Sponsored Links
2
2scoops0406
All well and good speculating, but I would guess that none of us has heard all the evidence. We can all grandstand and mock the jury, but that is a different matter. The jury has heard and weighed the evidence and delivered its verdict. Appeals notwithstanding, the case is closed on 10 not guilty verdicts.
and no, I wouldn't want him to babysit my children
and no, I wouldn't want him to babysit my children
There's a difference between your children getting into your bed at 3am because they've had a nightmare, and Michael Jackson getting into bed with your kids "innocently".
As has been said we haven't seen the evidence etc., so let's assume he isn't a kiddy fiddler, just a man who "believes" he is still a child. Let's hope that MJ realises he shouldn't be doing this, and doesn't do it again. For his own sake as well!
As has been said we haven't seen the evidence etc., so let's assume he isn't a kiddy fiddler, just a man who "believes" he is still a child. Let's hope that MJ realises he shouldn't be doing this, and doesn't do it again. For his own sake as well!
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 1 Jul 2004
- Messages
- 107
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
i was informed he was found guilty and got ten years.
the judge in following up on the sentence did happen to remark
"that if you were b_ _ _ k you would have got twenty years"
the judge in following up on the sentence did happen to remark
"that if you were b_ _ _ k you would have got twenty years"
It says as much about yanks as it does about mj, he admitted to sleeping with otherpeople children and they found porno mags , those people of the jury "good and true" believe that its ok to do so. they should all be locked up" so now their going to make squids out of the story about how they let a 40 plus year old man walk after sleeping with children, everyone's going on about how he really loves children but thats what pedaphiles think.
What do you base this belief on, intuition?PowerTool said:I believe he was guilty
I have yet to be convinced that he knew that anything he did was wrong.
Puts me in the Scottish law "not proven" category,I think
What do you really know about this person apart from what you read or see in the news?
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 43,928
- Reaction score
- 2,884
- Country
Some of the jurors were convinced he had been up to no good, but in that particular case could not prove positively.
And at least one juror did not like the mother clicking her fingers at members of the jury.
And another said, "Who in their right mind would let their children sleep with a stranger?"
Generally, I believe the jury thought the children had been egged on by the parents to try and get money.
And at least one juror did not like the mother clicking her fingers at members of the jury.
And another said, "Who in their right mind would let their children sleep with a stranger?"
Generally, I believe the jury thought the children had been egged on by the parents to try and get money.
I'm really, really pleased that MJ was cleared. Why? Because I don't think he intended to do anything bad. I'm no expert on English law, still less on US law, but I do know that a lot of it is about proving intent. Did MJ allow children to share his bed? Quite possibly. Did he do so with any malicious intent? Not a chance; the man is scarcely more than a child himself!
As I see it, sharing a bed with someone does not in itself constitute an assault, however much the paedophile witchfinders - because that's what most of them are - would like to think so. How many of us climbed into our parents' beds 'just for a cuddle'? What about a grandparent or some other relative? This is natural behaviour for our species. It is probably also natural to prefer the opposite sex parent though this is based on my own limited observation.
Would I allow my own children to spend the night, or any time at all, with MJ? A good question even if it's totally hypothetical because their mother certainly wouldn't. I'd have to think about that one. I'd be more worried about his multitude of minders than MJ himself and the effect on the kids of being exposed to the totally artificial superstar world.
Would I allow him to babysit our kids? Not a chance. He can't even babysit himself! I would probably come home to a house totally wrecked, the kids gone round to play with their friends and the hamster and gerbils inside the cats after the gormless MJ tried to get them to be friends.
The one thing that worried me about the whole MJ case, and one on which there has been little or no comment so far, was the charge of supplying alcohol to minors. This might sound like no big deal to us but US alcohol laws are a lot tougher than ours. Did he do it? Probably, because he's stupid enough. I think he can count himself a lucky man on that one.
As I see it, sharing a bed with someone does not in itself constitute an assault, however much the paedophile witchfinders - because that's what most of them are - would like to think so. How many of us climbed into our parents' beds 'just for a cuddle'? What about a grandparent or some other relative? This is natural behaviour for our species. It is probably also natural to prefer the opposite sex parent though this is based on my own limited observation.
Would I allow my own children to spend the night, or any time at all, with MJ? A good question even if it's totally hypothetical because their mother certainly wouldn't. I'd have to think about that one. I'd be more worried about his multitude of minders than MJ himself and the effect on the kids of being exposed to the totally artificial superstar world.
Would I allow him to babysit our kids? Not a chance. He can't even babysit himself! I would probably come home to a house totally wrecked, the kids gone round to play with their friends and the hamster and gerbils inside the cats after the gormless MJ tried to get them to be friends.
The one thing that worried me about the whole MJ case, and one on which there has been little or no comment so far, was the charge of supplying alcohol to minors. This might sound like no big deal to us but US alcohol laws are a lot tougher than ours. Did he do it? Probably, because he's stupid enough. I think he can count himself a lucky man on that one.
Sponsored Links
