Michael Jackson Verdict Reached (being read within the hour)

i agree that he screwed up, and there isnt too many people that deny that. but you just cant convict on what your opinion is. some of the jury said they couldnt prove beyond a resounable doubt desbite what they felt about jackson and if he did perform a lud act on a the kid.

i think a big part in the jurys verdict was the mother. they all agreed they did not like her. i wonder if her testimony weighed more than her sons. or if the jury payed less attention to the kids testimony due to the mothers actions through out the trial.
 
jackson iz a stupid fuck he should have learned his lesson the first time. .......who the fuck wants 2 hang wit a bunch of kids anywayz.....kids are so fuckin anoying.... i hope hiz dumbazz learns!!!!!!!!this time....
 
Saint33 said:
the man is obviously messed up. It jus bugs me how blind sum peeps can be, the guy obviously did it.
Obviously Micheal is messed up mentally, this obviosly stems from his childhood and the way he was raised, this doesn't make him guilty. How can you call people blind, a court of Law says he is innocent, is that too hard to comprehend.
 
tupacmansion said:
Why don't you backup what you say rather then dropping comments with not a single piece of evidence?
How the fuck am i supposed to back it up? Im not a detective. The guy is guilty, he only got off because he is famous. And what evidence have you provided? The fact that he wasnt convicted? If so, i wont take any of your posts seriously :thumb: .
 
haunted said:
How the fuck am i supposed to back it up? Im not a detective.
Of course your not detective and of course you have no evidence in regards to this case. This gives you no right to call him a child molestor.
Fair enough you can have your opinion, as stupid as it may be, but back it up, don't just make a random comment.
The guy is guilty, he only got off because he is famous.

plz tell me that was some kind of stupid joke, the only reason he was taken to court was because of his fame and money. The trial was being watched by millions, how the hell could he be let of because he was famous? it makes no sence.

And what evidence have you provided?
Its your job to prove his guilt, not my job to prove his innocence. Innocent until proven guilty. You must have some serious hatred for MJ, don't hate someone for the sake of hating them. Look at the facts.
 
tupacmansion said:
Its your job to prove his guilt, not my job to prove his innocence. Innocent until proven guilty. You must have some serious hatred for MJ, don't hate someone for the sake of hating them. Look at the facts.

We do hav some serious hate for him. I hate ne sick fuck who has sex wit kids. Im gettin tired of people sayin he didnt do it. Hes bin blamed twice for it, jus cuz ther wasnt enuf evidence to legally get away wit it, doesnt mean ther wasnt enough evidence tha wud obviously make it true. He wudnt be blamed twice for it if he didnt do it. And if u say cuz hes famous and because people want his money, ur dumb. U think people jus make these plans to get money, it wudnt happen twice, like y wud it happen to Micheal twice and its never happened to the 100s of other celebrities out ther. Like i sed before ud hav to be blind to not realise hes guilty. Actually blind, def and retard.
 
Saint33 said:
We do hav some serious hate for him. I hate ne sick fuck who has sex wit kids. Im gettin tired of people sayin he didnt do it. Hes bin blamed twice for it, jus cuz ther wasnt enuf evidence to legally get away wit it, doesnt mean ther wasnt enough evidence tha wud obviously make it true. He wudnt be blamed twice for it if he didnt do it. And if u say cuz hes famous and because people want his money, ur dumb. U think people jus make these plans to get money, it wudnt happen twice, like y wud it happen to Micheal twice and its never happened to the 100s of other celebrities out ther. Like i sed before ud hav to be blind to not realise hes guilty. Actually blind, def and retard.


just because he was blammed twice for lud acts with underage boys does not mean he did anything. the other times never went to trial and honestly he seems like the kind of person who would pay something to go away. and there is a good chance that the child 's mother from this time around new that from her previous experience of extorting jc penney. do you honestly know any facts about this case? have you been watching this case unfold everyday on msnbc and the abrams report? probably not. most likely you only know what the biased media is telling you. or what you hear from your friends in high school.

look your 15 and really, you dont know anything about the law, how the legal system works, or anything at all for that matter. just shut the fuck up! :thumb: :D
 
I was watching CNN and Fox, and it saddens me that even though the Jury, after a long trial, 174 witnesses and 9 days discussing the verdict found him not guilty, the media is still making sly comments and leading viewers to believe he is guilty. You know had they found him guilty everyone would have just said "I told you so," yet after a fair trial they just will not let up on Michael.

It just goes to show that in the media, Michael was guilty from the start.
 
haunted said:
How the fuck am i supposed to back it up? Im not a detective. The guy is guilty, he only got off because he is famous. And what evidence have you provided? The fact that he wasnt convicted? If so, i wont take any of your posts seriously :thumb: .

That is just ignorant and stupid, what you're saying is that because he is famous, the only outcome you would have accepted is guilty. Anything else and you would have said he got off because he was famous.

Open your eyes, the evidence was just not there. Your argument would hold some weight if everyone in the media was saying he was not guilty, but thats not the case. Everyone was saying he was guilty, and most of the media continues to lean that way. Yet the jury found him not guilty because there was no proof that he did it.

You have the burden of proof to convince me that Michael is guilty, if you cant do it, then you shouldnt make ignorant uneducated and unfounded remarks like that.
 
PuffnScruff said:
most likely you only know what the biased media is telling you. or what you hear from your friends in high school.

look your 15 and really, you dont know anything about the law, how the legal system works, or anything at all for that matter. just shut the fuck up! :thumb: :D

FUCK U, jus cuz im 15 u think i don no shit. Who the fuck r u to talk. I realise tha it was a fair trial and legally he shudnt hav bin prosicuted. Ther jus wasnt enough hard evidence. Im jus sayin he obviously did it, the guy is fucked up, hes bin blamed before, look how he treats his own kids like fuck, hangin them off balconies. The guys got fuckin issues. And dont tell me im biased cuz i rilly didnt giv a shit bout the guy before, jus from wut ive herd and seen, it seems pretty obvious he did it.

Plus, now don rag on me if im rong for this one cuz im not positive on it, but didnt the kid describe sumin bout his dick tha was unusual and he wud only no if he had seen it. I remember hearin tha awhile ago, but im not positive so don start trippin out on me if im rong.
 
we all know he's not all there . anyone can see that. but we also dont know how serious his addiction to pain killers were either , so that could have had some effect on him.
the baby slipt out from under his arms cause he didnt have a good hold on the child. that was pretty bad on his part. but i doubt he was thinking to himself, i think im going to throw my own child over the balconey for the whole world to see. he's not that screwed up.

yes, the child drew a picture of what jacksons penis looks like. what would they do, have jackson pull down his pants in front of the jury? the police did take pictures of jaclson when they arrested him. jackson said they took pictures of him naked. for all we know the judge could have viewed the drawing, the police pics, and decided that the evidence did not hold up and there was no reason to embarass jackson like that in front of the world.
 
Rukas said:
It just goes to show that in the media, Michael was guilty from the start.

Yea, no shit?

They feast on shit like this like vultures. They just look for opprotunities to kick someone while they're down, and continiue to beat the already dead horse.


Things like this is nothing new, and will stay the same as long as it gets ratings, because everythings about money thease days, including the reason for the trial in the first place.

untitled20jr.gif
 
Chronic said:
The people who are complaining need to shut the fuck up. You don't know he's guilty, you're merely speculating. You don't know the jury's reasons for letting him off. You don't know all the evidence. You don't know shit.

Thank the LORD somebody pointed that shit out! :thumb:
 

Latest posts

Donate

Back in the day, we used to recieve donations sent as cash in fake birthday cards! Those were the days! I still have some of them, actually.

Now we have crypto.

Ethereum/EVM: 0x9c70214f34ea949095308dca827380295b201e80

Bitcoin: bc1qa5twnqsqm8jxrcxm2z9w6gts7syha8gasqacww

Solana: 8xePHrFwsduS7xU4XNjp2FRArTD7RFzmCQsjBaetE2y8

Members online

No members online now.