# Is Michael guilty?



## Touch Of Death (Nov 19, 2003)

I say he is probably innocent of the charges and another family is attempting to cash in. What say you?


----------



## michaeledward (Nov 19, 2003)

> What say you?



Do you listen to O'Reilly? 

I certainly don't think he is 'Innocent', but he is probably not guilty.

Mike


----------



## Jeff Boler (Nov 19, 2003)

He's just a freak.  "3-million" dollar bail?  He did something naughty....


----------



## MartialArtsChic (Nov 19, 2003)

Well, I wouldn't be surprised if he did do it, but I'll wait til all is said and done and hear more about the evidence and stuff.  

However, this time around, he is actually getting arrested.  Last time was just an investigation and a settlement.  

He is weird though.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Nov 19, 2003)

They found the footage of him and the Elephant Mans bones? Or him being sworn into the clergy? :rofl: 



(sorry...couldn't resist)


----------



## rmcrobertson (Nov 19, 2003)

I saw a tape of him last night, in which he freely acknowledged sleeping with kids, and said--now THIS is classic--that, "it was one of the most loving things you can do." Then he swore up and down that anybody who thought he did anything else than sleep was sick.

Last I checked, that's molestation right there.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Nov 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Jeff Boler _
> *He's just a freak.  "3-million" dollar bail?  He did something naughty.... *


 Well that proves it then. It couldn't be because the guy is about a zillionare or anything.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Nov 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *I saw a tape of him last night, in which he freely acknowledged sleeping with kids, and said--now THIS is classic--that, "it was one of the most loving things you can do." Then he swore up and down that anybody who thought he did anything else than sleep was sick.
> 
> Last I checked, that's molestation right there. *


So being unconcious next to unconcious children is molestation? Man you Californians have strange laws.


----------



## michaeledward (Nov 19, 2003)

Question ... Is being asleep the same thing as being unconscious?


----------



## Cryozombie (Nov 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by michaeledward _
> *Question ... Is being asleep the same thing as being unconscious? *



Well... Uh... Medicaly I dunno...

But are you Conscious when you are asleep?

Cuz UNconsious would be the opposite of conscious.

Now... Im not defending Michael or anything... but...

Ive slept in the same bed next to some of my female friends... what does that make me? A rapist?

Come to think of it, Ive slept in the same bed as some of my male friends... does that make me gay?

IF all they did was share a bed, I cant see that he did anything ILLEGAL.  STUPID maybe, but not Illegal.


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Nov 19, 2003)

Whoooo...

I'm watching O'Reilly as I type this.  He just SCREAMED that Jackson was a "pervert".  That could get him a lawsuit.  

I've never seen O'Reilly this mad.

Insofar as Jackson's guilt...I suspect he's guilty.  But I want to see more of what the cops and prosecutor have on him.  

They didn't bring charges in the last incident.  The law in California was changed because of that.  The victim in this case is compelled to testify if necessary.  I hope if that happens they don't let Garagos, the defense, go at the boy.  That would be SO wrong.

People will say this kid is out for a buck...but I have a problem with that.  If one applies Ockham's razor, Michael comes out cut and bleeding guilt.

Note:  All the celebrities coming forth and saying how Jackson is such a wonderful and caring guy...in the recent (and ongoing) Catholic church scandal the priests were often viewed the same way.  So very often the perpetrator is popular, well liked, NICE.

You want a disturbing book that hits hard and right to the heart of the matter?  Anna Salter's "Predators".  Look it up on Amazon.  It'll come out in paperback in March.

Don't read it if you have a weak stomach.  It is a very necessary book...but it will shake you up.

Regards,

Steve Scott


----------



## rmcrobertson (Nov 20, 2003)

Uh...guys...reality check. These "female friends," you slept with? Were they, say, 10 or 11 years old? How many boyfriends of 10 or 11 or 12 have you taken little naps with? Do you habitually take lil' naps with children you are not related to? Have you ever dangled an infant off a  third-story balcony? May I ask what you think would happen to you if you did?


----------



## ABN (Nov 20, 2003)

*WTF? Moment* 


check out this blurb spoken by MJ's dad in an interview...(quoted from MSN)

Jacko's Dad's Switch Hit
Let's just say up front we're not going to make a lame "Beat It" joke in this item. Now, moving on ... In a bizarre sitdown with BBC interviewer Louis Theroux, Michael Jackson's father disputes his son's claims that he beat him as a child. "I whipped him with a switch and a belt," Joe Jackson explains in the interview, scheduled to air Sunday. "I never beat him. You beat someone with a stick." 

I am not posting this to defend the guy whatsoever, I just thought this gives an interesting perspective on a very 
screwed up family. I'm glad he cleared that up though, I always wondered what the difference was between whipping and beating


----------



## ABN (Nov 20, 2003)

*WTF? Moment* 


check out this blurb spoken by MJ's dad in an interview...(quoted from MSN)

Jacko's Dad's Switch Hit
Let's just say up front we're not going to make a lame "Beat It" joke in this item. Now, moving on ... In a bizarre sitdown with BBC interviewer Louis Theroux, Michael Jackson's father disputes his son's claims that he beat him as a child. "I whipped him with a switch and a belt," Joe Jackson explains in the interview, scheduled to air Sunday. "I never beat him. You beat someone with a stick." 

I am not posting this to defend the guy whatsoever, I just thought this gives an interesting perspective on a very 
screwed up family. I'm glad he cleared that up though, I always wondered what the difference was between whipping and beating


----------



## someguy (Nov 20, 2003)

Whipping a (1) : to strike with a slender lithe implement (as a lash or rod) especially as a punishment 

Beat 1 : to strike repeatedly: a) to hit repeatedly so as to inflict pain -- often used with up 

There is the differnce.  I guess he only whipped him.


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Nov 20, 2003)

A matter of semantics, I suppose.  The terms are often interchangeable.  Ali "whipped" Frazier...when he actually beat him up.

The elder Jackson is thinking, perhaps, that a beating can break bones when done with a stick.  A "whipping" done with a switch will not.

In cooking, however, beating and whipping are two different things.  

With that, I'll whisk away off to another thread.


Regards,


Steve


----------



## Karazenpo (Nov 20, 2003)

I have to totally agree with Robert on this. I've been in law enforcement since 1977 and have worked the investigative unit also. Red flags went up for me years ago on Michael Jackson.  Many red flags. His arrest was long overdue. If he was some John Smith living on Main St., USA he would have been arrested a long time ago and there would be no controversy. Sometimes I just can't figure why some of us give people of celebrity status so much leeway in breaking the law but to me, no matter who you are, the line is drawn on child molestation and that's the bottom line. Michael Jackson fits the police profile of a pedophile better than anyone I've ever dealt with in my career and his picture should be in Webster's dictionary right next to the word. Sorry but I've seen a lot and I just have no compassion for these type of people. They are predators!


----------



## MA-Caver (Nov 20, 2003)

I have to agree with Karazenpo because MJ has shown himself to be a very messed up individual, look at the plastic surgeries as a glaring example. Dangling his kid off a balcony is another and so forth. He's talented as all get out but m-e-s-s-e-d - UP!

As far as the molestation goes... I've worked with sexual offenders while they were in therapy (as a co-therapist). What it boils down to when you're doing something with _any_  child is "intent".  There are appropriate and inappropriate actions when it regards minors, especially small children. Laws vary from state to state but it's clear that anywhere you go an adult interacting with a child in the manner that Jackson has (admitted) been known to do is inappropriate unless it were his own children and they were distressed (nightmares), ill or simply needing parental comforting.  Doing it with other people's kids... you're toeing the line or gone over it. 

Michaels perceptions are likewise messed up. What he sees as being loving to children is potentially harmful in the long term. The man needs therapy without question. Lots of therapy.


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Nov 21, 2003)

I'm a little concerned that the cops aren't going to be able to make a case with this.

They started the investigation months ago...and they just recently raided the Neverland Ranch.  If Jackson had any evidence that they could have used (kiddie porn, etc) it'd be long gone by now.  Jackson has been aware of the pending charges for some time.  It could end up being a "he said, he said" case, which might not fly.

I hate to say it, but he may get away with it.  


Steve


----------



## Karazenpo (Nov 21, 2003)

Steve, I know what you're saying but I'll give you a little inside view from law enforcement. More than likely, this investigation or related investigation has been ongoing for quite some time, longer than you think or are led to believe by officials. I would have to say the D.A. made sure he crossed every t and dotted every i this time around. He knew this case would be put under a microscope and would get world wide attention and he also remembers what happened last time in 1993. I think the first step in this on-going investigation was the change in California law which got the 1993 case dismissed. i would have to think when all the facts are released, the state's case will show a long history of facts and circumstances in regards to pedophilia and Mr. Jackson. The cops have learned a lot since the O.J. Simpson case, not to mention others since. Just like when the Feds finally got the 'Teflon Don', John Gotti, I am willing to bet this one will 'stick'!   Again, Steve, I have no inside knowledge, just my perspective from my years of experience in law enforcement. I really hope you're not right, but you never know... especially with juries!   Respectfully, "Joe"


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Nov 23, 2003)

Joe...good points.  I heard today that they apparently found "love letters" to the kid.  That could be damning.  They may have found a number of other things as well.



Steve


----------



## Spud (Nov 24, 2003)

On a lighter side - Amazon.com has some interesting items to recommend for people buying MJ's latest CD:
Linky Poo

Our Customers' Advice
See what customers recommend in addition to, or instead of, the product on this page.
Recommend an item!

    * 1 person recommended At Folsom Prison [EXTRA TRACKS] [LIVE] [ORIGINAL RECORDING REMASTERED] in addition to Number Ones
    * 1 person recommended When Your Child Has Been Molested : A Parent's Guide to Healing and Recovery instead of Number Ones

See more customer buying advice


----------



## MisterMike (Nov 24, 2003)

Innocent until proven guilty, right?


----------



## Spud (Nov 24, 2003)

Oh, and by the way - -no jury will jury find him guilty. 

O.J. , Durst, et al....  

Can't think of too many parents who'd feel comfortable sending their kids to Neverland for an overnighter....


----------



## Dan Anderson (Nov 24, 2003)

This one is going to be a hard one to call.  Were he not such an oddball to begin with it'd be easier.  The press has judged and hanged him already.   This much is for sure.  Innocent until proven guilty is supposed to be the law of the land.  

The childlike innocence of Michael Jackson factor I have a hard time with.  Here's the guy who was savvy enough to buy Northern Songs (most of the Lennon/McCartney output which guarantees him millions a year in royalties alone).  The 3 mil payoff ten years ago doesn't help either.  The differences between him and OJ - 1) He's certifyably odd and OJ was a sports hero and 2) child molestation and murder are in two very different ball parks.

The Dan-boy prediction is if the kid & family isn't bought off, MJ is going down.

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## Cruentus (Nov 24, 2003)

I of course will give him the benefit of a trial before I say for sure that he is guilty....however, he's lookin' pretty damn guilty.

I don't think the DA would have raided the house of someone as wealthy and powerful as Jacko without having built up a strong case. I have to imagine that the DA has a lot of evidence in his bag of tricks to put Jacko away for a long time.

But...we'll see at the trial.

:asian:


----------



## Spud (Nov 24, 2003)

Without DNA or Jacko keeping some photo souvenirs it becomes a matter of kid said/Jacko said.  There is a big jump from having probably cause getting an arrest warrant or indictment and convicting.  

I wonder if Kobe sent MJ a big thank you card?


----------

