Dumb ass Cali fools. Jacko is found Not Guilty... WTF
 

That boy fondling freak got off again cause them dumb asses cant tell guilty from not.

Clearly, trial by jury is a farce. What the American public needs, nay deserves, is TRIAL BY METALLISTAR

the jury was from ca that is the problem. ca chose a meat head actoin star to be there governor based on fame and you are full of shit if you say it was based on his politics, hes a fucking republican why would they want him? of course they are going to let "the king of pop" do what ever the fuck he wants. if tried in the midwest hed be sleeping in a cell tonight.

and again, and again, hell, he probably started flipping through his little black book of boys as the convoy drove off, doin' a little heeheeeeee as he grabbed himself.

good argument, but there are certain states where he would be doomed to be found guilty as soon as the accusation arose just because he's a freak, and freaks are from the devil.

omg exactly, stupid guilty demonic freak.

it's safe to say that michael jackson a nutjob, but it seemed like it was tough to tell fact from fiction in that case. i didn't pay a whole lot of attention to it, but the accuser's mother seemed shifty. i heard that she had tried to exploit other celebrities for money before, so if that's true then i'm not really sure what to say.

at any rate, it's weird and most likely wrong for jackson to let kids sleep in his bed with him (even if all they're doing sleeping) and the dude needs to get some help.

excerpt from conversation with girlfriend last night:

her: he's innocent? so what's he going to do now?
me: i guess go back to his ranch and have a celebratory orgy with a new harem of little boys.
her: sweaty little boys?
me: oh, you know it.

DAMN RIGHT! And death is the only reasonable punishment. Death by bleaching in his case.

Micheal Jackson has never ever hidden the fact that hes a fucking freak. If you're gonna blame someone, blame the dumbass parents for letting their lil tyke sleep over micheals.

Jacko: um... mrs. hernandez? can billy sleep over tonite?

Mom: I dunno...

Jacko: c'mon, I'll buy you a new house...

Mom: He will be there in 20 minutes!


Poor billy

Jacko: Tickle party anyone? heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee heeeeeeeeeeeeeee

you know you wanna

i got some delicious jesus juice right here

Jeperel ... I agree with you! ::hell freezes::

Well, I mostly agree. I say to blame the molester and blame the mother.

Now, I'm the first to say that Michael Jackson is the most guilty man in America... and I have only a few doubts that he did what he was accused of. However, the jurors were right in this case... and I think that this is a case that should be lauded for its dedication to blindness rather than being criticized because Michael Jackson IS a freak (which he totally is). THere was not enough evidence to convict him, the prosecution had NO solid, reliable whitnessess. The "victims" weren't victims, they, and their parents, were as much criminals as Jackson is (assuming he did do what we all know he did). THe defense used every means that it could, and they had the stronger, more solid case.

Hex, you said that he'd be in prison in the midwest ... Well, that does no credit to the judicial system that you think you have in your state. If he was found guilty, it would be a greater judicial travesty than that he was found not-guilty. When we think of Michael Jackson, we think of the crazed idiot who went on Dateline, or whatever it was, climbing trees, talking about how he sleeps with his little boy friends ... We think of this lost lunatic who must be molesting children. The jury had to put that all aside ... it's nearly impossible. THe one guy who nearly every American (with the exception of the lunies outside the courtroom), over the last 12 years, has been convinced is crazy is Michael Jackson ... and these jurors had to put years of mostly true stereotypes and assumptions behind them and judge this case with what was presented to them.

What was presented to them was questionable testimony, unreliable whitnesses, and not a single shred of legitimate evidence indicting Michael Jackson. I think he did it, we all think he did many bad things, but the prosecution has to prove that in court. They did not prove it. Hence, Not-Guilty.

Now where's the rolling rally for the parents to throw them in the clinker?

Oh, and one last thing.

Jackson has always said that he sleeps with little boys, but does nothing sexual to them. He loves little boys, but is never sexually involved, and that's never even a possibility. If any man says this, that he sleeps with boys, you know he's molesting them. However, if there's one person who is not molesting them ... because of his shear insanity ... it's Michael Jackson.

Mike, I agree with your first post and disagree with the second.

In many cultures it is accaptable and encouraged to sleep with children, family members specifically. In his case these children probably were his family and he wanted to be close to them. I think it is very possible that he never molested them, in bed at least. However, when it comes to something this heinous it is best to err on the side of caution. If someone our age (back then) claimed to be molested it wouldn't be a huge deal, but children need protected. If there is even a sliver of solid evidence it should be a guilty charge. But like you said, the evidence in this case is not solid whatsoever.

California has a growing conservative following.

That's because liberals are everything conservatives say about them.
And conservatives are everything liberals say about them.

el oh el bigs, too true.

ladies and gentlemen I point to exhibit A.

::points to Prince on a table humping a crucifix::

Well, in our culture, the culture that Michael Jackson lives in, it is not encouraged or acceptable to sleep with children ... especially if it is not necessary (many of those cultures have those stigmas because of their living conditions). It is generally unnacceptable to sleep with children, even if you are not doing anything malicious to them ... it is not only a bad habit (many parental counselors instruct parents that the moment your young child gets into bed with you [say if they're afraid, or whatever], you have to pick them up and bring them back to their own bed), but it's also just plain weird. I had trouble wording my point from my second post ... I meant to point that ... everybody knows it's weird, and when MJ says "This is love," we all say that he's just saying that to avoid getting convicted ... but ... if there's one person who actually thinks sleeping with a child is love, it'd be Michael Jackson. That's what I meant to say, really.

And ... I disagree with the point that if there's one sliver of solid evidence a person should be convicted. There is rarely any perfect evidence, so you'd be judging "solid evidence" by something that isn't solid, and too many people would be convicted on circumstantial evidence and false eye whitness testimony. There has to be more than just evidence of guilty, there has to be proof of guilt.

It definitely is weird of MJ to be sleeping with children, but I just wanted to show that just because WE think something is wrong doesn't necessarily mean it is. Some psychologists say sleeping with children is wrong, but when has a psychologist been absolutely right? Never. Even Freud, Erikson, and Piaget's theories are "sometimes" cases.