vainandy said:

Oh My God. Wow, I've seen it all now.

purplecam said:

This is what it sounds like when.....women go bonkers.


M

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

I pray that he has finally learned his lesson.And I hope that his friends,family,advisors and even his fans make sure that he has learned his lesson.

langebleu said:

Damnit. You beat me to it. I had saved up that line for this day.
[Edited 6/14/05 1:29am]

rudeboynpg said:

Nancy Grace makes me laugh


She was so certain that MJ was gonna get convicted,and when that didn't happen,she got all mad and bitchy...lol...she'll probably take a week off just to deal with her disappointment.

Did you see it when she ate the crow sandwich? That was too funny.

HALLELUJAH!!!!!

vainandy said:

purplecam said:

He has some scary fans... did you see those people outside of the court.... and the countless MJ impersonators.... they're just as sad as the person they're portraying....

You know some of you bitches, who NEVER discussed the case here when evidences were coming out, but now suggest that he was guilty, make me sick to my stomach

EAT THIS!

LightOfArt said:

u dont have to have discussed the case to,.....

SPOT A GUILTY MAN SNEEKING OUT OF COURT !!! (looked a guilty man to ne)

it could only happen in wacko jacko land !

would the jury lettheir kids stay over at neverland ?

LightOfArt said:

The jury has declared him "not guilty". Everyone still has a right to think otherwise you know.... you sound like a freakin' zealot!

sosgemini said:

yeah what a fuckin kook!!!!

WOOOOO HOOOOO!!!!! IM SO HAPPY!!!!! EAT THAT YOU IDIOTS WHO THOUGHT HE WAS GUILTY!!!!! NOTHING YOU PEOPLE CAN SAY WILL BRING ME DOWN SO DONT BOTHER WITH YOUR 'HES REALLY GUILTY' SHIT COS THE VERDICT IS INNOCENT!!!!! YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH!!!!! INNOCENT INNOCENT MIKE

Not guilty my ass. Like MrSquiggle said, where there's smoke there's usually fire. 365 days sleeping with a kid watching tv and eating popcorn? Not bloody likely.

I'm sorry but as much as I love Michael's music and wish I could listen to it without feeling weird, I can't discredit my own intelligence that easily.

I wouldnt give a shit what everybody thinks at the moment



INNOCENT!!

JohnP said:

Do you accept that the evidence squarely failed to show guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

JohnP said:

yeah, but the thing is the boy who said he slept with him for 365 day, went on the witness stand and said nothing ever happened.

TheFrog said:

Yep. But no evidence doesn't mean a thing. Reasonable doubt remains.

.
[Edited 6/14/05 3:18am]

LightOfArt said:

means nothing.

JohnP said:

ooh I see now

It seems that a lot of you just wanted it to be over; for the verdict to be Not Guilty regardless of the truth. That's just blind fan-hood. You just want a simple solution. In my opinion there isn't one because there's every chance in the world that Michael Jackson has covered his tracks very well.

I don't know if he did it for sure - how can anyone? But I have a gut feeling that will not go away...I think it is very likely he's getting away with something.

You got that right.....

LightOfArt said:

and that's funny because....?

is it not possible that the kid could have lied? or that there were other children too scared to come forward who had nothing to do with the case at all?

i'm not saying i'm RIGHT...i'd just love for you guys to give me some reason to believe that Michael Jackson is COMPLETELY innocent of child-molestation charges. despite his obvious image problems, there's been so much stink around Michael for the past ten or so years about kids....i just find it very SUSPICIOUS despite the fact that Michael is one helluva nutty guy who makes great music.

there's the jury for the "norms" and then there's the jury for celebs...anyone with half a brain realises which is the more lenient.

.
[Edited 6/14/05 3:34am]

JohnP said:

Of course a lack of evidence cannot prove that nothing happened.

I guess one either believes in innocence until proven guilty, or doesn't.

JohnP said:

I agree with you.But if there is any reasonable doubt,you can't convict.The prosecution failed to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.The jury reached the right verdict.

TheFrog said:

Well in this case, I guess I don't. With all due respect, I think it's too simplistic.

While "innocent until proven guilty" may work with most offenders, Michael Jackson is not your average offender. As someone who as suffered his own mental afflictions and is now "well", I can tell you that Michael Jackson is clearly an imbalanced person (but most people can see that anyway of course!) who just might be believing his own lies.

Just my opinion.

.
[Edited 6/14/05 3:45am]

DavidEye said:

I suppose they did. FOR NOW.

JohnP said:

But see you havent followed the case. He was a 24 year old man and was talking about 93.

The evidence...uhm how about...ALL the prosecution witnesses were either sued by or sued MJ in the past and got thousands of dollars from tabloids...

I mean really no matter what I say you will never be convinced of his innocence. which is perfectly fine...BUT this case proved(if you followed it) that he was more likely to be innnocent than guilty

I think Michael's life style was prosectued in this trial. Very cleary seen, that one juror said he thought he was guilty because he found it hard sleepovers were non-sexual

JohnP said:

It works both ways though.Nobody can say for sure that he didn't do it,but nobody can say for sure that he did do it.It was up to the prosecution to prove BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that MJ did it.They failed to do so.They had a weak,shaky case to begin with.Their witnesses were not credible.If I were a juror,I would never convict someone unless I was 100% sure that they committed the crime.In any case,I'm just glad this is over.




...
[Edited 6/14/05 3:50am]