it's getting clearer that he's innnocent each day. and some peoplehere can not just accept it.

See what I hate is those people who say they think he's guilty, just seem to dissapear into thin air when some kind of evidence is shown. Where did those people that replied to MattyJam's thread go(the 'is he innocent or guilty, will he go to jail or not' topic)

LightOfArt said:

This thread has had 90 replies so far - are you trying to tell me they are all accepting an innocent MJ?

MJ is a guilty child fondling freak.
There - I haven't vanished into thin air & I think MJ is a guilty guilty guilty monster who is using his fame to pull the wool over his fans eyes since he knows they will look the other way no matter what MJ does.

I keep seeing MJ fans attack the mother of the VICTIM and think her problems wipe out any harm MJ has done to this poor child. This poor child that MJ supporters don't give one second caring about. I have not seen one MJ fan say this kid should be taken away from his mother. MJ fans could care less if this kid suffers. Thats why MJ thinks he can get away with this behaviour - because his fans don't care who MJ hurts as long as they can continue to worship at his decadent evil sicko feet.

thedoorkeeper said:

You mothafuckas want MJ to be in jail because of your personal hatred.

You don't for one second care if the boy is molested or not. I would attack that mother because she's a money hungry bitch. Did you know that the woman hired a lawyer BEFORE they met Michael to investigate chalid molestetion cases? I bet you did! do you care? NO. Why? Because you simply blindly WANT him to be a molester...

What's wrong with the world today?

You are typing all this shit about how a child fondling freak he is, without even trying to tell why you believe so

Woa.... Thats the first time i've seen light talk like that, you really pissed him off lol

but thedoor, what is the big deal man?
I give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but if your going to call MJ Guilty you NEED Proof
See In2 Tried..., It wasn't very good Proof but at least it started a nice debate...

your just mouthing off hatred for a person you don't even know?
Frustrated about your own personal vandetta against it so you masquerade that as sympathy for the Victim, when in reality you have no sympathy for the Victim as well as MJ Fans
You just want MJ in Jail, cause of your own personal reasons

I've never shown anytype of hatred Toward the Child,
Any...
Its the Mother... and yes she should lose custody,
I never shown Hatred Towards Jordy Chandler...
Some fans go overboard,
But im aware it wasn't his fault,
he was manipulated by the powers that be...

All i've ever done, was claim Jackson was Innocent, and thats all i'll ever say...

UNLESS i see proof otherwise...
I've read and sen proof that he's innocent...
But theirs not enough proof that he's guilty...

but obviously it doesn't take any proof to please you eh buddy?

your a reject from the dark ages who use to Burn Witches and jews cause you think there heretics

So why don't you relax you Incarnate Version of "Tomas De Torquemada"
and wait for a verdict like everyone else

If MJ fanatics want proof that he is guilty from those that believe he is guilty, then they must also provide proof that he is innocent if they wish to support such claims.

Bottom line is: we haven't seen the evidence, we know what the tabloids tell us, and that's about IT.

12 people saw fit to indict him - now let's see what emerges from the trial.

BURDEN OF PROOF...

Lies with the accusers. Jackson and his fanatics don't have to prove anything.

VoicesCarry said:

I believe I did back what I said.

VoicesCarry said:

Because only a fanatic would think that he was innocent.


Who are the reasonably sane and unbias folk.


Which is what we have been doing for the last year, thus the need for this sticky.


Which is why you haven't seen the evidence.


Which is proof enough of guilt.


Seeing that the prosecution has leaked their entire case: most of that information is now available for you to look over...or maybe you don't believe that's their entire case..maybe you believe (hope) that they have alot more. Do you know anything about the strength of MJ's Defense? Do you care? How a Janet fan couldn’t...I don't know.

It's like liking Levert and Disliking the Ojay's.
[Edited 2/5/05 10:45am]

papaa said:

Sorry, while we are all to assume innocence until proven otherwise, even in a court of law it is not only the prosecution that introduces evidence - and for good reason.

lilgish said:

I'm not one way or the other with MJ. I honestly don't give a shit anymore.

The essence of my post was that we should wait and see what evidence there is before we go around making claims of innocence or guilt. And I mean the evidence presented in court - as opposed to the smear campaigns directed against both Michael and the mother.

Are you going to deconstruct this post sentence fragment by sentence fragment, too?
[Edited 2/5/05 10:46am]

VoicesCarry said:

Not right now, I'm visiting http://cravingjanet.4.forumer.com/. That Jermaine Dupri is so cute.

APOLOGY ACCEPTED

The evidence a defence or defendant may introduce can be used to contradict evidence initially brought forward from the prosecution.

In a criminal case such as the one we're witnessing the burden is on the prosecution to prove the facts essential to their case.

Jackson's legal team may introduce evidence to the case if they seek to prove the accusers are liars aiming to extort money from their defendant. And this, as I'm sure you'll notice, is slightly distinct and different from proving Jackson's innocence as per his alleged conduct.

VoicesCarry said:

lilgish said:

papaa said:

You are Certainly Correct, The Burden of Proof rest solely on the State...
If Prosecution doe s not secure enough Evidence...
It does not matter if Jackson is innocent or guilty, The Case will be thrown out...

In the next court session, the dispute is solely on the evidence of prosecution, Defense claims that Prosecution has "Contaminated Evidence"
If this is true, Judge Melville will throw out the case before it even reaches The Trial Stages...
Based purely on Prosecution evidence...

Defense does not have to provide any information, proof if Prosecution evidence is indeed fallible...
If the evidence holds, than defense must battle claims ounder
"Habeas corpus" or Trial By Jury
but like i said if Judge sees that prosecution evidence is contaminated
He will Suspend Habeas corpus, and he will make the verdict himself and dismiss the case...

I personally hope this doesn't happen... i wan't to see how Defense can battle prosecution...
see if they could really prove Jackson innocent

i will say this

The reult of the proceedings will not infact Prove Jacksons Guilt Or Innocent...

He could be convicted guilty, and still be innocent
he could be aquitted and be guilty
The System does not work all the time...

My claims that he is innocent is based on personal politics and my knowledge of the case... i could be wrong...
[Edited 2/5/05 11:52am]

Luv4oneanotha said:

Are you a lawyer or something?
[Edited 2/5/05 12:01pm]

lilgish said:

nah, i took a few criminology courses in HS and freshman year of college , Interned in a Law Office and a protective service unit,
I wanted to be a lawyer, but the system was to currupt for my liking
but i know all my rights,
I think if i took the Bar Exam i'd probably Ace it,

im an Anthropology Major now lol

thanks for asking though

This photo is adorable.

Luv4oneanotha said:

So you'll be the resident legal expert on this thread. Theres a chance that your biased, but who in the media isn't.

You'll be interested to know that Ben Brafman came in the store I work at (in New York) a few months after he left the mj case. That Mofo was serious. I mean he would have eviscerated the family on cross examination. Here's what happened---

I Said: your that lawyer guy.
Brafman: Yea, What are you, a lawyer? (completely not joking)
I Said: No. Is Michael innocent or guilty?
Brafman:Innocent (completely not joking).
I Said:That's good.....lot's of unintelligible language.

This guy didn't crack a smile, he wasn't joking are trying to pacify an mj fan. He was all business. Why Michael or whoever fired him, I'll never know.

No matter what happens in the criminal case, there's gonna be a civil trail (and remember feldman is gone), so how much money are they going to sue for?
[Edited 2/5/05 12:38pm]

Anyone know when the MJ interview with Geraldo comes on?

lilgish said:

please, nobody listens to me on this Org,
they probably associate me with every other run of the mill fan,
im not really biased anymore... i use to be, but in my old age, i've grown tired of jacksons antics... My basis that he's innocent is based on how much i studied on the case...
I'd like jacksons music, whether he's guilty or innocent
From what i've heard, theirs just not enough Physical evidence...
in Law, your Innocent unless theirs evidence that your guilty
thus Innocent untill proven guilty
until i see stone cold evidence i will say he's innocence cause that is whats written in the constituition...

but anywayz
Brafman, is a fantastic lawyer, so is Mark Geregos...
Mj fired them both because Geregos was extremely busy with the peterson trial... not to mention the intervention by the Nation of islam was getting in the head of MJ... paranoid him to death, and made him fire his whole staff...
Notice that ever since they've been fired.. their all writing books about mj... to get back...

The Civil Suit... Will hold up for whatever the family is wishing to seek...
which is as much as they can get...
When I heard that Feldman Dropped the case that truly shocked me...
That means their was something about the accusers, that made him wan't to leave...
Usually a Civil Suit Lawyer... doesn't involve himself Criminally in a trial... it doesn't matter...
he gets his money either way...
so something truly shocking most of scared him away...

LightOfArt said:

True.
Nor do you.
You only want him to go away & stop bothering your IDOL.



What you are saying is that because she is a money hungry bitch that makes it impossible for MJ to have molested the child. Her actions completely exonerate MJ. I didn't realize that. My mistake.




Actually I was just responding to your previous post - you asked where were all the people who thought MJ was guilty & I raised my hand. I wanted to make sure you noticed me & it worked.
I just love to get you MJ supporters worked up.
And its so easy.

The only thing proven about all this yet is that he is NOT innocent until proven otherwise. Maybe/Hopefully in the court room but surely not in the mind of the masses.
That's sad but it's the way it is.

No, I DO care. He has a fucked up life, and I wish him all the best. Hope he goes to college and earns money and stuff And never sees his mother again who is ruining his life.


No what I'm saying is that because she hired a lawyer even before they met Michael means all this thing is set up. She planned the whole thing long time ago. And all those ever-changing timelines of the so called molestation



Still you can't give any reasons though can you? Blind belief, sad

Hey, you guys know how the boy said in his grand jury testimony that Michael wouldn't allow him and his siblings to keep track of time and dates at Neverland and would have them look at porn with him online?

Guess he forgot that the centrepiece of Neverland is a big-ass clock and on every computer there is a clock.

After reading some of the facts involved with this case, I dont think that the accuser has much of a case either.

LightOfArt said:

Does paying someone millions of dollars
to shutup prove MJ is guilty of molestation?
No.

Does hiring a lawyer before you go
to the police prove this woman is guilty?
No.

You can't have it both ways.

calldapplwondery83 said:

It's also sad when they vote..too.

squiddyren said:

The entire family is making that claim. Mike also bought them watches. I guess they didn't have a cellphone either

They did, that's how the family kept in contact with the alleged co-conspirators. How bout using the phone, call the police and say Hi I'm trapped at neverland or Hi Michael Jackson just licked my sons head on a plane in front of chris tucker.

thedoorkeeper said:

If you believe that?

Do you Believe This?

93 Settlement:




The document states that $15,331,250 was put into a trust fund for Jordan Chandler....the negligence allegation included in the lawsuit prompted Jackson's insurance company to step in and settle the case for him. This means that Jackson might not have paid the Chandlers anything. It also means that the insurance company most likely conducted their own investigation into the allegations and concluded that Jackson did not molest the boy; insurance companies generally do not settle if they believe the Defendant is liable. They will, however, settle for negligent behaviour.
[Edited 2/5/05 14:47pm]

lilgish said:

So fill me in here -
did MJ's insurance company put up the any of the $15,331,250.00
or was it all from MJ?

thedoorkeeper said:

No one knows, Lawyers have speculated its likelihood due to the wording of the settlement. Anyone familiar with law wanna take a stab at it?