I'm not surprised, and ultimately, it doesn't affect me. By now you have heard that the jury in the Michael Jackson pedophile case have acquitted the accused on all counts.
O.J. Simpson kills two people and gets away with it.
The Menendez brothers kill and get away with it.
Michael Jackson sexually abuses children and gets away with it.
Once again, the jurors were willing pawns who behaved as putty in the hands of attornies without conscience. And a society obsessed with dysfuction has once again reaped the fruit of its own tree.
But nothing goes unseen in the big picture. O.J. M.J. The day will come for each one, and the final verdict won't be pretty. Until then, we must be responsible for our own actions and do the right thing.
Oh, and if Michael Jackson ever invites your kids to Neverland Ranch, I recommend saying "no".
It's Del.icio.us!
Furl It!
June 14, 2005 08:31 AM
What makes you so sure of his guilt? I think the jury probably had a better opportunity than you to study all of the evidence, and they found him not guilty. That is good enough for me. I am satisfied with the trial. And I do agree with you. If the man actually did what he was accused of, it will come back to him eventually. He will be absolutely judged at some point. So I'm not too concerned with the current verdict.
And I believe the Menendez brothers were convicted, were they not?
-LV
June 14, 2005 11:04 AM
Is he truly guilty? Probably. But the truth is that the people who were trying to string him up this time were not credible at all and they displeyed such a lust for money and attention that any good jury would probably have to find him innocent. Sure, he's Michael Jackson. Sure he probably IS a pedophile. But the truth is that if there was not enough of a case against him, the jury was simply doing its job this time because of the obvious fakeness of the accusers. The justice system is screwed up and MJ SHOULD have gone down, but the jury did their best to be fair to ALL involved, without bias, which is the root of the American legal system. I'm personally more worried about the integrity of the system when the idiot woman who sued McDonald's over coffee gets a million bucks. MJ will get his just rewards someday though.
June 14, 2005 11:54 AM
Always interested in The Mayor's commentary I find Robert's submissions worth logging on for also. Guilty, not guilty, I'm really not in the know enough to make comment but Robert's criticism of the American legal system and reference to the Stella Liebeck case caught my attention. A million dollars for spilt coffee? The facts of that case are laid out at the supplied URL. Hmmmm, this is the fodder that spawns urban legends! Thanks boys for maintaining my interest and filling a small part of my day. Not guilty huh!
June 15, 2005 03:56 PM
It seems as though celebrities are above the law. Don't forget about Robert Blake too. If you want to commit a crime and get away with it, I suggest becoming a celebrity first.
June 20, 2005 03:22 PM
The Menendez brothers were sentenced to life in prison; they did not get away with it.
June 26, 2005 08:04 PM
Michael Jackson my very well be guilty, however the prosecution failed to prove the case "beyond a reasonable doubt". I think that he is guilty, however; I also feel that the parents that are so irresposible as to allow their children to spend the night over at Michael's place should be brought in under "Child Endangerment" charges.
July 20, 2005 11:28 PM
I started following the MJ trial believing he was guilty. As I really became involved by reading transcripts and doing research, I am now convinced that Michael Jackson never molested ANY child. The media should also be held accountable and responsible for the inaccurate and irresponsible media coverage this trial received. It is one thing for a reporter to voice their opinions, it is another to misrepresent what actually happened in the courtroom. I read the transcripts on a daily basis and sometimes really wondered what trial Diane Diamond, Nancy Grace, Maureen Orth amongst others actually following.
If most of America had access to the transcripts instead of relying on the biased media reporting, I truly believe they would have understood the jury's verict.
July 20, 2005 11:28 PM
I started following the MJ trial believing he was guilty. As I really became involved by reading transcripts and doing research, I am now convinced that Michael Jackson never molested ANY child. The media should also be held accountable and responsible for the inaccurate and irresponsible media coverage this trial received. It is one thing for a reporter to voice their opinions, it is another to misrepresent what actually happened in the courtroom. I read the transcripts on a daily basis and sometimes really wondered what trial Diane Diamond, Nancy Grace, Maureen Orth amongst others actually following.
If most of America had access to the transcripts instead of relying on the biased media reporting, I truly believe they would have understood the jury's verict.
November 14, 2005 10:00 PM
I agree with the above comment. To be so sure of Michael Jackson's guilt based on his allowance of kids (not ALL were boys, you have to look deeper for facts here people) in his bedroom. He freely admitted on national television that he done this. Would you put this out in the open if you knew it would cause such an up roar? If YOU molested children, would you go on national television and admit to having kids in your bed? I think not. It's called common sense, think about the ideas you have. "He payed off the boy in 1993" I hear you say...well thats a more entangeld case than the media would have you believe. At the time of the allegations in 1993, Michael Jackson was on top of the world, a world megastar. His advisors sat him down and advised Michael to get rid of the case, as they could not guarantee that justice would prevail (Michael denies any wrong doing) and he payed them off, to get rid of them. Have you ever listened to the tapes of the boys father where he talks about bringing Michael down BEFORE his son claims to be molested? I'm guessing you've also heard about the boy giving descriptions of Michael's genetailia... well thats another overused false topic the media likes to drag on with. The connections between the boys description and Michael Jackson weren't there, they could not find a SHRED of evidence pointing towards Michael being guilty.
Basing your ideas on tabloid bs is about the most stupid thing a person could do.
November 14, 2009 04:02 PM
MJ was not guilty! I don't know what trial you and diane "demon",nancy grace watched or "reported" about but it sure wasn't MJs! Go back and take a look at the file,that family has lies after lies after lies! They just wanted money!