MJ trial verdict

Discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users.
Forum rules
General Discussion is a bonus forum for discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users. All site rules apply.
skuld the great
Registered User
Posts: 379
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 4:08 pm

MJ trial verdict

Post by skuld the great » Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:22 pm

Not guilty on all ten counts!
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/article/ds21796.html wrote: Verdict 1 (conspiracy to commit child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion): COUNT 1: NOT GUILTY

Verdict 2 (lewd act on child younger than 14): COUNT 1: NOT GUILTY / COUNT 2: NOT GUILTY / COUNT 3: NOT GUILTY / COUNT 4: NOT GUILTY

Verdict 3 (attempted lewd act on child under 14): COUNT 1: NOT GUILTY

Verdict 4 (furnishing alcohol to minor, administering alcohol for child molestation): COUNT 1: NOT GUILTY / COUNT 2: NOT GUILTY / COUNT 3: NOT GUILTY / COUNT 4: NOT GUILTY


I believed he was innocent from the start, this is good news to me.
Skuld

User avatar
MHobbit
Former Team Member
Posts: 4761
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: There and Back Again

Post by MHobbit » Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:36 pm

I've fully lost faith in the American justice system [again]. :P
Former phpBB MOD Team member
No private support is offered.
"There’s too many things to get done, and I’m running out of days..."

User avatar
Draegonis
Former Team Member
Posts: 3950
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 3:12 pm
Location: Kµlt øƒ Ø
Contact:

Post by Draegonis » Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:38 pm

What a waste of the past 6 months.

craigbrass
Registered User
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 9:29 am
Location: Cumbria, UK
Contact:

Post by craigbrass » Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:48 pm

I agree with Draegonis, In terms of phpBB, its like starting a forum, getting it to 1000 members and then simply perminantly closing it.
Offering Quality and Reliable Web Hosting @ SubSonicSolutions. Click here for more info.

On a Crusade to get Everyone Using a Browser other than Internet Explorer!

adamsmark
Registered User
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 1:04 am
Location: Los Gatos, CA
Contact:

Post by adamsmark » Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:05 pm

I'm surprised. The man sleeps with young boys. This ought to be stopped. That said, the D.A. needed a stronger case--much stronger. I wouldn't have felt comfortable with a guilty verdict... but I don't feel comfortable with a not guilty verdict either.

Can't they get this guy for merely sleeping with boys? Or how about dangling a child outside a window?
"I believe in the atomic bomb."

Blogging at http://agabus.com

Rabidus_Lupus
Registered User
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 11:26 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Post by Rabidus_Lupus » Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:12 am

adamsmark wrote: I'm surprised. The man sleeps with young boys. This ought to be stopped. That said, the D.A. needed a stronger case--much stronger. I wouldn't have felt comfortable with a guilty verdict... but I don't feel comfortable with a not guilty verdict either.

The jury probably felt the same way, but when that's the case, you have to vote not guilty.
If there is only one God, and he is the top of the chain of command in life, where did he come from?

sonyboy
Registered User
Posts: 2980
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:10 am

Post by sonyboy » Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:32 am

Justice is served.

Vanderloogen
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:24 am

Post by Vanderloogen » Tue Jun 14, 2005 1:11 am

If you're famous and live in California................
You are above the law


So, today was no surprise

User avatar
psoTFX
Former Team Member
Posts: 7425
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2001 8:50 pm

Post by psoTFX » Tue Jun 14, 2005 1:35 am

It's amazing ... a jury of his peers hands down a not guilty verdict ... and people not party to all the testimony still decide he's guilty, hum ho.

FWIW, from what I've read via the BBC and other sites the past few months I'm amazed the DA, heck the Judge, took this (or allowed it to continue) for all this time. It seems the prosecutions evidence was at best "flimsy", and the defence appears to have consistently undermined each and every part of it. Again, based purely on what's reported I don't see how the jury could've handed out any different a verdict.

As for MJ's curious activities ... maybe, just maybe, this will knock some sense into the guy.
Last edited by psoTFX on Tue Jun 14, 2005 9:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

Muas
Registered User
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2003 7:57 pm

Post by Muas » Tue Jun 14, 2005 1:42 am

Predator or prey?
(Filed: 13/06/2005)

Michael Jackson may or may not be guilty as charged - but that, says Barbara Amiel, is beside the point. The essence of his trial has been the spectacle of a brilliant but peculiar man being fed, piece by piece, to the lions.

Link

So, to those who believe he is guilty, they can be happy in the fact that Jackson may have to sell his Neverland park among other accumlated weath. For those who believed Jackson was innocent, another example of just how badly innocents can be victimized by the public and within the courts.

For the rest who don't care either way, you missed out on worthier news.

User avatar
nuckfan15
Registered User
Posts: 1849
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 4:46 am
Location: Vancouver, BC
Name: Travis

Post by nuckfan15 » Tue Jun 14, 2005 1:51 am

Oh come on! Jackson was innocent. Have any of you Jackson haters every heard of a gold digger? Even the jurorys stated that "what kind of mother lets there kid sleep with Micheal Jackson." The case had no evidence and the mother was an idiot. And I will stand by this statement : Innocent until proven guilty. There was no proof in this case, so he is Innocent in my opinion. But overall I am quite pleased with the trial.

Now as for the mother, hopefully Jackson sues the money out of her. If not shes quite screwed anyway, correct me if Im wrong, does the loser not have to pay for the trial down there?Or maybe the courts will charge her. Well see.
Last edited by nuckfan15 on Tue Jun 14, 2005 1:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
Travis aka Nuckfan15 - No Private Support
Make use of the Support Request Template when seeking support.

Magnotta
Former Team Member
Posts: 1093
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:16 am
Location: Ontario

Post by Magnotta » Tue Jun 14, 2005 1:58 am

Muas wrote: So, to those who believe he is guilty, they can be happy in the fact that Jackson may have to sell his Neverland park among other accumlated weath.


Jackson already sold his Neverland ranch, to an undisclosed buyer. He's also stated he will most likely leave the country.

O well, it's what money get's you: the ability to go on TV and say you invite kids over to sleep in your bed with you, and yet have nothing happen. While I don't believe he molested this particular kid, I do believe he has probabaly molested other kids in the past, or at least come close.

Either way, it doesn't matter now. When the jury announced the verdicts, the first charge, conspieracy to abduct the child, hold family hostage, etc ect, I wasn't that suprised that he was found not guilty on that. MJ just doesn't seem like someone smart enough to actually think up all that.

But either way, it's over finally. I wish he was found guilty, but nothing anyone can do about it now. He just has too much money/fame. Heck, if he had dropped that baby from his hotel room that day he probably would have gotten away with it.

iloserman
Registered User
Posts: 1147
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 7:45 pm
Location: My Closet Mode: Working
Contact:

Post by iloserman » Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:06 am

Magnotta wrote: He just has too much money/fame. Heck, if he had dropped that baby from his hotel room that day he probably would have gotten away with it.



Did you not hear/read anything about the case or the evidence? Anyone with that shotty case evidence would be found not guilty under most any curcumstances. Wether rich, poor, or famous.


Just because the guy happens to be famous, and the case happens to be the biggest thing on the news in the past few months, dosn't mean thats the reason for the verdict.


ILM
- Have a problem? I would love to help you out.
[ AIM ] [ MSN ] [ PM ] [ E-MAIL ] [ Website ] <- Contact info below.

Over 2,550+ users assisted, outside of phpBB. 37 Hosted.

User avatar
prince_of_oreon
Registered User
Posts: 2422
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:01 pm
Location: Kvlt øf Ørëøñ ¤ þøµær øƒ †æh

Post by prince_of_oreon » Tue Jun 14, 2005 3:05 am

My gut feeling is if Jackson was guilty, the prosecution lost because they never won the jury over from the start. The jury was empathetic towards Jackson, and the defense did a good job of showing the inordinantly careless behaviour of his mother. If the jury was anything like myself, I'm sure the decision was based in part upon their disdain for the mother's negligence.

I still think he lucked out, and should have done time; but so should have OJ.
Both being wealthy Californian's I'm trying to draw some correlation. :wink:

Kanuck
Former Team Member
Posts: 2791
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 9:33 pm
Location: Toronto, Ontario

Post by Kanuck » Tue Jun 14, 2005 3:19 am

prince_of_oreon wrote: I still think he lucked out, and should have done time; but so should have OJ.

The difference here would be, one of these people is a mentally unstable individual who was victimized by a witch hunt; the other murdered three people, and got off because the glove that proved his guilt was ruled inadmissible.

Not really comparable.
Kanuck
Former phpBB.com team member

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”