Krytonite said:

I don't know. I think it is likely. Check my sig.

mrdespues said:

Jackson did wrong by helping this sickfuck and her little bastard

hey doesn't she look like Oceana ? ( the "Prince broke my sand dollar" thread)

mrdespues said:

If you're not insinuating that he's done anything, why say "I will not apologize for a paedophile"?

He could be guilty, he could be innocent. No one but Michael and the alledged victim(s) know for sure.



And only certain Orgers have lost touch with reality, FYI.

mrdespues said:

Since you posed the question following my outburst of lust towards Michael and Jackie, I figure I should answer you.

I'm not blind. If anything, anything in this case against Michael Jackson smacked of truth to me, I would be the first one to be up here posting "I think he's a great artist, but..." However, Michael Jackson is innocent until proven guilty and most of the signs at this stage of the case lend themselves to me thinking he's innocent. I have no reasons to make excuses for pedophilia and I think it's disgusting and despicable, but I will not automatically condemn Michael Jackson because he's been accused in a country where, historically, people like him (I think you can read into the subtext without me spelling it out) have been falsely accused/set up/framed for hundreds of years. I'm not going to feed into that hysteria.

I find it interesting that my reaction to a damn fine picture elicited such a moral conundrum in you, though.
[Edited 4/17/05 2:11am]

Pepina said:

(Though you don't have to justify your support to anyone Pepina, I'm certainly not going to.)

mrdespues said:

It seems likely that Michael Jackson is not Peter Pan, he is Gollum.

Your opinion really doesn't bother me at all, you're entitled to it, as i am to mine. Just don't hide behind the word 'likely'. As it appears you are.

Thought i'd post this, it's from the KOP board by a poster called AJmax58.

Unbelieveable!!

Just had an email back from Sky News replying to my email about using Steve Corbett to give live reports about whats happening in the courtroom!

They basically know he is biased, but say the viewers know this too!!

ALL THE VIEWERS KNOW IS WHAT THEY ARE TOLD!!!!!

If this case was reported extensively....and Joe Public had a broader and more varied account of whats happening in the courtroom....fine....but IT IS NOT BEING REPORTED, HARDLY AT ALL, (in the UK) AND WHEN IT IS its people like Steve Corbett spinning out of control!!!

Heres my email complaint to them, and their reply:-

Sky News,

I am writing to tell you about Steve Corbett, the reporter who writes for the Santa Maria Times, who you use to give live reports about the Mchael Jackson trial.

Its not over-exaggerating to say that Steve Corbetts `analysis` of the goings-on inside the courtroom are very favourable to the prosecution.
Even a day like yesterday, when Janet Arvizo was on the stand, while even the most hardened prosecution supporter admitted this woman was all over the place in her testimony....even contradicting what her children had said on the stand, Steve Corbett praised her to the hills!!

There is a reason for this....and I think Sky News should take this seriously and do a little research before putting this guy on the air again.

As a reporter for the Santa Maria Times, Steve Corbett has covered quite a few stories that have involved the D.A in this case, Tom Sneddon.
Even being critical of him in his professional conduct of particular cases.
One particular case of child molestation involved an officer who is also Tom Sneddon`s friend.
To cut a long story short, this officer was never charged, and to this day the family of this little girl wonder why Tom Sneddon didn`t investigate their case as agressively as he has persued Michael Jackson.

Steve Corbett went on Fox News, complaining about police misconduct during the first arraignment.
Shortly afterwards, Corbett recieved a phone call cfrom Sneddon himself who told him to stop reporting negative things about Santa Barbara and his office!

A bit far-fetched?

Well, this isn`t the first time Tom Sneddon has mis-used his position in authority....just ask Santa Barbara Defence lawyer Gary Dunlop....who successfully won police misconduct cases involving Sneddon`s office for a lot of his clients....which resulted in Sneddon trying to bring bogus charges against Dunlop, to get him out the way, so to speak.
This backfired on Sneddon as the charges were never founded, and Gary Dunlop right now is sueing the District Attorney`s office for character assasination amoungst other things.

This is probably why Gary Dunlop has recently been seen accompanying Michael Jackson to court.
Its no secret that Michael Jackson`s defence team have stated a vendetta against Jackson by the DA.....and it`ll be interesting to see what else Gary Dunlop knows about other misconduct involving Sneddon.

It`s easy to bring up the race-card in a case...but there is a good reason in this case involving Tom Sneddon.
There are many reports of intimidation of blacks in Santa Barbara by the DA`s office.
I`m sure if you do your own research, you`ll find just what I`m talking about.

Also, as the defence starts to present its case soon...you will hear about an Indian doctor who attended a function where the DA was present, he over-heard him say he was going to "get that nigger out of Santa Barbara"....of course meaning Michael Jackson.
It has also been established that one of Sneddon`s sons is a member of a white supremist group! And the apple doesn`t fall far from the tree!
Damn...didn`t Louis Theroux do a programme on Nazi`s.....you only have to watch that programme to see what is happening in this case!

Anyway, back to my point....Steve Corbett should NOT be giving his opinion on this case.

Its disgusting the way the media are reporting this case.
I don`t rely on you or the papers to tell me whats going on in court, I read the transcripts and go online to get a broader perspective.
It seems during cross examination, the reporters have their lunch-break!!
I`m expecting a media black-out once its the defence`s turn to present its case!!
As Michael Jackson`s spokewoman recently said, it seems like some reporters are in a different courtroom!!

I`m sure you`ve heard of Geraldo Riviara...who reports on Fox News.
From the start of this case, he has found the changing timeline and the family`s past similar charges to be false. And stated so openly on his show.
Geraldo has now been gagged by Fox News...he can no longer report on the Jackson case. I know this because Geraldo recently sent an email to www.thejusticesystem.com
Yet many other presenters, like John Gibson and Bill o`Reilly, who openly say on the air they think he is guilty, are still allowed to report on the case!!???
So its ok to say he`s guilty, but you can`t say he`s innocent!! (Even though "innocent until proven guilty" is the law over there!!)
How`s that for fair and balanced reporting?????

I expect the scandalous headlines and one-sided reporting from the tabloids, but you at Sky News are proving to be nothing better with your reporting of this case!

I hope things improve as this trial progresses.
I won`t hold my breath.

A disappointed viewer,
Mrs. M Jones

-----

Their reply:-


As you rightly point out, Steve Corbett's views are clearly biased...and we think our viewers are aware his is merely 'a take' on events in LA.



Thanks for your e-mail...Sky News Team

-----


[Edited 4/17/05 5:51am]

Pepina said:

She's got ya...

You claim your not insinuating
but you really are, you just don't wan't to seem callous and cold hearted by judging someone before a jury has even made a verdict.
in your eyes he's been judged and sentenced
Don't try to be coy,
Just say it

are you spineless?

Double post
[Edited 4/17/05 6:38am]

Marrk said:

Sad to say that this doesn't surprise me at all.

Gavin, Star, Blanca Francia and the bodyguard Ralph Chacon have all testified to seeing MJ either nude or semi-nude. The DA photographed MJ's body back in '93. None were asked to describe MJ's body under direct testimony at any stage.

Why is that i wonder?

Marrk said:

Yeah, I wonder.

Cloudbuster said:

I wonder too!

doctormcmeekle said:

...psst, what are we wondering about....?

http://www.steady-laughin.../slcom.htm

This site has beautiful footage of Mike with children at an orphanage....makes me wanna cry...I believe somewhere, if not in michael (hopefully in him), there exist a man with that kind of love for children. Children are very joyous.
http://s47.yousendit.com/...YD0B2CSOR

Luv4oneanotha said:

are you talking to me?

first of all pepina, you're TOO sensitive.

luv4oneanotha, i am not spineless at all. i'd love to think michael was innocent and i am very aware that the US is a country which loves to pick on unusual people (but no more than any other western country). but i am very concerned that michael just MAY have betrayed the hearts of millions and what is worse is that they are mainly KIDS.

.
[Edited 4/17/05 17:54pm]

Marrk said:

another blind fan, i see.

it's just an opinion.

.
[Edited 4/17/05 17:36pm]

meow85 said:

i'm sorry...are you thick? obviously i make no apology for a guy who is sick and takes advantage of little boys. end of story. nowhere have i said he has DONE this, i am just very aware that it is quite possible, apparently unlike a lot of you.

Marrk said:

Mike please leave Santa Barbra, let those those fucks have their pretend oasis 'while you recreate yours somewhere else.

EVERYBODY LISTEN TO MATT DRUDGE TONIGHT.


http://www.drudgereport.com/

mrdespues said:

Get off it man

we all know MJ isn't innocent

He hasn't been innocent since he became an adult
He's just clinging to a shattered childhood that no longer exists,
and thats unhealthy

You need to stop leading and just say

you think michael is a pedophile!
it isn't hard

instead of having this pseudo-agnostic like point of view
because your leaning toward him being guilty

if you think he is, Fine!
but don't try to masquerade it!

lot of people think he's guilty
Lot of people wan't him to be guilty

Make your own judgement

guilty or not you will always have your free speech

though i may hate what you say, i'll give my life to protect that right

mrdespues said:

I notice you didn't quite quote me fully. Where's your witty sig gone?

So i'm blind cause my opinion differs from yours. Do you seriously expect me just to drop everything and just agree with your viewpoint?

People with long memories on this board will remember i actually questioned my fanship with a thread on this very forum shortly after his arrest. There's been a lot that has happened since then. I've made it my business to find out as much as possible about what's been going on.

That's why he still has my full support. I could still be proven wrong, but i highly doubt it. So don't insult me by suggesting i've lost touch with reality or haven't thought this over.

Ta.

mrdespues said:

No one's asking you to make apologies for pedophiles. I don't claim to know the truth about what's going on with Michael, but it's pretty clear you've made up your mind that he's guilty and have taken it upon yourself to play judge, jury, and executioner.

Not you, not I, not anyone else but Michael and the alledged victims know what really happened. You have no more right to decide he must be guilty than someone else has to decide his inoccence.

http://www.prince.org/msg...sg_2522734
mrdespues has left the building

lilgish said:

I love that he didn't even stick around long enough to reply to everything. That's class.

doctormcmeekle said:

I wonder.

dag said:

that red on his arm is clashing with the suit

Any news about what´s going on in the court yet? With the Pope elections there´s nothing on CNN which is the only TV source for me over here.