British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   USA (https://britishexpats.com/forum/usa-57/)
-   -   Michael Jackson - Verdict (https://britishexpats.com/forum/usa-57/michael-jackson-verdict-308454/)

Englishmum Jun 13th 2005 8:59 am
Breaking News: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
I'm glued to CNN right now...the verdict Has been be read (5.18pm ET).

If you can't get to a telly, go to http://www.reuters.com or http://www.reuters.co.uk ;)

sibsie Jun 13th 2005 9:01 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
BBC are streaming it too. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4604027.stm

My money's on a NG verdict but I think he's guilty.

sibsie Jun 13th 2005 9:16 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
All NGs so far. :mad:

Englishmum Jun 13th 2005 9:18 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Sibsie - you were right.

Not guilty on all counts. :rolleyes:

bah.

sibsie Jun 13th 2005 9:19 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by Englishmum
Sibsie - you were right.
But I so wish I wasn't. Gutted.

Maz Jun 13th 2005 9:25 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
It turns my stomach that he's free again...

vegas Jun 13th 2005 9:29 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Much like his skin a Whitewash

franc111s Jun 13th 2005 9:30 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by Maz
It turns my stomach that he's free again...
In your oppinion. 12 people of our peers don't think so and I bet they went in with an open mind too. Hope I never find you on my jury. H'e s weirdo sure, but I never believed for one minute he was guilty - the evidence was pathetic, made up like friggin jackanory.

If we locked up all the weirdo's in Hollywood, I guess the free-ways would be easier to travel on. :beer:

callé Jun 13th 2005 9:34 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
:mad: Just like OJ. :rolleyes:

Maz Jun 13th 2005 9:34 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by franc111s
In your oppinion. 12 people of our peers don't think so and I bet they went in with an open mind too. Hope I never find you on my jury.

If we locked up all the weirdo's in Hollywood, I guess the free-ways would be easier to travel on. :beer:
Yes it is absolutely my opinion. That's why I said it turns MY stomach. As much as people can say "I just KNOW he's innocent", they don't know, and I don't know for sure either, but I'm giving my gut reaction. You can say you wouldn't want me on a jury deciding your fate. Makes me wonder what you've got to hide. :D You can bet, though, that after studying law for 3 years at university as part of my degree, that I do know how to sift through evidence. Thanks very much for your one-sided opinion, too. :D

franc111s Jun 13th 2005 9:42 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by Maz
Yes it is absolutely my opinion. That's why I said it turns MY stomach. As much as people can say "I just KNOW he's innocent", they don't know, and I don't know for sure either, but I'm giving my gut reaction. You can say you wouldn't want me on a jury deciding your fate. Makes me wonder what you've got to hide. :D You can bet, though, that after studying law for 3 years at university as part of my degree, that I do know how to sift through evidence. Thanks very much for your one-sided opinion, too. :D
Fair enough - I'm alone in my household on this one too. My problem is, the arguments for are more on "GUT". My arguments are on legal, evidence, strangeness of the case (changing dates, crime committed after the Bashir video (not before), know perpetual liars, scammers, leechers. His biggest mistake was paying out to the first guy which was common back then. There just wasn't any credible evidence and obviously the 12 people who had their chance to convict, saw that too.

Maz Jun 13th 2005 9:45 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by franc111s
Fair enough - I'm alone in my household on this one too. My problem is, the arguments for are more on "GUT". My arguments are on legal, evidence, strangeness of the case (changing dates, crime committed after the Bashir video (not before), know perpetual liars, scammers, leechers. His biggest mistake was paying out to the first guy which was common back then. There just wasn't any credible evidence and obviously the 12 people who had their chance to convict, saw that too.
I completely agree that if he was not guilty, he shouldn't have been settling out of court. To me, and many others (and this is just *my* opinion based on what I've seen), that screams "GUILTY!!"

Still, some blame HAS to be placed with the parents. Who in their right mind would let their kid have a sleepover at Wacko Jacko's?... :eek: :scared:

Elvira Jun 13th 2005 9:46 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by franc111s
Fair enough - I'm alone in my household on this one too. My problem is, the arguments for are more on "GUT". My arguments are on legal, evidence, strangeness of the case (changing dates, crime committed after the Bashir video (not before), know perpetual liars, scammers, leechers. His biggest mistake was paying out to the first guy which was common back then. There just wasn't any credible evidence and obviously the 12 people who had their chance to convict, saw that too.

Luckily, at the end of the day, juries tend to go by the evidence presented to them, not their 'gut' feeling or what they 'believe'. The evidence presented did not prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that MJ was guilty. So they had to find him innocent.

In any event, the chief prosecution witness is on record of having, on three separate occasions, denied that MJ ever molested him.

TaffyinOK Jun 13th 2005 9:47 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by Maz
Yes it is absolutely my opinion. That's why I said it turns MY stomach. As much as people can say "I just KNOW he's innocent", they don't know, and I don't know for sure either, but I'm giving my gut reaction. You can say you wouldn't want me on a jury deciding your fate. Makes me wonder what you've got to hide. :D You can bet, though, that after studying law for 3 years at university as part of my degree, that I do know how to sift through evidence. Thanks very much for your one-sided opinion, too. :D
I'm with you Maz. We will probably hear in the coming days how the jury deliberated with all due solemnity upon the facts as they were presented. How they were instructed to consider ONLY the facts presented during the trial. The fact that Jackson stated on national television that he thinks it's perfectly okay to have children sleep in his bed will have absolutely nothing to do with how the jury reached their verdict. The whole fiasco is sickening!

ImHere Jun 13th 2005 9:51 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by TaffyinOK
I'm with you Maz. We will probably hear in the coming days how the jury deliberated with all due solemnity upon the facts as they were presented. How they were instructed to consider ONLY the facts presented during the trial. The fact that Jackson stated on national television that he thinks it's perfectly okay to have children sleep in his bed will have absolutely nothing to do with how the jury reached their verdict. The whole fiasco is sickening!
Which is always the case and how it should be. Thats why juries are isolated during a trial so they cant be swayed by outside influences of biased parties either way.

I think back to the rigged and mispresented cases back in the 70's and 80's that have since been overturned by due process of law (Guildford 4 etc) and how people screamed profaneties at the "guilty" then.

doctor scrumpy Jun 13th 2005 9:52 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Guilty till proven rich & famous.... The American Way.

britvic Jun 13th 2005 10:13 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by franc111s
In your oppinion. 12 people of our peers don't think so and I bet they went in with an open mind too. Hope I never find you on my jury. H'e s weirdo sure, but I never believed for one minute he was guilty - the evidence was pathetic, made up like friggin jackanory.

If we locked up all the weirdo's in Hollywood, I guess the free-ways would be easier to travel on. :beer:
Here Here franc111s well said, I'm so relieved for Michael :) and in tears watching the verdict, should never have gone to trial in the first place.

ImHere Jun 13th 2005 10:18 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by britvic
Here Here franc111s well said, I'm so relieved for Michael :) and in tears watching the verdict, should never have gone to trial in the first place.

Actually I hope he counter sues the defendants parents to make an example to the dick head irresponsable morons that like to use their little dears as a money making scheme.

rincewind Jun 13th 2005 10:22 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by ImHere
Actually I hope he counter sues the defendants parents to make an example to the dick head irresponsable morons that like to use their little dears as a money making scheme.
Blimey, how many MJ threads are running now. I can't possibly argue on all of them :D :D

sibsie Jun 13th 2005 10:34 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Anyone care to place a bet on MJ re-releasing "Smooth criminal" to kick start his career!

ImHere Jun 13th 2005 10:46 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by rincewind
Blimey, how many MJ threads are running now. I can't possibly argue on all of them :D :D
Im up to 4 now I beleive.

Taffyles Jun 13th 2005 10:48 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by ImHere
Actually I hope he counter sues the defendants parents to make an example to the dick head irresponsable morons that like to use their little dears as a money making scheme.
There should be an investigation into the mother and charges brought- she is abusing her children.
Back to the topic. I think there was more than enough doubt established to acquitt Jackson- the prosecution didn't really have a case, as it turns out. I believe Jackson tries to look and act like Peter Pan in his Neverland having sleepovers with lost boys- no doubt trying to have the normal childhood he never had. Eccentric, yes absolutely.. but child molestor? nahhh. He was far too open about his activities for one thing- IMO.... in all innocence.

Guelder Rose Jun 13th 2005 10:50 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by DonnaElvira
Luckily, at the end of the day, juries tend to go by the evidence presented to them, not their 'gut' feeling or what they 'believe'. The evidence presented did not prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that MJ was guilty. So they had to find him innocent.
And for that, I am grateful!

I am one of the camp who didn't believe that he molested this particular boy (and the only one in my household). Others I know, may not have believed the charge by this boy, but thought he should have been found guilty because of all the other 'stories' ... which really would have been an injustice.

Guelder Rose Jun 13th 2005 10:52 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by britvic
.... should never have gone to trial in the first place.
Too true!

rincewind Jun 13th 2005 10:52 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by Taffyles
There should be an investigation into the mother and charges brought- she is abusing her children.
Back to the topic. I think there was more than enough doubt established to acquitt Jackson- the prosecution didn't really have a case, as it turns out. I believe Jackson tries to look and act like Peter Pan in his Neverland having sleepovers with lost boys- no doubt trying to have the normal childhood he never had. Eccentric, yes absolutely.. but child molestor? nahhh. He was far too open about his activities for one thing- IMO.... in all innocence.
I'm curious to see how he will act now. Will he still have sleepovers and risk it happening again. His trust was used against him twice now and if it was me, I wouldn't take that chance again.

Whatever the parent's "m.o." was, I think they should be investigated. Wasn't there some deal with them and JC Penny's?? Didn't the parents so them too??

rincewind Jun 13th 2005 10:56 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by britvic
should never have gone to trial in the first place.
I agree, yet sadly, after the first pay off there was suspicion. Some felt that paying the first settlement was a way to silence people.

I feel this case had to go to trial to either confirm or deny the allegations. For me, the truth is now known yet there will be some that feel this is an injustice.

If he had paid this bunch off, it would have made him look more guilty when he wasn't according to the jury.

smeg Jun 13th 2005 11:02 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Another forum I'm on has some interesting information about the pay off on the old case from someone who went to Neverland (as a cancer patient, as part of the "Make a wish" foundation) as a young teenager, and has kept in touch ever since.

Apparantly the pay off was against Michaels wishes, but was under instruction from the insurance company of his record label. It wasn't even his money.

Of course, that could be bollocks, but she seems pretty sure!

tony_2003 Jun 13th 2005 11:30 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Case was one of the biggest farces I have seen in my life. Glad the jury saw through the serial liars. The only thing sickening about this case was that a mother would put her children through anything for a cash windfall. Well done MJ! :beer: :beer: :beer:

sibsie Jun 13th 2005 12:06 pm
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
The most horrifying aspect of today's events must be the news that MJ is going to do a "Victory" tour with his brothers. :scared:

veryfunny Jun 13th 2005 2:41 pm
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Looks like many people were hoping he was guilty without any evidence. Just amasing how people can get labelled just by being charged with something and later aquitted by their peers in a court of law. I pray to God I never have some of these people on this board as a jury should I even end up in court for something I never done.



Originally Posted by franc111s
In your oppinion. 12 people of our peers don't think so and I bet they went in with an open mind too. Hope I never find you on my jury. H'e s weirdo sure, but I never believed for one minute he was guilty - the evidence was pathetic, made up like friggin jackanory.

If we locked up all the weirdo's in Hollywood, I guess the free-ways would be easier to travel on. :beer:

veryfunny Jun 13th 2005 2:43 pm
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Hey, did any one hear.. I will be writting a book next to tell all..................

Soon to be in a bookstore near you!

Originally Posted by tony_2003
Case was one of the biggest farces I have seen in my life. Glad the jury saw through the serial liars. The only thing sickening about this case was that a mother would put her children through anything for a cash windfall. Well done MJ! :beer: :beer: :beer:

franc111s Jun 13th 2005 11:31 pm
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
SO, have you read also what most Brits think. This part of the BBC normally reflects a pretty good pro-portion of what people think. I'm guessing perhaps the BBC reported more "facts" than their US news counter-parts.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/4615225.stm

Most Brits here think this was a farce too and from the facts they read, felt this was a trial by the media and MJ was innocent of the crimes but not of being wacko.

TaffyinOK Jun 14th 2005 1:00 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by Taffyles
There should be an investigation into the mother and charges brought- she is abusing her children.
Back to the topic. I think there was more than enough doubt established to acquitt Jackson- the prosecution didn't really have a case, as it turns out. I believe Jackson tries to look and act like Peter Pan in his Neverland having sleepovers with lost boys- no doubt trying to have the normal childhood he never had. Eccentric, yes absolutely.. but child molestor? nahhh. He was far too open about his activities for one thing- IMO.... in all innocence.

"Eccentric, yes absolutely.." Crazy like a fox more like.

The consenus on this forum appears to be that the jury brought in the correct verdict for these particular charges, and I begrudgingly agree. However, any man who "sleeps" with little boys (notice the glaring absence of little girls) is definitely left of center. MJ needs psychiatric help, at the very least.

Taffyles Jun 14th 2005 1:58 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by TaffyinOK
"Eccentric, yes absolutely.." Crazy like a fox more like.

The consenus on this forum appears to be that the jury brought in the correct verdict for these particular charges, and I begrudgingly agree. However, any man who "sleeps" with little boys (notice the glaring absence of little girls) is definitely left of center. MJ needs psychiatric help, at the very least.
Incredible naivety isn't listed in the DSM IV. I don't think he has a mental illness, I think he simply needs to grow up and get real. Although I'm sure some counselling would help him come to terms with all this. He "sleeps" with boys yes, but sleep doesn't always mean sex or molestation. He hangs out with kids- climbs trees with them, plays video games, running round Neverland having fun and sleeps. Why is it soo hard for people to think that this could be innocent? A reflection of the times I suppose.
As for the sleepovers...Macauly Culkin said to Larry King- you have to remember Michael Jackson's bed is the size of a room, his bedroom is two storeys with 3 bathrooms ...and when he had sleepovers with MJ, Michael Jackson slept on the floor- camping out. The guy is just trying to recapture the childhood he never had. Its got to stop of course..at least the sleepovers have to stop. I hope he doesn't close the doors of Neverland to all after this - he's helped a lot of disadvantaged and ill children.

rincewind Jun 14th 2005 2:05 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by Taffyles
I hope he doesn't close the doors of Neverland to all after this - he's helped a lot of disadvantaged and ill children.
But like most things, someone comes a long and screws it up for everyone else.

Taffyles Jun 14th 2005 2:20 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by rincewind
I'm curious to see how he will act now. Will he still have sleepovers and risk it happening again. His trust was used against him twice now and if it was me, I wouldn't take that chance again.

Whatever the parent's "m.o." was, I think they should be investigated. Wasn't there some deal with them and JC Penny's?? Didn't the parents so them too??
Yes the family has a history of this.The parents used their son's cancer to try and get money out of celebrities- J Leno being one. They divorced and the father lost custody of the kids because he assaulted the mother. Next, the mother filed a false law suit against JC Penny to try and get money (previously having sent the boys to acting lessons). Gavin Alvariz admitted that he had lied in that law suit...IOW committed perjury. And no doubt she saw an opportunity to get a big settlement out of Michael Jackson. The child protective agencies should be investigating HER.

rincewind Jun 14th 2005 2:24 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by Taffyles
The child protective agencies should be investigating HER.
Agreed.

doctor scrumpy Jun 14th 2005 3:31 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
NBC must have a great sense of humour.

Our tv was advertizing Fear Factor, with people having to put awful things in their mouth whilst being blindfolded. Strangely enough they had wacko jacko instead on.

Who says the Yanks don't do irony ??? :D

austin_d_powers Jun 14th 2005 3:35 am
Re: Michael Jackson - Verdict
 
Originally Posted by callé
:mad: Just like OJ. :rolleyes:
NO, not like OJ.

MJ had a trial,
OJ had a long running media circus show (literally) with cameras in the court room and everyone thinking about book deals, movie rights and TV shows (including the jury).


All times are GMT -12. The time now is 8:45 am.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.