• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

michale jackson enough said.

Johnny

.. Commodore ..
Political User
#3
He's a fruitcake. Needs to be put in a mental ward or something.

You know the funny thing is that since he's rich he is known as eccentric. If he was a normal joe like you and me he would be referred to as a pedophile nut case ..
 
#4
Michael Jackson might seem to exhibit the same behaviors that sick pedophile would portray; however, I believe he is harmless. Granting the fact that his whole childhood was taken away, forced into the production industry his entire youth. He does obviously have some mental deficientcies, but I honestly believe he thinks of himself as a kid and tries to do all the things a normal kid 30 years younger than himself would do.. lmao? To suggest anything sexual is not far from the spot, unless you look at the psychology going on up stairs.

In my own opinion, Jackson is innocent and the general public would like to seem him put away just because. Because why? Everyone wants to think he's some sick pervert just because of the wierd things he does, but the world is too cruel to understand the psychology of his life.
 

muzikool

Act your wage.
Political User
#5
It's one thing if people are making an assumption based on his behavior, it's another when children are accusing him of doing illegal things. Granted, the accusations could be false, but since the accusations exist Jackson must be put on trial. Evidence, or the lack thereof, will hopefully bring out the truth in the end.
 

Johnny

.. Commodore ..
Political User
#6
fully 100% agree with muzikool .. I hope he is innocent, then he can shove it averyones face. If you look at it, he has been the target of jokes and accusations for years now. That makes it tough to believe whether what they say is true or not ..
 
#7
Well the law that the general public will do absolutely anything for money rings true about 100% of the time. If there is one thing that will make me sick, even more than if Jackson really is a pedophile, is these childrens parents persuading these kids to make up these stories.

Really it is quite sad how much everyone actually hates/cares about Jackson (or any public figure for that matter), isn't in nice to make your own life seem normal contrasting it against people who day in and out offer their lives for critique by the masses. Unless this persons decisions directly effect your own life, what this person does or doesnt do shouldn't take up too much time out of your day.
 

Tuffgong4

The Donger Need Food!!!!
Political User
#8
from all reports right now he is still a celebrity yes but by no means is he rich...he is in hellish debt with no end in sight and has not sold records like he used to...if he did may he burn in hell but if he didn't the people accusing him should have to pay him all the attorney fees back so he can go back to having the money he had
 

wigan_ukmale

OSNN Junior Addict
#9
"British reporter Martin Bashir refused to answer nearly all of the defence's questions on the second day of the trial in Santa Maria, California." - Is this because he tried his best to make Jackson look as bad a possible in his documentry, because his documentry started off all the accusations leading to this trial or because he's a cold blooded liar?

And as for the Jury - "The jurors range in age from 20 to 79. The racial and ethnic breakdown appeared to be seven whites, four Hispanics and one Asian. There were no African Americans." - why no african american? Seems like the judge has made his mind up already and has chosen a jury that are more likely to find Jackson guilty. What hope has Jackson got now?
 

wigan_ukmale

OSNN Junior Addict
#12
Oh sorry, thought I read somewhere that Michael Jackson was in court this week - so if this is old news I apologise.

I was under the impression that OSNN Forum was for chatting about recent (current) topics. Just because this thread was opened last year doesn't mean its an "old argument".
 
L

Lee

Guest
#13
I don't think it is right to discuss it anyway, like when you're on jury service you cannot discuss details with anyone else.

He is innocent to proven guilty, so till he is convicted or not convicted of what he is accused of, then we should not discuss it.
 

falconguard

Carbon based lifeform
Political User
#14
uhmm, he seems to be going to court every two years when someone new keeps popping up. not that this is news, but maybe the fact that he did not settle this one out of court. ahh well he has money
 
L

Lee

Guest
#15
I can't see him being found guilty anyway. It's all based on a I.T.V.1 programme.

This case will be thrown out soon, Orange Juice Simpson all over again.
 

wigan_ukmale

OSNN Junior Addict
#16
I don't think its right to discuss whether he's guilty or not guilty either (thats what the jury is for afterall), but I did think that people might want to discuss the progress of the case.
 
L

Lee

Guest
#17
wigan_ukmale said:
I don't think its right to discuss whether he's guilty or not guilty either (thats what the jury is for afterall), but I did think that people might want to discuss the progress of the case.
Well all you will know is, reports on the radio, tv (bskyb 1) or news papers.

They aren't showing it live, you don't have access to all the evidence so really, even watching the TV simulation by actors on bskyb 1 still makes no difference.

I myself watched nearly all of the OJ Simpson case, I was shocked when he was found not guilty, for whatever reason, I feel this will be the same with Michael Jackson.

Last I say on the matter.
 

falconguard

Carbon based lifeform
Political User
#18
Lee, it isn't a case of celebrity as far as OJ, but a case of money
Money buys good representation in court, and that makes all the difference.
you can go up and down our court histories and see where money had an influence. I know not a glowing commendation of our law and it's practice, but what the hell, they are lawyers. They deserve to cannibalize their young
 

muzikool

Act your wage.
Political User
#20
wigan_ukmale said:
And as for the Jury - "The jurors range in age from 20 to 79. The racial and ethnic breakdown appeared to be seven whites, four Hispanics and one Asian. There were no African Americans." - why no african american? Seems like the judge has made his mind up already and has chosen a jury that are more likely to find Jackson guilty. What hope has Jackson got now?
What hope has he got? Apparently juries without African Americans are prejudiced against black-turned-white pop stars. I hope you're joking. If you are, then you need to use a smilie with your post.

The judge's duty is to weed out any potential juror who appears to be prejudiced one way or the other in the first place. What if potential African Americans jurors were found to be prejudiced against Jackson in some shape or form? Perhaps a perception exists amongst some African Americans that Jackson was ashamed of being black. That would give a judge pretty good reason to dismiss those people.

I can't see any potential for a valid argument claiming that a jury lacking African Americans would be more threatening to Jackson than a jury with African Americans. This is not and should not be a race issue.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Electronic Punk wrote on Perris Calderon's profile.
All good still mate?
Hello, is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me ...
Xie
What a long strange trip it's been. =)

Forum statistics

Threads
61,961
Messages
673,239
Members
89,015
Latest member
evaiwhitis