is boys and that he has shared his bed with some of them. I said those are neither illegal noor proof, merely vague conjecture and moralistic outrage. If you disagree with that, then yes, we certainly have no more to discuss
#255158 by unknown[65822] at 2005-06-19 19:35:05 (8 years ago) - [Report]
I would vote:
Guilty as charged!
#255376 by unknown[77795] at 2005-06-19 21:54:00 (8 years ago) - [Report]
(Power User) at 2005-06-18 23:03:18 (8 years ago) - [
