Michael Jackson Not Guilty

MSN News Special: The Michael Jackson Trial
SANTA MARIA, California (Reuters) - Michael Jackson was found not guilty on Monday of molesting a 13 year-old boy in 2003 and was acquitted of conspiracy and alcohol charges.

The jury in central California cleared the pop star of all charges after a bitter four-month trial that could have ended in nearly 20 years prison for one of the world's best known entertainers. Jackson had stood trial on 10 counts including molestation, plying the boy with alcohol and conspiracy to commit child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion.

How much did that cost the American taxpayer?

Never been a fan of his music and I'm a sceptic till the last believeing that he got off on the 'resonable doubt' verdict only, still that's the decision although we can all have our own opinion.

What's the odds on a world tour?

What will his next single be called? Something with an underlying message about 'have faith in me, I'm not guilty'?

Farsical!

1. The trial ended up costing the county 4 million dollars.

2. He's not guilty in the eyes of the jury. I pray that is the right and proper verdict and am not in any position to question it. However, OJ was and still is guilty. [img]wink.gif[/img]

....this is funny though...


http://www.mikebellopenstudio.com/my_pictures/river.gif

I've lived in California all my life and I can say that California people are idiots. We let Oj off, Robert Blake and now MJ. Any 40+ year old guy sleeping with little boys should be hung by his pecker (assuming Michael has one)until it tears apart from his body, then duct tape it in his mouth until he suffocates.
there I feel better. good day all [img]smile.gif[/img]

NOT PREACHING RELIGION:
Who r we to decide...only God knows the real story and will deal him his fate in the end.
He who is without sin, cast the first stone.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sherri Sixxx:
MSN News Special: The Michael Jackson Trial
SANTA MARIA, California (Reuters) - Michael Jackson was found not guilty on Monday of molesting a 13 year-old boy in 2003 and was acquitted of conspiracy and alcohol charges.

The jury in central California cleared the pop star of all charges after a bitter four-month trial that could have ended in nearly 20 years prison for one of the world's best known entertainers. Jackson had stood trial on 10 counts including molestation, plying the boy with alcohol and conspiracy to commit child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion.

---

<font size="4" face="Arial">That is too bad, i was relly lookin forward to the reality show, MICHAEL JACKSON IN PRISON episode 1: this time it's michaels ass !

As with OJ, it's the pending civil cases which
will really drain him, financially as much as
physically. This is just stage 1. This will drag
on for years. And whilst Jackson's losing cash
the jury, having already insulted people once
with their verdict, will go on to make a packet
via book sales and Oprah etc.

Pfe! What a farce.

D.

<font color="#FF0000" size="1">[ June 14, 2005 07:14 AM: Message edited by: Deviant D ]</font>

The kids mother was the one who screwed it up (depending on your view) I think the travesty is probably that MJ's behaviour has been suspect enough to be very questionable and cerainly give very good reason to think he has done something very bad. However, that crazy mother over -egged the cake so much that no one in their right mind could beleieve she was not manipulating the situation in some way and 'some way' has to be construde as 'all the way'
She created reasonable doubt that something was being made out to be something else and without being sure exactly how far this went, you have to aquit.
If he wasn't guilty of fiddling with that particular kid, then I don't thnk many people believe he has not acted inappropriately in some way. As the jury said, they had to aqui on THIS particular is becuase the mothers testimony was so crazy it had to be bollocks!
When I saw here give it a month or so back I would have bet money he was gonna walk.

<font color="#FF0000" size="1">[ June 14, 2005 07:47 AM: Message edited by: IH Rich Rags ]</font>

As I said before...it was a crock-of-sh#t to see Michael go free once again. As I said earlier, I guess society doesn't see anything wrong with a 40something year old man having sleep-overs with a little boy. So what happens?...Michael gets a slap in the hand once more....soon to doing what he did before again and again. Once a molester...always a molester. Californians hide your kids. I feel the boy and his mother screwed up the whole case. If they weren't involved Michael would be going up the river at this moment.

Observation: The fans outside daily?...WTF?...Do these people have jobs?...then again I noticed on the news footage that most were Mexican....LOL...ah theres's the reason...problem solved....haha [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Yeh, those dirty border jumpers - send 'em all
up the river!

Re the crazy mother: I think she's the victim
of bad rehearsal. If she had composed what she
really wanted to say in advance, instead of all
blurting it out stream of consciously (like one of
Hunter's posts - [img]tongue.gif[/img] - ), she might have been
listened to more intently.

How does he recover? Easy. Stick 'Jesus Juice'
on the market. What was it - red wine in a coke
can? Coke and Red Wine - there you go.

'The cocktail which can be drunk my minors!'

D.

Can't help think you are missing the point D. I think he was guilty too, but if someone punches you in a bar and you're up for some comp, why risk it by saying your assailant came at you with a knife and screaming that he had been plotting to do you for months?
You would be insinutating forethought and an attempted assualt with a weapon in order to make something look much worse. If you get found out lying then nothing you say can be considered reliable surely? She f**ked it up by trying to get everyone to paint a much more vivid picture than was maybe the truth and in doing so she made it too unbeleievabe. Look at her history.
She sued JC Penny after saying she was not after financial compensation. If someone had walked in on Jacko in the act, then he would have been playing bitch boy to Bubba right now, but they didnt and when the accusers mom starts acting like Liza Minelli on Acid, it just created too much suspicion of motive.

<font color="#FF0000" size="1">[ June 14, 2005 08:39 AM: Message edited by: IH Rich Rags ]</font>

You make fair points, sadly I'm already bored
about discussing this schtuupid trial. It high-
lighted for me everything I despise about America,
but let's not go into that.

D.

Yep, I'll agree with you for once dude. Case closed.

I'm still moving to Canada ey


jk

<font color="#FF0000" size="1">[ June 14, 2005 10:29 AM: Message edited by: baby_lemonade ]</font>