I think what he's saying, what it would only be sensible to say, is that the jury had access to much better information regarding this than you do. Therefore their opinion is worth a damn sight more than yours. They say he isn't a paedophile, you say he is, but they are far more credible than you.lowing wrote:
You are saying MJ was not a child molester because a jury said so.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
YOU think he is a child molestor. Society (through the actions of the court) has found that not to be the case. People are WRONGLY accused and FOUND NOT GUILTY all the time. It's definitely not something unique to MJ.lowing wrote:
You are proving my point.
A person who has WRONGLY been FOUND GUILTY of rape, is not a rapist. Regardless as to what the jury says, correct?
Just because a guilty man was acquitted of a crime does not mean he did not commit the crime. Same thing
Where ya at Ken? I think this argument is worth your response.
Just because a man was accused of a crime does not mean he committed the crime. Same thing.
Was Michael Jackson a weirdo? Most definitely. Was he a child molestor? Inconclusive.
By this, you MUST use the same argument they other way. A man wrongfully convicted of rape MUST be a rapist because a jury said so.
I say, a jury has nothing to do with your guilt or innocence, if you murdered someone you ARE a murderer, regardless as to what the jury says.
If you molested a child you ARE a child molester, regardless as to what the jury says.
If you did not Molest or did not murder, then you ARE NOT a molester or a murderer, regardless as to what the jury says.
Based on his paid out hush money, his mannerisms, etc.. I choose to believe he is guilty. The burden of innocent until proven guilty does not apply to you or me, only to the govt. who is assigning punishment.
I dunno, I'm kind of pissed congress is spending time on this instead of something else.blademaster wrote:
dude just leave the guy alone he is dead go pick on Clinton, or some other crooked politician who harass women all the time just let it GO......
Come to think about it, this will be my last post on this topic
No I don't have to use the same argument the other way. It's that simple. A man wrongfully accused of rape is wrongfully accused and may be wrongfully convicted. The sad fact though is that unless the courts overturn the conviction, that's how he's going to be viewed by society at large. Maybe he will be the only one that knows his true innocence, but that doesn't change the fact that he is innocent or that society will still view him as guilty.
MJ was acquitted of molestation charges but many people still view him as quilty. That doesn't make him guilty, just like being acquitted doesn't mean he is not guilty - hence my use of the term inconclusive. You are calling him out as a pedophile because that's the way you see it. You are entitled to your own opinion, just realize that it is an opinion. We probably will never know the truth - but just because you think he is a pedophile does not make it so - same as the fact he was acquitted doesn't mean he is innocent.
For what it's worth, there's been studies that I've read about the reliability of children when discussing molestation charges - especially relevant are the children's parents motives, ability to coerce and ignorance of a child. You call the payments hush money, but they could also be described as an extortion payment or a payment to make the negative press go away.
MJ was acquitted of molestation charges but many people still view him as quilty. That doesn't make him guilty, just like being acquitted doesn't mean he is not guilty - hence my use of the term inconclusive. You are calling him out as a pedophile because that's the way you see it. You are entitled to your own opinion, just realize that it is an opinion. We probably will never know the truth - but just because you think he is a pedophile does not make it so - same as the fact he was acquitted doesn't mean he is innocent.
For what it's worth, there's been studies that I've read about the reliability of children when discussing molestation charges - especially relevant are the children's parents motives, ability to coerce and ignorance of a child. You call the payments hush money, but they could also be described as an extortion payment or a payment to make the negative press go away.
Jurors are also forced to ignore the obvious as well, plenty of jurors that thought a person was guilty but because of the letter of the law and what was allowed or not allowed, they could not convict.Bertster7 wrote:
I think what he's saying, what it would only be sensible to say, is that the jury had access to much better information regarding this than you do. Therefore their opinion is worth a damn sight more than yours. They say he isn't a paedophile, you say he is, but they are far more credible than you.lowing wrote:
You are saying MJ was not a child molester because a jury said so.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
YOU think he is a child molestor. Society (through the actions of the court) has found that not to be the case. People are WRONGLY accused and FOUND NOT GUILTY all the time. It's definitely not something unique to MJ.
Just because a man was accused of a crime does not mean he committed the crime. Same thing.
Was Michael Jackson a weirdo? Most definitely. Was he a child molestor? Inconclusive.
By this, you MUST use the same argument they other way. A man wrongfully convicted of rape MUST be a rapist because a jury said so.
I say, a jury has nothing to do with your guilt or innocence, if you murdered someone you ARE a murderer, regardless as to what the jury says.
If you molested a child you ARE a child molester, regardless as to what the jury says.
If you did not Molest or did not murder, then you ARE NOT a molester or a murderer, regardless as to what the jury says.
Based on his paid out hush money, his mannerisms, etc.. I choose to believe he is guilty. The burden of innocent until proven guilty does not apply to you or me, only to the govt. who is assigning punishment.
Yeah except it was testimony of the workers at Netherland and not the children that is damning.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
No I don't have to use the same argument the other way. It's that simple. A man wrongfully accused of rape is wrongfully accused. The sad fact though is that unless the courts overturn the conviction, that's how he's going to be viewed by society at large. Maybe he will be the only one that knows his true innocence, but that doesn't change the fact that he is in fact innocent or that society will still view him as guilty.
MJ was acquitted of molestation charges but many people still view him as quilty. That doesn't make him guilty, just like being acquitted doesn't mean he is not guilty - hence my use of the term inconclusive. You are calling him out as a pedophile because that's the way you see it. You are entitled to your own opinion, just realize that it is an opinion. We probably will never know the truth - but just because you think he is a pedophile does not make it so - same as the fact he was acquitted doesn't mean he is innocent.
For what it's worth, there's been studies that I've read about the reliability of children when discussing molestation charges - especially relevant are the children's parents motives, ability to coerce and ignorance of a child.
Collectively, just like with OJ, there is no reason to believe based on the evidence and the testimony, that he is not guilty.
I'm sure the world would have been a horrible place without his awesome talent. so lets forget what a freak he was. even if he is not guilty of being a pedo I think he is still a horrible role model. living in a fantasy world at the age of 50 and constantly trying to alter his appearance and lying about the reasons is such a good example for the youth and yes I think his reasons are purely some sick vanity thing and nothing to do with any disease. and now we find out he may have been addicted to pain killers, but that's ok since he was in pain right? from a burn injury from 20 fucking years ago! I had way worse burns on more of my body and was on pain killers for a max of 4 months.
so many of the people at his memorial spent plenty of time ripping into him while he was alive, but hey now they have a shot at some easy free world coverage to show how sad they are. the only ones I feel bad for are those poor kids who are going to be pulled from all directions by greedy fucks who want their piece of the pie.
so many of the people at his memorial spent plenty of time ripping into him while he was alive, but hey now they have a shot at some easy free world coverage to show how sad they are. the only ones I feel bad for are those poor kids who are going to be pulled from all directions by greedy fucks who want their piece of the pie.
Hard to address a post that agrees with me and argues at the same time. Not sure how to proceed.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
No I don't have to use the same argument the other way. It's that simple. A man wrongfully accused of rape is wrongfully accused and may be wrongfully convicted. The sad fact though is that unless the courts overturn the conviction, that's how he's going to be viewed by society at large. Maybe he will be the only one that knows his true innocence, but that doesn't change the fact that he is innocent or that society will still view him as guilty.
MJ was acquitted of molestation charges but many people still view him as quilty. That doesn't make him guilty, just like being acquitted doesn't mean he is not guilty - hence my use of the term inconclusive. You are calling him out as a pedophile because that's the way you see it. You are entitled to your own opinion, just realize that it is an opinion. We probably will never know the truth - but just because you think he is a pedophile does not make it so - same as the fact he was acquitted doesn't mean he is innocent.
For what it's worth, there's been studies that I've read about the reliability of children when discussing molestation charges - especially relevant are the children's parents motives, ability to coerce and ignorance of a child. You call the payments hush money, but they could also be described as an extortion payment or a payment to make the negative press go away.
Lowing in a nutshell wrote:
The seriousness of the charges is more important than the nature of the evidence.
nope, the evidence was present, as it was at OJ's trial. I suppose however, you think OJ is not a murderer, because the jury said so.ATG wrote:
Lowing in a nutshell wrote:
The seriousness of the charges is more important than the nature of the evidence.
I guess I missed the part in the MJ trial about the damning DNA evidence.lowing wrote:
nope, the evidence was present, as it was at OJ's trial. I suppose however, you think OJ is not a murderer, because the jury said so.ATG wrote:
Lowing in a nutshell wrote:
The seriousness of the charges is more important than the nature of the evidence.
The police had MJ pull out his cock, literally. They failed to make a case. A person who can be kept quiet with money has likely not been harmed because the basic human desire for justice usually outweighs greed.
I know the story was big nationally, but here in so cal it was bigger, we can all agree the guy was a freak, but there was no proof or credible claim of molestation.
I remember people saying he had debbie row set up as a baby factory so he would have his own private child farm, to be able to have sex with them unquestioned.
Sickening, the price of fame. So many jealous of the talent and money. America is a tabloid nantion that gets off on knocking down those it elevates.
Did somebody offer his daughter money to get up there yesterday and say he was the greatest dad ever???
May he rest in peace a vindicated man.
Do you think his daughters words were hers and not rehearsed? really?ATG wrote:
I guess I missed the part in the MJ trial about the damning DNA evidence.lowing wrote:
nope, the evidence was present, as it was at OJ's trial. I suppose however, you think OJ is not a murderer, because the jury said so.ATG wrote:
The police had MJ pull out his cock, literally. They failed to make a case. A person who can be kept quiet with money has likely not been harmed because the basic human desire for justice usually outweighs greed.
I know the story was big nationally, but here in so cal it was bigger, we can all agree the guy was a freak, but there was no proof or credible claim of molestation.
I remember people saying he had debbie row set up as a baby factory so he would have his own private child farm, to be able to have sex with them unquestioned.
Sickening, the price of fame. So many jealous of the talent and money. America is a tabloid nantion that gets off on knocking down those it elevates.
Did somebody offer his daughter money to get up there yesterday and say he was the greatest dad ever???
May he rest in peace a vindicated man.
and I disagree, greed does outwiegh justice. Unless you are going to say, money plays no part in our justice system.
also this:
"Ed McMahon died this week. He was a great entertainer, but prior to his stage accomplishments he was a distinguished Marine Corps fighter pilot in WWII earning six Air Medals and attaining the rank of Colonel. He was discharged in 1946 and was later promoted to the rank of Brigadier General in the CA Air National Guard.
Farrah Fawcett died this week after a long career in Hollywood as an actress. After she was diagnosed with cancer, she became an activist for cancer treatment and devoted her last remaining years encouraging people to seek treatment. She documented her plight on film and used it to encourage others to stay positive and upbeat despite their diagnosis and suffering.
Michael Jackson died this week. He was perhaps one of the greatest singers of modern time. He will also be remembered for his eccentric lifestyle that included sleeping with a chimpanzee, living in a carnival-like atmosphere at Neverland, his fascination with Peter Pan, and his numerous masks and costumes. He also admitted to finding pleasure sleeping with young boys and paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families of these boys despite being acquitted by a court on one allegation of sexual molestation.
QUESTION - Which of the above did the House of Representatives declare a moment of silence. (Hint - It wasn't the first two.)
QUESTION - Which of the above family's received a personal note of condolence from President Obama? (Hint - It wasn't the first two.) "
Nice elaboration lowing ... you have really mastered the art of total bullcrap ...
"he was charged with child molestation aka he is guilty, the jury after examining the evidence has nothing to do with the matter"
Are you serious?
"he was charged with child molestation aka he is guilty, the jury after examining the evidence has nothing to do with the matter"
Are you serious?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
QUESTION - Which one of those was the most popular person in the world at one time? Which one of those people had hundreds of thousands of people rushing to pay their respects?
He was never convicted of being a pedophile. That said, the media is making him out to be some sort of national hero, and it's making me sick.
Yes, I am.Varegg wrote:
Nice elaboration lowing ... you have really mastered the art of total bullcrap ...
"he was charged with child molestation aka he is guilty, the jury after examining the evidence has nothing to do with the matter"
Are you serious?
A jury does not determain if you are guilty of something, your actions determain that.
If you kill someone, are you not a murderer, regardless if you are found innocent?
If you are NOT a rapist, and the jury finds you guilty of rape, does this make you a rapist?
Already covered this, how about scrolling back?
I did ... but didn't find anything that concluded with MJ molesting a child beyond reasonable doubt ... seeing as you "know" he did just that you have some proof?lowing wrote:
Yes, I am.Varegg wrote:
Nice elaboration lowing ... you have really mastered the art of total bullcrap ...
"he was charged with child molestation aka he is guilty, the jury after examining the evidence has nothing to do with the matter"
Are you serious?
A jury does not determain if you are guilty of something, your actions determain that.
If you kill someone, are you not a murderer, regardless if you are found innocent?
If you are NOT a rapist, and the jury finds you guilty of rape, does this make you a rapist?
Already covered this, how about scrolling back?
Your analogies stinks lowing and has nothing do with the case in question ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
To pay respect or to cash in?.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
QUESTION - Which one of those was the most popular person in the world at one time? Which one of those people had hundreds of thousands of people rushing to pay their respects?
T-shirt sales, album sales, ticket scalping to his memorial, etc......
Anyone that says MJ changed their lives, is an idiot in deserate need for a fuckin life. Anyone that hero worships a pedophile should do the same.
If you read, the burden of reasonable doubt is left for the govt. not for you or me.Varegg wrote:
I did ... but didn't find anything that concluded with MJ molesting a child beyond reasonable doubt ... seeing as you "know" he did just that you have some proof?lowing wrote:
Yes, I am.Varegg wrote:
Nice elaboration lowing ... you have really mastered the art of total bullcrap ...
"he was charged with child molestation aka he is guilty, the jury after examining the evidence has nothing to do with the matter"
Are you serious?
A jury does not determain if you are guilty of something, your actions determain that.
If you kill someone, are you not a murderer, regardless if you are found innocent?
If you are NOT a rapist, and the jury finds you guilty of rape, does this make you a rapist?
Already covered this, how about scrolling back?
Your analogies stinks lowing and has nothing do with the case in question ...
So which is it, what decides guilt or innocence of a crime, your actions, or a jury?
I'm still curious as to see what kind of "proof" lowing has that MJ is a child molester.
It's like KJ said - it's inconclusive. You can't say he is, you can't say he's not. There's no proof. Whatsoever.
Like I said in the other topic, they couldn't even pin serving alcohol to a minor on him.
It's like KJ said - it's inconclusive. You can't say he is, you can't say he's not. There's no proof. Whatsoever.
Like I said in the other topic, they couldn't even pin serving alcohol to a minor on him.
'The only thing they like to see more than a hero is to see a hero fail, fall, die trying. In spite of everything you've done, eventually they will hate you...why bother?'ATG wrote:
Sickening, the price of fame. So many jealous of the talent and money. America is a tabloid nantion that gets off on knocking down those it elevates.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
Not guilty until proven so ... and that includes a jury, a judge and a couple of lawyers ...lowing wrote:
If you read, the burden of reasonable doubt is left for the govt. not for you or me.Varegg wrote:
I did ... but didn't find anything that concluded with MJ molesting a child beyond reasonable doubt ... seeing as you "know" he did just that you have some proof?lowing wrote:
Yes, I am.
A jury does not determain if you are guilty of something, your actions determain that.
If you kill someone, are you not a murderer, regardless if you are found innocent?
If you are NOT a rapist, and the jury finds you guilty of rape, does this make you a rapist?
Already covered this, how about scrolling back?
Your analogies stinks lowing and has nothing do with the case in question ...
So which is it, what decides guilt or innocence of a crime, your actions, or a jury?
You say it's not left for you or me but you by your posts have judged him ... how do you defend your statement of him being a pedophile?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
The govt. needs proof I do not.Poseidon wrote:
I'm still curious as to see what kind of "proof" lowing has that MJ is a child molester.
It's like KJ said - it's inconclusive. You can't say he is, you can't say he's not. There's no proof. Whatsoever.
Like I said in the other topic, they couldn't even pin serving alcohol to a minor on him.
By your assumptions I can only assume you would allow your son to sleep with MJ in the same bed, or even in the same house.
i guess hitler was never guilty of anything then. and i guess that chick who shot mccnair aint guilty since she is dead. oh, and OJ is innocent.Varegg wrote:
Not guilty until proven so ... and that includes a jury, a judge and a couple of lawyers ...
You say it's not left for you or me but you by your posts have judged him ... how do you defend your statement of him being a pedophile?
keep going though. i am laughing.
Right right, I forgot. You don't care for the whole "innocent until proven guilty" shtick. You know, the thing that's the cornerstone of our legal system...lowing wrote:
The govt. needs proof I do not.Poseidon wrote:
I'm still curious as to see what kind of "proof" lowing has that MJ is a child molester.
It's like KJ said - it's inconclusive. You can't say he is, you can't say he's not. There's no proof. Whatsoever.
Like I said in the other topic, they couldn't even pin serving alcohol to a minor on him.
By your assumptions I can only assume you would allow your son to sleep with MJ in the same bed, or even in the same house.
Personally? I wouldn't. But those parents did. That's up to them.
Totally irrelevant ...usmarine wrote:
i guess hitler was never guilty of anything then. and i guess that chick who shot mccnair aint guilty since she is dead. oh, and OJ is innocent.Varegg wrote:
Not guilty until proven so ... and that includes a jury, a judge and a couple of lawyers ...
You say it's not left for you or me but you by your posts have judged him ... how do you defend your statement of him being a pedophile?
keep going though. i am laughing.
Wait behind the line ..............................................................