New topic
PrintableSassyBritches said: VinnyM27 said: They should be ashamed of themselves but especially that "Don't snap your fingers at me. lady" bitch who winked at the cameras. It was reported she was going to do a book and here is the twist. You better not hope there is a hell, Grandma! There is a word for her. It starts with a C ends with a T and the word is cunt!
she's one of the "book" sellers? you've got to be kidding me?!  oh, how the tides turn when the dollar's earned. she's old enough to know better.It was hinted this woman was working on a book deal while the trail was still going on! She apparently also has a grandchild who is a registered sex offender. That bitch is 24-7! It's like she wants to be Anna Nicole or something! All I have to say to her....Don't snap your fingers at me, lady! | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
LightOfArt said: they're offered a million $ each. Who wouldnt change their mind for that much?
From what I heard and from her comments, it was heavily suggested her book was going to be in his favor! Guess money talks and "snapping" walks.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
  
 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Thanx Ellie,
I just wanted to post them. There goes her last bit of credibilty. What a shame. 
BlueNote | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
And another one... 
Another Jackson juror expresses doubt Katarina Carls changed vote to not guilty citing reasonable doubt The Associated Press Updated: 1:22 p.m. ET Aug. 10, 2005 LOS ANGELES - One of three jurors who initially wanted to convict Michael Jackson said she believes the entertainer is a child molester but joined in the unanimous verdict exonerating him because she believed there was reasonable doubt in this case. Two Jackson jurors, Eleanor Cook and Ray Hultman, said Monday as they began publicizing book deals that they believe Jackson molested his 15-year-old accuser and now regret finding him not guilty in the June verdict. They said on the new MSNBC show "Rita Cosby: Live and Direct," that they went along with the other panelists because the jury foreman threatened to have them removed. Appearing on the show Tuesday, Juror Katarina Carls said she initially agreed with Cook and Hultman that Jackson was guilty, but decided she could not convict because of jury instructions that he must be acquitted if there was reasonable doubt. She said it was possible that Jackson's accuser was lying. "I kept asking myself, is there any slight possibility that this boy might lie at all? And my answer was yes," she said. Cook and Hultman's reversals have no effect on the verdict, which cannot be appealed. Jackson's lawyer, Tom Mesereau, has ridiculed their accounts, saying they may be seeking fame and fortune. Another juror appearing on the show Tuesday, Mike Stevens, disputed Cook's claim that she was intimidated into going along. He said Cook told another juror at one point that she couldn't be swayed. "She said, 'Honey, I'm 79 years old. I can do whatever I want to do,'" Stevens said. "And so how can she say that she felt threatened when she came up with a comment like that?" Stevens said foreman Paul Rodriguez did not threaten to remove Cook for holding out, but rather for giving personal opinions. "What I heard why that was said was because she kept making remarks ... involving her own opinion and the way her heart felt," Stevens said. "You're supposed to follow what the law says and what the evidence shows, not what your heart feels. Am I right?" Rodriguez did not return calls for comment. Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. © 2005 MSNBC.com Been gone for a minute, now I'm back with the jump off | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Two of the jurors in the Michael Jackson trial apparently have had a change of heart, insisting on a television talk show this week that the pop star was guilty of molestation charges but they were too intimidated by the jury foreman to vote against the majority.
One of the jurors told MSNBC's Rita Crosby that "it's never too late to tell the truth." We beg to differ. The time for telling the truth would have been during the jury's deliberations, after which the jury emerged to acquit Jackson on 14 counts, ranging from child molestation to supplying a minor with alcoholic beverages. But that might have fouled up the book deals the two now-remorseful jurors are reported to be working on. In fact, the entire episode on the MSNBC talk show could be construed as the opening moves for promoting those books about the trial. At best, this appears to be little more than a cynical and pathetic effort to promote the books. At worst, it's a complete abrogation of a juror's responsibility. It's too bad there's not some legal way to hold them liable for their failures. But perhaps they feel that since they did their time on the jury in a lengthy trial, they deserve a little something extra. One juror even went so far as to say that the other jurors should be ashamed for letting Jackson go free. Talk about turning logic on its head. It's the two jurors who bear the shame - for failing to uphold the duty they swore to fulfill. In fact, other jurors say the climate in the jury room during the trial and during deliberations was quiet, calm and reasoned. If these two jurors felt this strongly about Jackson's guilt, they owed it to both the defendant and the plaintiffs to speak their minds - and stick with those beliefs, no matter how heated the debate in the jury room. The public comments by these two are even more disturbing because they previously had stood by the jury's verdict. In this week's TV interview, they gave few specifics about the alleged intimidation. We suppose that information is being saved for their books. We firmly believe in and support our jury system, but it's a belief that is severely tested by the knowledge that people like this - lacking in both courage and conviction - are at times sitting in judgment of their fellow citizens. If nothing else, we should all realize the system is less than perfect. And we should all make a statement by refusing to buy their books. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Ellie said:
Is that bitch selling that shirt or something? Shame. shame, shame....Damn, damn, damn! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
That's like a juror getting mad because OJ wanted to date their daughther. If they thought he was guilty they should have did what was right. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
That's got to be some interesting books.  I'd understand if writing was your passion and that's how you'd express yourself, but these were just plain jurors in a criminal case. What kind of a more interesting viewpoint they could have than a journalist or a columnist couldn't?
"I'm gonna write a book about it!" - well, why don't you write a song instead? Or re-enact the whole event with puppets and film that? Why a book exactly? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Ellie said:
 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I regret Michael Jackson. Joe should have killed him. All you others say Hell Yea!!  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sosgemini said: we need a law preventing folks from profiting from jury duty..it could seriously screw up our legal system.
what, so we can screw up our first amendment? good thinking. "Awards are like hemorrhoids. Sooner or later, every asshole gets one." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DavidEye said: Xavier23 said: well why the fuck didn't they say this at the trial?
Exactly.They had their chance to speak up during the trial,and vote to convict him if they truly felt that he was guilty.But now that the trial is over,these two jurors are just trying to create controversy so they can sell alot of books and stay in the headlines Keep in mind that it took almost within 2 long weeks for THIS jury to come with a decision. And I knew damn good and well that it was either going to be "not guilty" or "hung jury". And I guess these 2 whining jurors were pushing for "hung jury"! Oh well. Either way, who f***ing cares at this point. Michael has left American and he's never coming back. Next thread please....  [Edited 8/12/05 21:42pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sinisterpentatonic said: I just realized how far down those nipples are   I never met you, but I LOVE you & I will forever!! Thank you for being YOU - my little Princey, the best to EVER do it | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
