New topic
PrintableMrSquiggle said: LightOfArt said: 
 Only a hardcore MJ fan would get that.hell yeah i'm a hardcore fan | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
massive amounts of porn in Michaels bedroom
That's weird... Maybe he planted it there to make it seem like he was straight? thats actually extremely untrue, Majority of pedophiles come from regular homes, they just have a hormone and neurological imbalnce that makes them lust after children, this can be reversed through massive therapy,
Forget what you've heard there is no Template for a Pedophile, They come in all shapes and sizes But Child psychologist have Examined Jackson, and claim he's the furthest from a Pedophile on 1 accounts 1. He actually cares about children, pedophiles only see children as sex objects and degrade them and lust after them Did you just say there is no template for a paedophile and then say that he does not fit the paedophile template? Michael Jackson Doesn't have a birthmark on his penis, this is a lie!
in 1993 Jordy Chandler was asked to describe Jacksons penis and Claimed there was a birthmark, When Police Searched jacksons body all they found where depigmented skin cells from his skin disease Vitiligo,Thus the Child didn't accurately Describe the penis Oh that's ridiculous. Michael Jackson is out of jail because the kid didn't know the correct scientific name for the mark on his penis that he saw while being molested. HE DID IT. in a court of law there is ONLY evidence and Proof,
You cannot base your assumptions on his meer apearence or the fact that he has a ranch which can attract children, its absolutely Irrelevent!. unless you have Hardcore evidence, your case is pretty much shot Unless your an extremely good prosecutor you might have a chance But Jackson's Defense is piled up with so much Evidence and wittnesses against the prosecution its going to be a trial bloodbath if it goes to court True, a court of law can only be evidence and proof. That's the way it always should be. Court of law aside: Do you really think he's isn't guilty? It would certaintly explain a lot of things if he was. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
That's weird... Maybe he planted it there to make it seem like he was straight?
Michael was out of the city when they collected them(LasVegas wah that?) Oh that's ridiculous. Michael Jackson is out of jail because the kid didn't know the correct scientific name for the mark on his penis that he saw while being molested. HE DID IT.
You must be kidding. "Correct scientific name of the mark"
He described his penis, and it didnt match. it's easy as a b c! Don't talk stuff like he molested him, he did it etc. it's all speculation If you think he is guilty, explain to me why are the dates of socalled molestation keeps changing? Why? When exactly did Mr. Jackson molested you? Gavin(accuser): Last week. Are you sure? Gavin: Yeah But last week you said Jackson is innocent in Living With Mj Documentary. Gavin: Yeah but he served me with that Jesus Juice before we were interviewed so I didnt know what I was talking about. Oh ok. That's exactly what's going on I tell ya. HOAX  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Michael was out of the city when they collected them(LasVegas wah that?)
it's odd though... either he genuinely jacks off, or he showed it to the boys... but then, why would you show straight porn to get boys to have gay sex? maybe it was just to get them hard. You must be kidding. "Correct scientific name of the mark"
He described his penis, and it didnt match. it's easy as a b c! Technically, yes. Whether Michael Jackson is in jail or not depends on whether the mark on his penis is described as a "mark" - which would be consistent with "depigmented skin cells" - or a "birthmark", which scientifically it is not. That's a disgrace to the legal system. We both know he did it, and you fams are in denial. And the airport camera incident proved that we'd probably do the same thing if it was Prince. If you think he is guilty, explain to me why are the dates of socalled molestation keeps changing? Why?
it'd probably be hard to get the exact date something as traumatic as that. maybe he can't remember. changing dates don't mean the whole case is bunk. But last week you said Jackson is innocent in Living With Mj Documentary.[/b]
As if Gavin would've told the truth while holding hands with the man who molested him, in his house, with cameras rolling. [This message was edited Mon Jul 12 6:56:46 2004 by MrSquiggle] [This message was edited Mon Jul 12 6:59:30 2004 by MrSquiggle] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MrSquiggle said: estelle1981 said: That's a very good point. People also have sex in elevators, the park, public bathrooms, etc. In fact, when I was in New York City a year ago, a married couple got caught having sex in a church. I guess MJ should just never leave his house and never talk or interact with any children, including his own. The thing that has me soo pissed off about the MJ case is that R. Kelly did the same shit to little girls and nobody is boycotting his albums and calling him a pedophil. In fact, I've met people who have said things like, "Oh, well that girl didn't look 14" or "Those girls wanted to have sex with R. Kelly". That disgusts me more than anything. Until I see evidence that MJ is a pedophile, because I've seen the R. Kelly video, I'm not going to be saying that the man is guilty. Yeah, he should definetely be prosecuted as well. But if R.Kelly is guilty, he isn't anywhere near as bad of a paedophile as MJ, because she was 14 and girls that age can look much older. Morally, it's much better to sleep with a older-looking, sexually aware 14-year-old than hundreds of innocent, sick 5-year-old boys. You must have never seen the video, because 1) it was more than one girl and they ranged in age between 12 and 14 and 2) one of them clearly looked 14 (very little and undeveloped), while another girl was the 14-year old niece of one of his roadies. Maybe you should research a topic more and stop being a biased jackass. A pedophile is a pedophile and that boy that MJ supposedly molested was 14 or 15 himself when the incident supposedly happened, because it supposedly happened three years ago and in an article that I just read the boy just turned 18 this year. From what your saying, the girls might have wanted to or liked having sex with R. Kelly.  Well, the boy might have liked having sex with older men, because homosexuality has no age. For you to say that R. Kelly isn't as bad as MJ makes you look like a complete chavinistic pig....sorry, but I call it as I see it. It's okay for men to molest and take advantage of teenage girls, but it's not okay for men to do the same thing to teenage boys?????  Man, you need some serious therapy, for real. Regardless of whether those young girls wanted to have sex with R.Kelly, he should have been a man and said "No", just like Micheal should have said "no", if he is found guilty of the crime.SPREAD LOVE UNTIL THE SUN'S FINAL RISE--The Duality a.k.a. "WYNTER SKYE" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MrSquiggle said: Luv4oneanotha said: Basically cause it says you don't know Shizzle My nizzle Holocaust avenue,2009 What about my question: Has there ever been anyone in history who sleeps every night in the same bed as unrelated sick children without doing something sexual? Does Mother Theresa count? In life, I'm sure she had slept in bed with many sick people, including children but I doubt she was doing it for sexual reasons. Since you feel this way about MJ, I hope you feel the same way about all those Catholic priests who actually admitted to molesting dozens of 8 and 9 year old little boys. But, society seems to have forgiven those perverts because they are ordained men of God.  Disgusting. What these "holy men" (bullshit) did sickens me 10 times more than what Micheal is being accused of. Every single one of them deserves to rot in prison.[This message was edited Mon Jul 12 11:24:42 2004 by estelle1981] SPREAD LOVE UNTIL THE SUN'S FINAL RISE--The Duality a.k.a. "WYNTER SKYE" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MrSquiggle said:[quote] massive amounts of porn in Michaels bedroom
That's weird... Maybe he planted it there to make it seem like he was straight?
don't be stupid, if he wanted to make it look as if he where straight he would of bought them himself instead of hiring his nephews and personel to buy it for him, Secondly MJ wasn't aware of the Raid before hand so that disproves the theory the main tactic of a Raid is to Catch the victim off guarde and search the premises, at that time he has no time to cover up his tracks, Buy a Police tactic books! Oh that's ridiculous. Michael Jackson is out of jail because the kid didn't know the correct scientific name for the mark on his penis that he saw while being molested. HE DID IT.
the police had drawings of Jacksons penis, which included Markings in his upper torso that Jordy Described, When the search of his body went through, there were no markings, no distuiguishing marks,Nothing, Michael was clean in 1993, no evidence against him, nothing why the settlement? A Young Johnny Cochrans Fault! When Cochran and Fields , Jacksons law team at the time, field 4 motions for the court, 2 against discovery in the case, 1 for jacksons testimony, and 1 against a speedy trial, they where denied all 4 motions, even though 2 of the motions were civil rights protocal, they where still denied because the case was involving a child under 16. Cochran saw this and influenced Michael to settle with the alleged victims, basically saying it would be quicker and less hurtful to his career if he settled, Jacksons other Attorney Fields and his Private investigator Pellicano, Resigned because they did not want anypart of the settlement, they claimed that jackson should try and bring these "Extortionist" down, But michael at the time was suffering from mental anguish and gave in to the 20 million dollar settlement Evan Chandler , the childs father offered True, a court of law can only be evidence and proof. That's the way it always should be.
Court of law aside: Do you really think he's isn't guilty? It would certaintly explain a lot of things if he was. I KNOW he's innocent i've been studying this for a long time son, this has nothing to my personal feelings toward him i also like R.Kelly , but sadly he really IS a pedophile Michael is not This Case is EXACTLY like the 1993 case, Bitter child custody battle, The Mother has a history of Extortion, the same players are involved, Larry Feldman was the lawyer of jordy chandler in 93 and the current lawyer of Gavin, The Mother filed for a civil suit first, which basically means she has monetary motives the Allegations went through a third party advisor, a Therapist, the same therapist in 1993 Any legal expert that explors all the factors in this case knows that it involves extortion If MJ was indeed a child molester like every other Child predator he would have tracks, which he doesn't my friend this the last resort of a retiring d.A. who wants a prize on his mantle, he doesn't care if Michael is innocent or guilty, but its not his fault Prosecutors don't care, They have to do there best to MAKE him guilty thats there job But there's something about sneddon thats sneaky, The Judge is keeping a close eye at him because of his recent antic Sneddon was a civil righst breaker, and is known for tamering with the jury pool so he's dirty... the reason they moved the case to santa maria was one of 2, Sneddon could be easily watched, and the jury pool will be conservative and not easily influenced Forget about the child molestation charge, because this will eventually be dropped the only thing im paticularly worried about is the Conspiracy Charge alot of people involed in it even a few celebs... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
estelle1981 said: MrSquiggle said: Yeah, he should definetely be prosecuted as well. But if R.Kelly is guilty, he isn't anywhere near as bad of a paedophile as MJ, because she was 14 and girls that age can look much older. Morally, it's much better to sleep with a older-looking, sexually aware 14-year-old than hundreds of innocent, sick 5-year-old boys. You must have never seen the video, because 1) it was more than one girl and they ranged in age between 12 and 14 and 2) one of them clearly looked 14 (very little and undeveloped), while another girl was the 14-year old niece of one of his roadies. Maybe you should research a topic more and stop being a biased jackass. A pedophile is a pedophile and that boy that MJ supposedly molested was 14 or 15 himself when the incident supposedly happened, because it supposedly happened three years ago and in an article that I just read the boy just turned 18 this year. From what your saying, the girls might have wanted to or liked having sex with R. Kelly. Well, the boy might have liked having sex with older men, because homosexuality has no age. For you to say that R. Kelly isn't as bad as MJ makes you look like a complete chavinistic pig....sorry, but I call it as I see it. It's okay for men to molest and take advantage of teenage girls, but it's not okay for men to do the same thing to teenage boys????? Man, you need some serious therapy, for real. Regardless of whether those young girls wanted to have sex with R.Kelly, he should have been a man and said "No", just like Micheal should have said "no", if he is found guilty of the crime.I don't know anything about the R.Kelly case. I'm the first one to admit it. He is irrelevant to the discussion. From what you have just told me, I agree he should be prosecuted for the same reasons that MJ should be. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
estelle1981 said: Does Mother Theresa count? In life, I'm sure she had slept in bed with many sick people, including children but I doubt she was doing it for sexual reasons.  I suppose so, but probably only because that's all they had.
Since you feel this way about MJ, I hope you feel the same way about all those Catholic priests who actually admitted to molesting dozens of 8 and 9 year old little boys. But, society seems to have forgiven those perverts because they are ordained men of God.
Disgusting. What these "holy men" (bullshit) did sickens me 10 times more than what Micheal is being accused of. Every single one of them deserves to rot in prison.
[This message was edited Mon Jul 12 11:24:42 2004 by estelle1981] I agree completely. Just because there are worse people in the world is no reason not to prosecute MJ. And since you feel this way about catholic priests, I hope you feel the same way about Michael Jackson. Society seems to forgiven this obvious chicken hawk because he is a world-class entertainer. Disgusting. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MrSquiggle said: estelle1981 said: Does Mother Theresa count? In life, I'm sure she had slept in bed with many sick people, including children but I doubt she was doing it for sexual reasons. I suppose so, but probably only because that's all they had.
Since you feel this way about MJ, I hope you feel the same way about all those Catholic priests who actually admitted to molesting dozens of 8 and 9 year old little boys. But, society seems to have forgiven those perverts because they are ordained men of God.
Disgusting. What these "holy men" (bullshit) did sickens me 10 times more than what Micheal is being accused of. Every single one of them deserves to rot in prison.
[This message was edited Mon Jul 12 11:24:42 2004 by estelle1981] I agree completely. Just because there are worse people in the world is no reason not to prosecute MJ. And since you feel this way about catholic priests, I hope you feel the same way about Michael Jackson. Society seems to forgiven this obvious chicken hawk because he is a world-class entertainer. Disgusting.try replying my posts tiger.... or is it that you can't? hehe | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MrSquiggle said: Court of law aside: Do you really think he's isn't guilty? It would certaintly explain a lot of things if he was. Squiggle, u r funny. First you want the 'blinded' fans to get back to reality and now u r saying we shouldn't look at the facts? Please explain yourself. BlueNote | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BlueNote said: MrSquiggle said: Court of law aside: Do you really think he's isn't guilty? It would certaintly explain a lot of things if he was. Squiggle, u r funny. First you want the 'blinded' fans to get back to reality and now u r saying we shouldn't look at the facts? Please explain yourself. BlueNote Blue this guy needs to face reality! like all the other anti-mjs they avoid all the facts and just want him to be guilty its some kind of personal affliction if your going to have an opinion about something at least have facts to back them up what facts do you have squigg we're dying to hear them, (if you have any) Only in this world will people get a sense of euphoria by Accusing someone of allegations theyd on't have the mind capacity nor the sources to comprehend see what the world has come to?
Prince said it best "Whats Wrong With The World Today" [This message was edited Tue Jul 13 4:27:09 2004 by Luv4oneanotha] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Luv4oneanotha said: BlueNote said: Squiggle, u r funny. First you want the 'blinded' fans to get back to reality and now u r saying we shouldn't look at the facts? Please explain yourself. BlueNote Blue this guy needs to face reality! like all the other anti-mjs they avoid all the facts and just want him to be guilty its some kind of personal affliction if your going to have an opinion about something at least have facts to back them up what facts do you have squigg we're dying to hear them, (if you have any) Only in this world will people get a sense of euphoria by Accusing someone of allegations theyd on't have the mind capacity nor the sources to comprehend see what the world has come to?
Prince said it best "Whats Wrong With The World Today" [This message was edited Tue Jul 13 4:27:09 2004 by Luv4oneanotha] I don't want to bash squiggle, but he has to base his opinion upon something. BlueNote | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BlueNote said: MrSquiggle said: Court of law aside: Do you really think he's isn't guilty? It would certaintly explain a lot of things if he was. Squiggle, u r funny. First you want the 'blinded' fans to get back to reality and now u r saying we shouldn't look at the facts? Please explain yourself. BlueNote I believe that in reality, he is guilty. The facts provided are all legal terms that weasel him out of the charge, so he cannot be prosecuted by a court of law. There is nothing that actually proves he didn't do it as such. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
lol then can you prove something substanial that MAKES him guilty lol
cause i can come up with a whole bunch of proof that hes not guilty but can you come up with something that does prove him guilty and if you can't you might as well not reply, hehe | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Luv4oneanotha said:[quote] MrSquiggle said: the police had drawings of Jacksons penis, which included Markings in his upper torso that Jordy Described, When the search of his body went through, there were no markings, no distuiguishing marks,Nothing, Michael was clean in 1993, no evidence against him, nothing why the settlement? A Young Johnny Cochrans Fault! When Cochran and Fields , Jacksons law team at the time, field 4 motions for the court, 2 against discovery in the case, 1 for jacksons testimony, and 1 against a speedy trial, they where denied all 4 motions, even though 2 of the motions were civil rights protocal, they where still denied because the case was involving a child under 16. Cochran saw this and influenced Michael to settle with the alleged victims, basically saying it would be quicker and less hurtful to his career if he settled, Jacksons other Attorney Fields and his Private investigator Pellicano, Resigned because they did not want anypart of the settlement, they claimed that jackson should try and bring these "Extortionist" down, But michael at the time was suffering from mental anguish and gave in to the 20 million dollar settlement Evan Chandler , the childs father offered Mental anguish no excuse, he should've gone through with the trial to prove it to us all. I'd certaintly have a lot more respect for him. And it's possible that the father could've been a greedy bastard who put money over putting the man who molested his son to justice. This Case is EXACTLY like the 1993 case,
Bitter child custody battle, The Mother has a history of Extortion, the same players are involved, Larry Feldman was the lawyer of jordy chandler in 93 and the current lawyer of Gavin, The Mother filed for a civil suit first, which basically means she has monetary motives the Allegations went through a third party advisor, a Therapist, the same therapist in 1993 Any legal expert that explors all the factors in this case knows that it involves extortion But the mother has made it very clear that she does not want "the devil's money". If MJ was indeed a child molester
like every other Child predator he would have tracks, which he doesn't What 'tracks'? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Luv4oneanotha said: lol then can you prove something substanial that MAKES him guilty lol
cause i can come up with a whole bunch of proof that hes not guilty but can you come up with something that does prove him guilty and if you can't you might as well not reply, hehe Explain this: They found a digital camera in the Neverland master bathroom. http://www.thesmokinggun....turn1.html | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
what do you want me to explain, he's now allowed to have a digital Camera? Wtf?
hehe [This message was edited Tue Jul 13 17:40:59 2004 by Luv4oneanotha] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Luv4oneanotha said: what do you want me to explain, he's now allowed to have a digital Camera? Wtf?
hehe [This message was edited Tue Jul 13 17:40:59 2004 by Luv4oneanotha] Give me a non-incriminating reason why he would have a digital camera in his bathroom. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MrSquiggle said: Luv4oneanotha said: what do you want me to explain, he's now allowed to have a digital Camera? Wtf?
hehe [This message was edited Tue Jul 13 17:40:59 2004 by Luv4oneanotha] Give me a non-incriminating reason why he would have a digital camera in his bathroom.The same reason i do lol because where else would you put it? lol lol if it was child pornography dude, they would have charged him for child pornography lol dont tell me thats what u thought dude? lol | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Luv4oneanotha said: MrSquiggle said: Give me a non-incriminating reason why he would have a digital camera in his bathroom.The same reason i do lol because where else would you put it? lol lol if it was child pornography dude, they would have charged him for child pornography lol dont tell me thats what u thought dude? lol What would he have been photographing in his bathroom? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
why assume he's photographing something in his bathroom? lol
he probably took some pictures when he was in vegas with his children and left them in his bedroom? lol its not a big deal lol if it was anything of the sinister kind toards children authoroties would have to report it as child pornography and add that to his indictment they confiscated a whole bunch of crap from his room Computers, letters its just procedure, Pictures can be considered as evidence, but they can't withhold that evidence as "Surprise evidence" or else they can be held in contempt of court and they would have to disregard the evidence so i assure you if there was anything of that nature in the digital pictures, they would be forced to report it and you would know I.E. when they raided R.kellys homes they found Digital cameras full of child Pornography They where forced to add counts of child pornography if there was anything in those cameras itw ould been in the public already is there anything else ya got? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Luv4oneanotha said: why assume he's photographing something in his bathroom? lol
he probably took some pictures when he was in vegas with his children and left them in his bedroom? BATHROOM. Not bedroom. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MrSquiggle said: Luv4oneanotha said: why assume he's photographing something in his bathroom? lol
he probably took some pictures when he was in vegas with his children and left them in his bedroom? BATHROOM. Not bedroom. my bad lol i dunno man lol thats his problem maybe he was taking a piss and forgot the camera there lol its beside the point maybe his help put it there maybe he likes to take pictures of himself in the mirror lol hes an egomaniac lol it doesn't matter as long as there was nothing in the camera lol now is there anything else lol? please tell me u have more then that lol | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MrSquiggle said: Of course they didn't use his name, but it was an obvious parallel and it's great to hear a rational anti-MJ opinion for once. There's this ultra-rich man in NYC who owns a chain of toy stores and a mansion full of toys, rides and kid things. He donates large amounts to kids charities. Recently, a boy has been found posting psychopathic threats on a slasher chatroom and torturing his sister's dolls. When he's interrogated, he ends up confessing that he was molested by the rich guy and his parents made a "deal" to hush up for a huge amount of money. He gets arrested and accuses the police of "brutality". People say "How could he have done it, he's such a nice man, gives so much to charities". Another case comes out against the rich guy, but it ends up being a scam - so he calls himself the victim and gets off free. At the end, the SVU team are watching a victory party at his mansion with all these kids around him, and they say "Don't worry, he'll give us plenty more chances". So great to hear someone stand up to this outrage and mass denial. Paedophiles can be entertaining too.
that actually played here on Australian TV last Thursday night...it was so depressing coz he got away with it  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Natisse said: MrSquiggle said: Of course they didn't use his name, but it was an obvious parallel and it's great to hear a rational anti-MJ opinion for once. There's this ultra-rich man in NYC who owns a chain of toy stores and a mansion full of toys, rides and kid things. He donates large amounts to kids charities. Recently, a boy has been found posting psychopathic threats on a slasher chatroom and torturing his sister's dolls. When he's interrogated, he ends up confessing that he was molested by the rich guy and his parents made a "deal" to hush up for a huge amount of money. He gets arrested and accuses the police of "brutality". People say "How could he have done it, he's such a nice man, gives so much to charities". Another case comes out against the rich guy, but it ends up being a scam - so he calls himself the victim and gets off free. At the end, the SVU team are watching a victory party at his mansion with all these kids around him, and they say "Don't worry, he'll give us plenty more chances". So great to hear someone stand up to this outrage and mass denial. Paedophiles can be entertaining too.
that actually played here on Australian TV last Thursday night...it was so depressing coz he got away with it happens alot in life! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Luv4oneanotha said: MrSquiggle said: BATHROOM. Not bedroom. my bad lol i dunno man lol thats his problem maybe he was taking a piss and forgot the camera there lol its beside the point maybe his help put it there maybe he likes to take pictures of himself in the mirror lol hes an egomaniac lol it doesn't matter as long as there was nothing in the camera lol now is there anything else lol? please tell me u have more then that lol I can see you're desperately trying to divert the discussion. Let's stick to the point at hand. He could've easily uploaded pictures to another source, maybe a computer, and wiped the images from the camera. And it definetely makes him suspicious. I think the problem is that we're arguing about different things. You say that it cannot be legally proven that he did it, and you're probably right. I'm arguing that he actually did it, based on reasonable conclusions from evidence and circumstance, regardless of whether the courts can prove it or not. It's a failure of the legal system that he isn't in jail right now, or at least a mental asylum. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MrSquiggle said: Luv4oneanotha said: my bad lol i dunno man lol thats his problem maybe he was taking a piss and forgot the camera there lol its beside the point maybe his help put it there maybe he likes to take pictures of himself in the mirror lol hes an egomaniac lol it doesn't matter as long as there was nothing in the camera lol now is there anything else lol? please tell me u have more then that lol I can see you're desperately trying to divert the discussion. Let's stick to the point at hand. He could've easily uploaded pictures to another source, maybe a computer, and wiped the images from the camera. And it definetely makes him suspicious. I think the problem is that we're arguing about different things. You say that it cannot be legally proven that he did it, and you're probably right. I'm arguing that he actually did it, based on reasonable conclusions from evidence and circumstance, regardless of whether the courts can prove it or not. It's a failure of the legal system that he isn't in jail right now, or at least a mental asylum. who are you Joeseph Stalin? you haven't proven anything, there are no reasonable conclusions all you have is Conspiracy theory, which without anything substanial means nothing! well i suggest you go live in a dictatorship,cause this is the united states which abides by the law (sometimes) if the event can't be proven legally it generally didn't exist, so either deal with it, or just leave the man alone If he is guilty its the problem of law enforcement, I assure you he's not cause if he was guilty i highly doubt the mother of the said child would go through with a civil suit for 15 million its time you wake up , "Money makes the world go round" 1 years ago i did a poll at my college, if they had the chance to extort money from a Celebrity, would they take advantage of it? 8 out of 10 people would always say yes Money makes the world go round... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MrSquiggle said: Luv4oneanotha said: lol then can you prove something substanial that MAKES him guilty lol
cause i can come up with a whole bunch of proof that hes not guilty but can you come up with something that does prove him guilty and if you can't you might as well not reply, hehe Explain this: They found a digital camera in the Neverland master bathroom. http://www.thesmokinggun....turn1.html you explain me this then, http://www.mjnewsonline.com/mj.txt 
coz u're showing no proof mate. u desperately WANT him to be guilty. that's kinda sick coz u want a innocent man in jail and a child be molested and don't give me that "I am a fan of his, I'm not a hater" crap coz i'm not buying that | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
You people are crazy!
You can't OWN the sun! The sun owns YOU! It belongs to us ALL! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |