[QUOTE] why is MJ afforded the exemption?
I strongly feel he is not!
I am but in awe of his musicality.
Thats about all I know about him. The rest seem to be spun out of proportion by all media.
Printable View
[QUOTE] why is MJ afforded the exemption?
I strongly feel he is not!
I am but in awe of his musicality.
Thats about all I know about him. The rest seem to be spun out of proportion by all media.
Once again, RW's post is spot on.
Jeppe, what i meant by that is, we snicker at all the 80s big hair posers & the mullett heads, yet no one seems to want to point out how bizarre MJ has altered his appearance...& then lied to the public media time & time again about it. It's one thing to get a surgery for something & then downplay it or deny it, it is quite another thing when it's obv you've had multiples of tens or more & continue to deny it. Some of us are not that stupid...[not YOU, just in general, i mean...MJ shouldn't think we're that dumb] [img]wink.gif[/img] I'm just saying, it's his life, but when you look at many of the obv facts, some things just cause some wonder...
I'm also one of those who apprecoiates his talents, but this is far beyond that. I mean, the trouble he sets himself up to get into. You think they'd have learned by now...
The fact that he paid off huge amounts of $ to "get out of" the other charge is very disturbing to me too, RW... [img]graemlins/hmmm.gif[/img] I'm not going to speak for anyone else, but if it were ME, I would NEVER have done that. NEVER. But i know the judicial shenanigans & jury trials these days can be quite elusive, & perhaps lead to mistakes in decisions & judgements, but if i were innocent, I would never have taken that bait...
once again, CJ's last & RW's was spot on tho.
Just rem also, "good" lawyers these days also know how to work the system to try to get it to their vantage point - the Almighty........dollar.
Let's face it - this is one disadvantage that you CA peeps have to deal with...the state is not exactly known for it's stupendously enlightened juries in its celebrity trials.... NOT saying anything by that... [img]wink.gif[/img]
I do hope it's simply that MJ is a strange bird who is somehow trying to live a childhood he never had...but it should still make one raise an eyebrow...it's getting a little beyond the "pale" if you get my drift. In this day & age, an inelligent adult can't afford to allow themselves to continuously get into these kinds of appearances... [img]graemlins/hmmm.gif[/img]
Once again, H2, cj, JPtD, & RW's posts are the deal here.
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ June 14, 2005 09:46 AM: Message edited by: got_a_match_grip? ]</font>
Hear ya loud and clear g.a.m.
And my thought was just that I think that people HAVE spent much time on his appearance (and understandably so!). I just reached a point -personally- where it didn't make sense to point anymore bandaid wrapped fingers (!!) at that poor man.
When I put on my MJ records, I believe him to be the greatest pop genius ever. Even far beyond other favorites of mine incl. Prince.
Thanks for the great music MJ
And now... on to drummers and drumming!
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ June 14, 2005 11:21 AM: Message edited by: Jeppe Morgenthaler ]</font>
OML, RW, that link you provided.
Extensively cruel, but...the line about his father nicknaming him"big-nose" says it ALL. [img]eek.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/hmmm.gif[/img] Cruel, hard-pushing father...enabling mother...
"'Genius' [if you want to call being a popular famous muso or entertainer that] often comes with a great price."
[I happen to be of the opin that the field of public entertainment sould never be afforded the muse of "genius"...jmho [img]wink.gif[/img]
"Extreme talent is usually directly inversely proportional to the acute compulsive neurotic-mania..."
I agree, Jeppe... [img]wink.gif[/img] [img]cool.gif[/img]
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ June 14, 2005 10:00 AM: Message edited by: got_a_match_grip? ]</font>
just from what i've learned from studying criminal psychology. Which will apply even more here as this is a big case, with big opportunities for the lawyers to become more "respected" and to win big money.
1. It is the lawyers and the judge who pick the jury.
2. Most lawyers, not all, but most, care only about winning wether or not they are serving justice. Because if they really were, lawyers that knew their clients were guilty wouldn't defend them.
3. In ideal world, the jury would be made up of equally mixed race, age, sex, religion and location etc But since lawyers only care about winning so they can have more "wins" on their name increasing chance of being hired and winning more money, a lawyer is likely to pick jury members after interviewing them, whom he feels will be "on his side". e.g. If the prosection is against say a young african-american male, he will be more likely to pick someone who already has a prejudice or a stereotype of african-americans that favours the prosection, such as the typeical 80 year old femaly lady who still sees african americans as inferior or whatever (i'm not racist, but it's just the example that was given to me in criminal psychology today)
So there we have it, personally, purely from sources like T.V interviews, the internet, and past experiences i thought he was guilty. But that golddigger thing is also perfectly believable and makes a lot of sense too.
anyways just my 2 cents, even jury aren't just! The heart of Justice is in fact not even the heart of justice!
P.S i just wrote about this because these facts could very easily help explain why he was found not guilty, if people thought he was guilty or vice-versa!
also please do correct me if i'm wrong in any of this, i accept that, and i'm happy to embrace corrections!
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't care for sleezy defense lawyers either. Just FYI, Johnny bought the farm a couple months ago.Quote:
He's [J Cochran] a full o BS arsehole who knows the loopholes in the law, AWA that the average jury member can easily be swayed by courtroom acrobats & spin - sorry, JMHO over the years. I bet he doesn't have OJ in the morning with his breakfast...he appears the type of guy that $$ obv takes precedent over justice. That is a bad, slippery slope for ALL OF US. Allwoing injustice anywhere is an affront to justice EVERYWHERE.
You could have a lineup of Charles Manson and MJ and when they called for a Freaky, Anti-social... Pedophile, Chuck would stay in place and MJ would be front and center. Talent or no talent. He may not be guilty in this case, but as stated, way too many flags have been thrown up to not think he's been involved in some unnatural behavior with kids. If he were truly innocent, the way he conducted himself should have been radically modified when the FIRST kid cried molestation! Mike couldn't be that naive in his thinking to think that he's not at risk for someone to take advantage of his celebrity stature.
The brutha...uh...er guy needs some serious help and prayer.
Clint
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So I'd heard.Quote:
I don't care for sleezy defense lawyers either. Just FYI, Johnny bought the farm a couple months ago.
I just wonder if it's too hot to plow said farm where he is now. [img]wink.gif[/img]
Mind you; I've been no angel at times, & I'm DEF NOT the judge, but...I draw the line in the sand at many places many others will, & do, not...discernment is discernment, of the actions I've witnessed during his stay here on the planet. [img]cool.gif[/img]
"Injustice [evil] anywhere is an affront to justice [what is 'right'] everywhere."
GREAT post, SP. Thankfully, there are still some good lawyers with a conscience at work quietly in the corners...
Forget Rikki Rockit [did his mum name him that?!]...what he did is far productive compared to the sleazy lawyers & media folk who use their pundit or medium to twist & spin for self-opportunism & $$ in this country!!! /;-p
Oh dear, another borderline political post... [img]tongue.gif[/img]
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ June 15, 2005 03:12 PM: Message edited by: got_a_match_grip? ]</font>
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">way too many flags have been thrown up to not think he's been involved in some unnatural behavior with kids.Quote:
Originally posted by Clintuplet:
Clint
that is the quote here....i'm sorry, this guy is guilty of something and so are the sick low self esteem parents. way to much wierd stuff to still be coincidence and innocence. a not guilty verdict does not mean 'not guilty' (OJ).... just as a guilty verdict has put plenty of innocent people in jail until the advent of DNA sampling. it goes both ways for those that beleive 'innocent until proven guilty'.
like the dave chappelle (R. Kelly) skit (hilarious by the way)....you are going to need video tape of the whole criminal act for celebrities, and even then they might get off!
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I agree. I know there are good and bad in the practice of law, but I work in a 'Domestic Relations'(divorce court) building and overhear some of the sleeziest gutter discussion there is.Quote:
I draw the line in the sand at many places many others will, & do, not...discernment is discernment, of the actions I've witnessed during his stay here on the planet.
These are the lawyers that leave ethics and scrupples at the front door <s>crap</s> metal
detector.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">OJ said he was going to find the real killers. I wonder if MJ is working to find the real molesters?Quote:
a not guilty verdict does not mean 'not guilty' (OJ)
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Aside from his childish mindset and sexual proclivities, anyone who would mutilate their face like that is a very troubled individual.Quote:
Originally posted by cjbdrm:
Being found "not guilty" in a court of law does not mean he's innocent. It only means that the prosecution wasn't able to convince the jurors beyond a reasonable doubt.
I love Michael Jackson the musician, dancer, and entertainer. But he's a very troubled individual.
In his mind he's a curious 11 or 12 year old boy that likes to do boy things, but also happens to be homosexual.
This won't change anything. He'll just have his guests sign release forms.
I say we put the stupid parents on trial.
As for releases, it would only apply to a civil action. In a criminal action, the plaintiff is the state (or nation). An individual doesn't have the authority to waive the state's rights.