michael jackson......

[loulou]

Who thinks he wasn't guilty?

[roxy]

Here's how "they" put it: "Not guilty" does not mean "innocent". "They" are probably right...

 

12 people have sat through three months of evidence and have sat and deliberated for a further seven days.  They found him not guilty.

He is not guilty.

[loulou]

Well so they say.

[smurfboy]

I still can't decide what I think. After seeing him on the Bashir programme I did genuinely think there was nothing sexual in it, but that he was very disturbed in that he couldn't see how inappropriate it was.

Apparently one of the jurors has already said he thinks Jacko IS a paedophile and has abused boys in the past, but the evidence wasn't strong enough to convict in this case. Hardly a resounding 'not guilty'...

[lemoneye]

I think that trial by jury is not a good thing. I have sat on a jury and been faced with two of the guiltiest little toe-rags (or worse) that you are ever likely to be unfortunate enough to meet (especially outside a nightclub) and then seen them get off because other jury members are too stupid to understand the concept. Very worrying.

"Oh, he's about the same age as my Jimmy - and my Jimmy wouldnt have meant to do it if he was there - so i think he aint guilty" etc etc ad nauseum

[oldspice]

I think he has actually been found not guilty of touching and fondling young boys in the persuit of gaining sexual satsfaction.

However, I am not convinced that he is not guilty not sexual abuse because he hasn't touched them. If he gained even mental sexual satisfaction from being in bed with young boys (and let's face it, he might not even have admitted this to himself) then that is abusive.

It is highly inappropriate for a man of his age to share his bed with adolescent boys. It is in no way an innocent act.

The poor man is a complete mess and the quicker he disappears from public view to get himself in order the better.

[lemoneye]

The other question that REALLY needs asking is - would you let your kids "sleep over" at an eccentric rock stars house? Would you let your kids stay at ANY 40 year old mans house? Maybe you would, especially if you had an ulterior motive, or several million ulterior motives....

[chocolate chick]

I have asked my boyfriend this and he said he would never let his
children anywhere near Michael Jackson, let alone stay at his in his
bed.



The jury said there was not enough evidence to convict him, I would
like to know what evidence they did find and why Michael Jackson was
not called to the stand.

[loulou]

I say castrate him.

I say castrate him.

Oooooooooow! Eeee-heeeeee!

Oldspice Wrote... "If he gained even mental sexual satisfaction from being in bed with young boys (and let's face it, he might not even have admitted this to himself) then that is abusive".

An interesting point of view.  Am I abusing 16 year old schoolgirls by ogling them in their uniforms?  I know the answer but I just wondered where one draws the line with abuse.

 

Oldspice Wrote... "If he gained even mental sexual satisfaction from being in bed with young boys (and let's face it, he might not even have admitted this to himself) then that is abusive".

An interesting point of view.  Am I abusing 16 year old schoolgirls by ogling them in their uniforms?  I know the answer but I just wondered where one draws the line with abuse.

What you and your girlfriend do in your own time is entirely up to the pair of you.

 

I think that trial by jury is not a good thing. I have sat on a jury and been faced with two of the guiltiest little toe-rags (or worse) that you are ever likely to be unfortunate enough to meet (especially outside a nightclub) and then seen them get off because other jury members are too stupid to understand the concept. Very worrying.

"Oh, he's about the same age as my Jimmy - and my Jimmy wouldnt have meant to do it if he was there - so i think he aint guilty" etc etc ad nauseum

I have never been on a jury, but I hope this is the exception rather than the rule. 

Oldspice Wrote... "If he gained even mental sexual satisfaction from being in bed with young boys (and let's face it, he might not even have admitted this to himself) then that is abusive".

An interesting point of view.  Am I abusing 16 year old schoolgirls by ogling them in their uniforms?  I know the answer but I just wondered where one draws the line with abuse.

What you and your girlfriend do in your own time is entirely up to the pair of you.

My girlfriend doesn't ogle girls in school uniform