http://images.t-nation.com/forum_images/./1/.1118706372460.jesusjuice.jpg
In this specific case, probably. Innocent PERIOD? Hell no.
theres a difference between being Innocent and Not Gulity, he’s defaintly guilty and just like Oj, what makes me sick is to hear people cheering when they heard the verdict
Just cause he’s wierd doesn’t mean he’s guilty.
If you think ‘wierd’ people are the only ones who molest children then I’d really hate to be under your supervision as a child.
The guy’s had a childhood unlike anyone else, and he’s obviously very psychologically damaged, doesn’t make him a child molestor.
“Knock knock… Who’s there? Little Boy Blue… Little Boy Blue who? Michael Jackson…”
OD
I wonder if he will still think it is acceptable to have sleep overs with little boys. You can feel sorry for the abuse he suffered as a child, but not for the pedophile he became.
The innocent verdict is understandable it was a weak case, but I believe he is a molester.
well, you can’t send people to jail based on a “he said, she said” case. They didn’t show any proof, just weak arguments by people that hated him or wanted money from him.
I think this case was more a comment on the blind tunnel vision of the DA.
Do I think that MJ is a child molester? Your damn right I do.
Did the prosecution prove it? Nope.
The judge in this case allowed crap too be admitted as ‘evidence’ that - even if they had gotten a conviction - would certainly be thrown out on appeal.
Note to parents - if you are going to whore your kids out to a big star for cash, you should be the ones thrown in jail for reckless endangerment.
I just got this email from a client of mine, don’t know where the picture came from, but one picture is worth a thousand words…
laquino1
[quote]rainjack wrote:
I think this case was more a comment on the blind tunnel vision of the DA.
Do I think that MJ is a child molester? Your damn right I do.[/quote]
I agree with everything you wrote…except the idea that anyone knows he is a child molester. I think he is screwed up just like I wrote about months ago when he was first accused. I don’t think that alone equals “sex with kids”. He acts like a big kid himself. I think that means he may need professional help, but for anyone to act as if they “know” he molests children is just wrong. There has never been any evidence of that…just him in a big ass amusement park for a house. The dude has hung with kids since we were all kids. Not one of us has shit to say back in 1985 when he was going to awards shows with Bubbles and Webster. What changed? We grew up…he didn’t.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I agree with everything you wrote…except the idea that anyone knows he is a child molester. I think he is screwed up just like I wrote about months ago when he was first accused. I don’t think that alone equals “sex with kids”. He acts like a big kid himself. I think that means he may need professional help, but for anyone to act as if they “know” he molests children is just wrong. There has never been any evidence of that…just him in a big ass amusement park for a house. The dude has hung with kids since we were all kids. Not one of us has shit to say back in 1985 when he was going to awards shows with Bubbles and Webster. What changed? We grew up…he didn’t.[/quote]
It did freak me out in '85, or whenever it was, to see him buddied up to Webster. Of course I was 20 at the time, so that might make a difference in how I percieve MJ. (Insert old fart joke here)
But I’ll rephrase the statement. I wouldn’t leave my son at his house to spend the night - would you?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I think this case was more a comment on the blind tunnel vision of the DA.
Do I think that MJ is a child molester? Your damn right I do.
I agree with everything you wrote…except the idea that anyone knows he is a child molester. I think he is screwed up just like I wrote about months ago when he was first accused. I don’t think that alone equals “sex with kids”. He acts like a big kid himself. I think that means he may need professional help, but for anyone to act as if they “know” he molests children is just wrong. There has never been any evidence of that…just him in a big ass amusement park for a house. The dude has hung with kids since we were all kids. Not one of us has shit to say back in 1985 when he was going to awards shows with Bubbles and Webster. What changed? We grew up…he didn’t.[/quote]
The one thing you are missing is that by his own admission (even bragging about it) is that he sleeps with kids.
ProfX, I couldn’t say with complete certainty, but their is enough circumstantial evidence for me to feel that he is.
If it wasn’t MJ and you knew an adult man who spent an enormous amount of time with young male adolecents and had them sleep in his bed and offered them liquor wouldn’t you draw some suspicion.
Lewis’s own mother said that she squashed their friendship after MJ was caught trying to check them into a motel back in the eighties before he refined his seduction techniques. I mentioned this before.
Do you think that adrogenous looking Caulkin character would admit publicly that MJ fondled him? No way. That being said I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.
[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
If it wasn’t MJ and you knew an adult man who spent an enormous amount of time with young male adolecents and had them sleep in his bed and offered them liquor wouldn’t you draw some suspicion.
[/quote]
No one would think it was innocent if the victim here was a 13 year old girl being given alcohol and sleeping in the same bed as a grown ass man.
[quote]RoadWarrior wrote:
The one thing you are missing is that by his own admission (even bragging about it) is that he sleeps with kids.
[/quote]
I didn’t miss that at all. I also heard some of the testimony (watched way too much court tv re-enactment coverage of court proceedings) and the concept of a bed meant a 2 story bedroom with video games and a movie screen. I am simply saying that none of knows one way or the other and he is weird…just weird enough to simply enjoy hanging with kids instead of adults.
As for Rainjack’s comments, no, I wouldn’t let my kids spend the night at any grown man’s house regardless of how famous he is without my direct supervision at all times. The fact that many parents did means those parents are to fault. Hell, my parents didn’t allow me to even spend the night at any friends’ houses until I was too old to enjoy it.
Agreed with Professor X on everything he said.
Sure he has admitted to sleeping with kids, but that in itself says a lot. Kids are who he chooses to spend his time with. He’s a weirdo. ::shrug:: Doesn’t mean he’s a predator. The fact that he has readily admitted to kids sleeping in his bed several times says a lot. If he we’re guilty of more, wouldn’t he be trying to hide that shit?
Plus, from what I’ve read about psychologically, “vanilla” stroke mags generally do nothing for people who molest children. I know he supposedly showed it to kids to get them in bed, yada yada. But they said they found boatloads of that shit at the crib. Just a few magazines would work for that. No need for the amount they claimed to have gotten from his house. Michael Jackson: chronic masturbator I definitely buy, but I don’t think he’s a child molestor. And don’t forget, deep down, Michael is black, and he was married to Lisa Marie. I think he likes some ass and titties, myself. Just, perhaps a little too much, judging by the amount of porn they finagled from him. He’s probably pissed about that. That shit’s like the perverts version of a great old baseball card collection.
That guy’s let hundreds, if not thousands of kids stay at his house over the last 20 years. Where are all the other’s? It sounds a lot more realistic to me that 2 of those hundreds of families over 20 years tried to get some free money than it does to think if he really is a child molestor, he ONLY touched 2 of those hundreds of kids. More people would’ve come forward about this. It already looked as if he was going to be found guilty to a lot of people. Those that were molested by him, if they existed, would’ve come forward because it’s a lot easier to jump on a bandwagon than it is to build one. No one wanting to come out first I’ll buy, but it already looked like they had him. If they existed, others would’ve come out, whether out of greed or some type of “healing process”.
And agreed with Professor X on this, especially. Any of those parents who let any of their kids stay at any grown adults house, no matter who it is, without being supervised is a real disappointment as a parental figure. If a guy who looked like that who had all the same shit that he had but who they’d never heard of had their kids at their house, he’d have been in jail just on the suspicion of doing something. The guy sang some songs. You don’t fucking know him, guilty or not. All of these kids should be placed into foster homes. Being a starstruck asshole isn’t an option when your child’s safety is on the line. Shame on all of them.
Kubo
I agree with Prof…and as someone who has seen far too many people hurt with frivilous lawsuits and/or lawsuits that amounted to “legal extortion”…what I think happened here was that this family,a bunch of disgruntled former employees, and an overzealous DA gambled and lost…
Years earlier, a family settled out of court for somewhere between 15-20 million dollars…and you can believe that this was this families hope…
What they didn’t bargain for was that Jackson wouldn’t…or at this time in his Life couldn’t…settle…
Another thing to understand (and I have seen this destroy Lives also)…the definition of “molestation” has become so broad…even broader than the definition of “sexual harrassment”… as to almost tell us nothing about what truly happened…and it lessens the horrible acts that happen to those children who are truly victimized.
One final point…no one “won” here…Micheal is just not going to jail…
Mufasa
Just had to share. . .
So I’m watching CNN and they are doing a segment on the “Not Guilty” verdict, sounds normal, right?
Well, wait till you hear what one of Jackson’s followers had to say. . .
“Michael is more than music. He touches people.”
Ya think?
I’m not sure. I agree with the verdict. I’m not sure that he’s a child molester. He’s definitely a sick man with terrible judgement. And he needs serious pschiatric help. His ideas and behavior with kids is bizarre. But it doesn’t mean he molests them. Bottom line, the DA did not provide the evidence even if it is true.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
but for anyone to act as if they “know” he molests children is just wrong. There has never been any evidence of that…[/quote]
Oh geez, it is not “wrong” to have an opinion. People have opinions about other people all the time.
I used to think maybe he was just weird. But then his own statements, and some of the bizarre circumstantial evidence that came out, made me think he’s guilty.
But to say it’s “wrong” to merely have an opinion about him? That itself is wrong. 
[quote]chrisb71 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
but for anyone to act as if they “know” he molests children is just wrong. There has never been any evidence of that…
Oh geez, it is not “wrong” to have an opinion. People have opinions about other people all the time.
I used to think maybe he was just weird. But then his own statements, and some of the bizarre circumstantial evidence that came out, made me think he’s guilty.
But to say it’s “wrong” to merely have an opinion about him? That itself is wrong. :-)[/quote]
I didn’t say anything about having an opinion. It was written that they know he is a pedophile. No one knows that. You can have any opinion you want to have. I personally think it comes from personal bias which way you stand as far as it is concerned. From what I say and heard from others like Chris Tucker, Macauly Caulkin(sp?), and Jay Leno, these people seemed to be out for money from nearly any celebrity they could get their hands on. After her son is supposedly molested…the mother takes him to a lawyer? Not a hospital…not a police department…but a lawyer?
It is a free country and you can believe whatever you want to. However, in this case, I personally don’t believe he molested anyone. All of the evidence seemed to point to gold-diggers taking advantage of his personal issues with finally growing up. Also, the jury didn’t seem like a bunch of idiots. In hearing them speak, they all seemed fairly intelligent about the issue and their role in it.