DrunkMonkey 0 #51 March 15, 2005 Fucking perv is going to walk... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
br0k3n 0 #52 March 15, 2005 QuoteFucking perv is going to walk... Moonwalk?----------------------------------------------------------- --+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #53 March 15, 2005 Quote"The teenager who claims he was sexually abused by Michael Jackson has admitted telling his former teacher he had not been molested by the star. Gavin Arvizo made the admission as he was grilled by Jackson's lawyer Thomas Mesereau." I honestly don't know if Jackson is guilty or innocent. His behavior with young boys is quite bizarre at the very least. I have a friend who was the victim of sexual abuse by a man. I know for a fact that it is extremely difficult for these victims to admit and it is not unusual for them to lie and say nothing ever happened, when in fact it did. This particular case has questionable evidence on both sides. With that in mind, I think it leans in Jackson's favor as his guilt must be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. Just weird all around. Chris _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miked10270 0 #54 March 15, 2005 QuoteWhat seems like the most likely one? If you take a look at the kid, his background, his family and the things they have done in the past it begins to give you a rough idea of the kind of people they are. Really? On the one hand, they can be seen as a family of dishonest "trailer-trash" on the make from an altruistic rich man who selflessly befriended them in their hour of need. On the other hand, their behaviour can be seen as a the response of a poorly educated family faced with terrible abuse by a man whose wealth & power protected him. The child can be seen as a troublemaker at school... Or a child trying to come to terms with what happened to him. Are his schoool discipline problems simply due to his character? Or are they a (common) symptom displayed by victims of abuse? And as for coaching... ALL witnesses in a serious trial ARE coached to an extent to prepare them for the ordeal of giving evidence. Like I said before: NOT PROVEN! Which in The US will probably translate into a majority "Not Guilty" verdict, followed by allegations that he bought the doubt through his legal team & comparisons to The OJ Simpson trial. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,442 #55 March 15, 2005 >Who is the child lying to? The court now? Or his teacher then? Doesn't much matter. We have a 'guilty beyond a reasonable doubt' standard, and thus if the case is based primarily on the testimony of someone who is known to be dishonest, his testimony fails to meet the standard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tigra 0 #56 March 15, 2005 I certainly *hope* the prosecution has more than this kid's testimony, but maybe I am giving the DA's office a little too much credit. Weren't there crates of "evidence" removed from Michael Jackson's home? I mean, the truth is, most chidren do not make reliable witnesses. In order to successfully prosecute this case, they had to know they needed more than just the kid's word, right? And as they proceeded with the case, I'm sure they could see that his family's history would work against them too. Like I said, maybe I am giving the prosecution way too much credit, but I'm waiting to see what else they have. And about the kid lying- he told his teachers and the dean at his school he wasn't molested. I don't see that as particularly damaging by itself- there are any number of reasons why he would have denied having been abused. If you were a 13 year old boy, would you want that going around your school? Its also possible he was still enthralled with Michael Jackson, enough to lie to protect him. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #57 March 15, 2005 Let´s suppose that MJ is innocent... If the jury declares him innocent, is there anyway that he can get back the money he has spent defending himself? Would the families prosecuting be obligated to pay the cost of the trial, judge, security, etc... (even other party lawyers?) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,442 #58 March 15, 2005 >there are any number of reasons why he would have denied having been abused. Oh, I agree. However, the defense can argue that given that, there are now good reasons for him to lie as well (i.e. the prospect of making money, or of proving himself and his parents 'right.') So if it's been shown that a witness will lie when it is beneficial for him to do so, that goes a long way towards invalidating their testimony. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tigra 0 #59 March 15, 2005 Of course its damaging any time a witness is caught in a lie. This particular lie is less damaging than some other inconsistencies in his testimony because it is explainable and understandable. Just my opinion. I still think the prosecution needs more to convict and I really hope they have it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #60 March 16, 2005 he probably couldn't get the money back, because even if he sued the kid's family to recover it, they wouldn't be able to pay. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #61 March 16, 2005 That is what i thought. I don´t think think MJ is the most respectble guy in the neighbourhood, but i think that the parents of those kids are much worse. If the jury finds MJ innocent, there shoould be some punishment for the families that lied in court. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #62 March 16, 2005 That'd set a pretty dangerous public policy... accuse someone of a crime, the people don't have enough evidence but go to trial anyway, and the person gets off, and then you get charged with perjury, whether you actually lied or not. It could lead to people not coming forward and not testifying. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tigra 0 #63 March 16, 2005 This is a criminal case, not a lawsuit. It isn't up to the accuser to file charges, its up to the grand jury and the prosecuter to determine if the case has enough merit to try. They had (have) a burden to evaluate the evidence and the credibility of the witness before they proceed. Obviously, they felt they had enough and since I believe the prosecution is still presenting their case, there is probably more evidence. I'm sure there was also a lot of public pressure to try the case because it is so high profile (even if the actual evidence was weak, a fact that has yet to be determined) sort of a "damned if you do damned if you don't" situation. If it is determined that the accuser or any of his family lied on the witness stand, they can be charged with perjury. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #64 April 21, 2005 http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0421051_michael_jackson_1.html - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkydivingNurse 0 #65 May 5, 2005 I like Michael Jackson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #66 May 5, 2005 I still think the prosecution needs more to convict and I really hope they have it. Why? The guy is obviously very strange, but his strangeness doesn't make him a sex offender. Why do people want him to be guilty so badly? I personally hope that he didn't do these things, and having no first-hand knowledge there's no way for me to know. I wouldn't want him to be convicted of something he didn't do. linz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tigra 0 #67 May 5, 2005 Why? For one thing, I hope the prosecution didn't go after him with no real evidence, and strictly on rumor, innuendo and public pressure. Because although its clearly flawed, I'd like to believe in our legal system. For another, based on everything I have heard over the years and what's coming out of this trial, I don't think the man should be around children. Maybe he isn't raping them but his behaviour is not appropriate. (And yes, the parents who are selling their children to him for new cars, etc., are every bit as much at fault as he is!) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casurf1978 0 #68 May 5, 2005 IMO people are giving him a huge amount of leeway. If this were a regular person they would've already taken away his kids and folks would be ready to fry the guy. There is something really weird, in a sick way, with MJ. It just doesnt seem right that this is the second or third time someone has charged him with sexual abuse of a kid and people think nothing is going on. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #69 May 5, 2005 I know lots of weird people. There are lots of very effeminate men and men who "just don't seem right." They're not necessarily sex offenders. If these people were pursued, because of their large bank accounts, with the same determination, there'd be alot of people wanting them to be convicted also....based on the way they present themselves that doesn't sit well with the mainstream. I think that there are LOTS of people who would like to take MJ's money, and a number of them will go to lengths to get it. I agree that he's not someone that any thoughtful parent would let babysit their children, but again, I'm just as frightened by people who are so out to punish someone in this way because of their eccentricities, without real proof that he committed a crime. Lots of people are brought to trial....Just because the DA has evidence, doesn't mean that a person is guilty. Look at Mike Mullins. Do y'all want to hang him???? linz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisamariewillbe 1 #70 May 5, 2005 Any grown man who has children / boys not related to him sleeping in his bed and admits it as being a beautiful thing on national television is guilty. I think MJ is gross, guilty and should have those children taken away and should be locked away forever. He isnt just weird, he has proven to lie to the media, his fans and just plain everyone with such things as "no I never have had plastic surgery" its just like Bill Clintons lies, anyones lies, you lie you get caught or are known to be lying you lose credibility, he admitted to boys sleeping in his bed. GROSS. WRONG.Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KevinMcGuire 0 #71 May 5, 2005 He isnt just weird, he has proven to lie to the media, his fans and just plain everyone with such things as "no I never have had plastic surgery" ---------------------------------------------------------- Now there is a reason to throw and man in prision if I ever saw one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisamariewillbe 1 #72 May 5, 2005 no did I say that was a reason to throw him in prision? No but he proves he is a liar, and he has said what a beautiful thing it is to sleep in the same bed with 10 to 13 year old boys he considers his friends. Either he is insane and has the mental capacity of a 10 yr old or a perverted pedophile who deseves to go to jail and be castrated.Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #73 May 5, 2005 Aren't you the same person who complained that 35% of people in prison are wrongly convicted????? And then you used that statistic to justify your feelings that a woman should not have been convicted of rape???? I'm confused. Now it's okay if a person is wrongly convicted? Or if he's convicted of child sexual abuse where he's only been proven, like Bill Clinton, to lie to the media? Your line of reasoning has lost me. linz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisamariewillbe 1 #74 May 5, 2005 no he wouldnt be wrongly convicted, read the post, has he or has he NOT told us as the people in a interview that he sleeps with little boysSudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #75 May 5, 2005 Where I believe that sleeping in the same bed with little boys may be icky. It's not child sexual abuse. There is a line that must be crossed. That ain't it. linz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
