Michael Jackson

[earpl]

it was clear he was going to be not guilty.... im not saying he didnt do it, because i think he did, but the kids parents got them to play it up too much, so much they made it inbelieveable.

"im one sneekey peekey, ti**y viewin mother f****r"

"yall didn't think bubbles was a f*****g monkey did you"

[stevetubbyturbo]

I just hope he takes this as a warning and leaves kiddys alone now as next time he might not be so lucky

[Fmrl]

I just hope he takes this as a warning and leaves kiddys alone now as next time he might not be so lucky

I don't think it will make any difference to the way he behaves - according to US law he's completely innocent on all counts.

MJ openly admitted in court that he slept with young boys, etc. therefore he can carry on doing this without any fear of prosecution.

[Tegan]

is the usa law a bit wrong? correct me if i'm wrong, i dont know any law, but isnt it that if 1 jury believes that he is innocent, then he would be off?

Sorry if there are any MJ fans here, but my own opinion is, my ***** he didnt touch kids i dont care if he is innocent or not, i also believes that he got off with it because he is a superstar.

Sorry for my "biased" view, but thats wot i believe

Ray

←

Some jurisdictions allow majority verdicts in criminal cases.

Certain jurisdictions require a minimum number of jurors to agree, but in others (notably Scotland) a simple majority is acceptable.

Occasionally juries deliberate for several days. Usually initially a judge will instruct a jury not to contemplate a majority verdict. After a time, if no verdict is found the judge will recall the jury and instruct them that he is prepared to consider one.

In English law, the jury's conversations must not be disclosed outside the jury, even after the case, and to repeat parts of them is contempt of court and can result in time in jail.

In the USA this rule does not apply, and sometimes jurors have made remarks that called into question whether a verdict was properly arrived at.

So as for the Jury sitting a press conference and answering questions - well you can make up your own mind whether a fair verdict was reached and whether or not they were truly able to put the fact that he is/was a mega star out of their minds!

hope that answers your question ray

T x

[jay dh]

justice was done

i knew all along he wasnt guilty and the evidence wasnt there that he was guilty

good result

Jay

[Karma Supra]

I'm not proud, I'd let him molest me for $20million

[Demonic Angel]

From the Sky News website, a reader called Gavin Brown has summed it all up!

I'm at a loss. So many people here are slating the US legal system for finding the man not guilty, but how small minded are these critics as all they seem to be saying is that they know better, he was guilty and if they ran the US like the dictators they seem to aspire to being then they would have had him hung drawn and quartered. Watch the whole trial did you? It amazes me, you slate the system because the outcome was not what you believe to be correct even though you weren't in the courtroom, you didn't hear every piece of evidence and you have decided in your own minds that the man is paedophile. Sneddon has been chasing Jackson for years and the jury themselves said that they were amazed by the lack of evidence. In the years it's taken him to get Jackson to court you would have thought that if there was any real tangible evidence then it would have been put forward. Granted he paid the previous accuser off, but in fairness, taking into account the financial and emotional batering he has taken, £15m was a bargain! The sad thing is that you who believe he is guilty will never accept anything other than what you believe to be correct, regardless of what a jury might conclude. It must be difficult being right all the time, how do you guys cope?

The guys an innocent man and has been found innocent in a court of law. To slate the system because you're not happy with the outcome isn't fair IMO!

[Blaze]

Hes innocent by law and thats what the law says! Lack of evidence is what most people are saying!(i know what i mean even if you lot dont! )

IMHO i think he has been hounded for years by people who want his money and he has Neveland because he never had a childhood.

Would you be the same if you had all his money and had no childhood?

[MSC_Kev]

At the end of the day, there where far too many key witnesses discredited for coming forward with fabricated stories to make money out of it!

If there was any form of doubt in the Jury's mind then he should like he has been found not guilty and with the increasing amount of discredited witnesses, I'm not at all surprised he got let off.

If any of the stories and statements where in fact the whole truth and Jackson did commit offences against children then these where simply clouded over imo by the amount of money grabbing american's trying to get something out of the Jackson case.

Personally I think he's miss-understood and with his childhood being what is was it's not surprising he has turned out somewhat different to the norm. At the same time I have my serious doubts at some of the things that people and Jackson have openly admitted to doing, I don't think the truth will ever come out totally tbh. However his reputation has took a huge dent and I would think American families will think twice about leaving there children alone with Jackson again, so if anything has gone on, then hopefully there will not be a repeat of it in the near future.

Kev

[Fmrl]

Would you be the same if you had all his money and had no childhood?

Isn't it just MJ himself that said he didn't have a childhood in order to justify the way he behaves?

Would you let him babysit your kids?

[Gnome]

Still think he's a weirdo....

:D :D :D

[Blaze]

Would you be the same if you had all his money and had no childhood?

Isn't it just MJ himself that said he didn't have a childhood in order to justify the way he behaves?

Would you let him babysit your kids?

←

i dont have any so it would be hard

[Tegan]

The guys an innocent man and has been found innocent in a court of law. To slate the system because you're not happy with the outcome isn't fair IMO!

←

I agree unless youve sat in the courtroom and heard every piece of evidence then its not fair to say whether the jury were right or wrong

but do take into mind cases such as the soham murders or little jamie that got murdered on train tracks - in any of these cases if there was a jury and they were found not guilty im sure all you lot would have a fair bit to say about that

puts it into perspective! ;)

[Fmrl]

I just wonder if it would have been possible to have kept the entire case anonymous and whether that would have made any difference to the outcome.

Eg. if the jury had just been told the facts of the case without any mention of MJ.

[Ryan1985]

I thought he was innocent ('cos all the people involved obviously just wanted money), he was PROVEN innocent so justice is done imo.

[Fmrl]

He was found not guilty due to insufficient evidence.

[Ryan1985]

And why? There was none to be found! In my opinion of course! ;)

[Tegan]

This thread could go on forever!

Everyone has different opinion whether or not the verdict was correct

There never gonna be a clear answer anyway

[Al J]

Okay, so Jackson is officially innocent of the counts against him. So what! Would those of you who think he has done nothing wrong leave your children or a nephew or neice in his care? I sure wouldn't.

Even if innocent in actuality, his practices and behaviour sail very close to the wind. His fame and popularity do not excuse some of his actions and the flag waving "Victory" comments on his website are pretty sick. This is not up there with historic moments like the bringing down of the Berlin Wall or the release of Nelson Mandela. A little humility wouldn't go amiss.

[jay dh]

I just wonder if it would have been possible to have kept the entire case anonymous and whether that would have made any difference to the outcome.

Eg. if the jury had just been told the facts of the case without any mention of MJ.

←

it would be exactly the same

[jay dh]

He was found not guilty due to insufficient evidence.

←

not true, the evidence there wasnt acurate

[Demonic Angel]

Okay, so Jackson is officially innocent of the counts against him. So what! Would those of you who think he has done nothing wrong leave your children or a nephew or neice in his care? I sure wouldn't.

←

Do you mean that because of the sex offences or for another reason Al? Hes not a child sex offender - IMO all he's ever done is loved children too much (and not in that sense either before anyone says!)

I truly believe that he is just misguided and the only reason I would not leave my child in his care is for the simple fact that psychologically hes a child in a mans body and therefore not in my honest opinion, capable of looking after a child - it would be nothing to do with any sort of sexual deviances.

In that respect also, if it was me working for American Social Services I would give Debbie Rowe full custody of all three children, or at least Joe & Katherine Jackson. Not because he is a bad father, but I dont believe he is capable of raising three small children - those kids deserve a half-normal life, not being sheilded by veils all the time.

Thats just my opinion though.

[jay dh]

Okay, so Jackson is officially innocent of the counts against him. So what! Would those of you who think he has done nothing wrong leave your children or a nephew or neice in his care? I sure wouldn't.

←

Do you mean that because of the s*x offences or for another reason Al? Hes not a child s*x offender - IMO all he's ever done is loved children too much (and not in that sense either before anyone says!)

I truly believe that he is just misguided and the only reason I would not leave my child in his care is for the simple fact that psychologically hes a child in a mans body and therefore not in my honest opinion, capable of looking after a child - it would be nothing to do with any sort of sexual deviances.

In that respect also, if it was me working for American Social Services I would give Debbie Rowe full custody of all three children, or at least Joe & Katherine Jackson. Not because he is a bad father, but I dont believe he is capable of raising three small children - those kids deserve a half-normal life, not being sheilded by veils all the time.

Thats just my opinion though.

←

i agree with that, although i would not leave kids in custody of joe jackson as he is not suitable to look after children. he has a bad temper among a few things

Jay

[Demonic Angel]

Okay, so Jackson is officially innocent of the counts against him. So what! Would those of you who think he has done nothing wrong leave your children or a nephew or neice in his care? I sure wouldn't.

←

Do you mean that because of the sex offences or for another reason Al? Hes not a child sex offender - IMO all he's ever done is loved children too much (and not in that sense either before anyone says!)

I truly believe that he is just misguided and the only reason I would not leave my child in his care is for the simple fact that psychologically hes a child in a mans body and therefore not in my honest opinion, capable of looking after a child - it would be nothing to do with any sort of sexual deviances.

In that respect also, if it was me working for American Social Services I would give Debbie Rowe full custody of all three children, or at least Joe & Katherine Jackson. Not because he is a bad father, but I dont believe he is capable of raising three small children - those kids deserve a half-normal life, not being sheilded by veils all the time.

Thats just my opinion though.

←

i agree with that, although i would not leave kids in custody of joe jackson as he is not suitable to look after children. he has a bad temper among a few things

Jay

←

Thats a fair point - Joe made Michaels youth hell, pretty much the reason he is how he is today is his childhood or lack of it.

I say Debbie Rowe then - let her has full custody of Prince Michael, Paris & also Prince Michael II - she can give them a stable upbringing. Michael has a lot of issues he needs to sort out.

[Al J]

I think I'd always be worried about the s*x offence side of things (he wouldn't be the first person judged innocent to have actually committed the crime, now would he?) but no, I was more concerned about the damaging mental effect that association with him has, in my opnion, on young minds.

It is one thing for Jackson to cling onto his misguided beliefs.

It is totally another matter to pass those beliefs onto children as normal adult behaviour.