There are even some priests that cant keep their hands off children, and we are to believe that the number of times that this guy shared his bed with young boys, which total years in time, that nothing happened?
Why cant I believe that? I dont.
45 year old men dont just choose to sleep with young boys just to sleep...this guy thought he could publically state that it was fine and get away with it because he is famous...
Oh, he actually did get away with that, didnt he?
Of course thats just my opinion....I could be wrong. (Dennis Miller)
"You might be the toughest little whacker. . .but in my world, you're about as worrisome as a cloudy day." (Dutch Dooley)
Here Michael looks black, doesn't he? Some things might have occurred but NOT for molestation purposes. More reasonably inadvertently or for innocent purposes. Life isn't the way you view things in absolute terms. Lots of interpretation and lots of room for error. Lots of distance between the rainbow of shades of gray. You have nothing but a swiss cheese theory thinking negative of people trying to do good for humanity. What if you were mistakened to harm the good deeds he poured his heart out to help the world? Jackson has a good heart as opposed to THIS accuser in this case making ALL these unproven allegations.
quote:
Jim Nasium said this in posting...
so, ken nj, if you see 99 pieces of evidence pointing to guilt, but none of them are able to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the offense never occurred? your bias is showing. it just doesn't happen that way in life, sorry.
Not exacty, but you're getting close to my thinking and we are still at two sides of this spectrum. What the DA proved with the 9 or 99 things in court simply that looks can be deceiving when weaving that kind of garbage molestation theory against Jackson or any defendant with all those 10 UNBELIEVABLE charges. Sneddon better bring in TONS of incredible evidence to back them up. He brought a little toy truck of garbage. Those 9 items were nothing but PROJECTION to attempt to make reasonably astute NON-black jurors to say he's guilty of MOLESTATION allegations:
1. Some disgruntled employee say in court he thinks he saw an act of molestation. Jurors heard him and listened to the cross-examination too. But DA didn't produce anyone saying s/he saw Jacko molesting THIS accuser Gavin Arvizo. In fact Gavin NEVER said in court or to anyone prior to mom going to lawyer that all the times he slept, that Jacko made unwanted advances and actually touched him in his private parts. No evidence of molestation.
2. So he had one of those aroused moments where kids also happened to be around his house. It's like normal people throughout the day or watching/thinking about something exciting in their head suddenly get an embarrassing erection. As to be that incident happening at that location, lots of kids attend movie theatre and lots of grown men and women get aroused alone on a heated moment. That witness had nothing better to do but to be a voyeur and a pervert to leap at own 15 minutes.
3. 90 percent of adults have some erotic material in room at some time in their life and sometimes could be inadvertently out in the open. This is nothing but normal life occurences. People are stupid and forget. Don't think they are evidence making them molesters. Only showed they're human and horny creatures of the world.
4. What do you expect on own magazines in own house? That he doesn't flip those pages? That fingerprints makes him molester? I would have a hard time to reason why if there wasn't any prints on those magazines. That means Jacko is now a dealer with large inventory for sale. Get with it. It's normal and this type of evidence doesn't rise to level of BRD. Just more crapola you called evidence.
5. Okay Jacko gave a sip of Jesus Juice... maybe this is why all those smart defense attorneys would say that Jacko could have been convicted. But it ain't molestation. Just more garbage charges the jurors reasoned to say that DA Sneddon was going out of wack Jacko to waist their time and taxpayer's money. Perhaps the cops should have charged him for jaywalking too.
6. Kissing is normal everday occurences. A peck on the cheek whatever. Just like a handshake. Your witness in court didn't say he saw him kissing the accuser nor that he was passionately and sexually kissing him. No testimony that Jacko was kissing Gavin on his butt-cheeks either.
7. Another of your weak witness on kissing another part of someone's body - the face. Big deal. Did Jacko disrobe this boy and continued to kiss him in the private parts? No evidence. Not molestation. Maybe they were just teasing like kids. It's NOT like if someone gets to second base, that counts as a homerun and the batter scored. BFD.
8. Okay that proved kids like to snuggle up to him. Kids feel wanted. He acted like their father. This I agree is wrong. They're not his kids. But he acts like their rich sugar daddy they never had. Just another fantasy for both in Neverland and going on the world tour. But where is molestation? Nothing but a dream.
9. Everyone pays for want of convenience. You ever pay a parking ticket you fed into a broken meter? You pay for small things charged but don't want to dispute the contract? You only have dollars but not hundreds of millions or once a billionaire. Paying is normal daily occurence and the amount seems relative to scale. A spit in the ocean for him.
someone actually witnessed mccauley culkin having a sex act performed on him. culkin, for whatever reason, denies this. that means that didn't happen too, right? the guys were just - how did you say it? - "having fun"? that kind of fun is illegal.
Lots of people see actor McCauley perform. Could s/he be mistakened? Then that someone should have filed charges to the police and NOT come to another trial or say on the street that McCauley had a sex act performed on him. BFD. Only showed that he's horny too. How does that make McCauley being molested by Jacko or Jacko going down on him. No evidence in court against Jacko to prove molestation, right?
your reasoning, if it weren't so sad, is almost laughable.
i took a shower this morning. nobody actually saw me in there, so i didn't take a shower. yeah, the towel is wet, my hair is wet, the mirror's a liitle steamed with vapor, and someone outside might have even heard the water pipes running. however, other things might have caused those same effects. if i can come up with millions, i'm sure i can find a high-powered lawyer to point that out to a jury, who will then have some nagging doubts about my shower story.
so, that takes care of the trial verdict. as for whether or not it really happened? i never took that shower. it just looks like i did.
Jim Nasium said this in post #228 : i took a shower this morning. nobody actually saw me in there, so i didn't take a shower. yeah, the towel is wet, my hair is wet, the mirror's a liitle steamed with vapor, and someone outside might have even heard the water pipes running. however, other things might have caused those same effects. if i can come up with millions, i'm sure i can find a high-powered lawyer to point that out to a jury, who will then have some nagging doubts about my shower story.
so, that takes care of the trial verdict. as for whether or not it really happened? i never took that shower. it just looks like i did.
Excellent response!!
Of course thats just my opinion....I could be wrong. (Dennis Miller)
"You might be the toughest little whacker. . .but in my world, you're about as worrisome as a cloudy day." (Dutch Dooley)
I beleive that someone who was working there, like a cook or a maid, witnessed something illegal going on. Apparenlty, Culkin won't admit it, after his role in Party Monster, I don't see why it's so hard.
This was posted a week before I arrived here on the BB.
quote:
mystic said this in post #34
I see him innocent until proven guilty...but...... I find it funny that people can throw out words like MJ is child-like and gullible, and can be tricked into things like this....
Time for Jackson World Tour.
Michael Jackson is now DECLARED innocent by a court of law. The evidence showed and the jurors deliberated that the mother Janet Ventura - Arvizo suffers from BPO and can't be trusted. The 70 old grandmother juror can't stand the Sneddon's star witness snapping her finger at them while on the witness stand. The DAs put certified liars that have a long history of filing frivolous and false allegations, whether against J.C. Penny, against own husband David Arvizo in own divorce lawsuit and now against Michael Jackson. These crackpots all have one thing in mind... $$$$$$ when lying which now proved "MJ is child-like and gullible."
If a 45 year old man (child like as he seems ), who KNOWS wrong from right (and he does...lets face it)....should know better than to sleep with little boys in his bed. He has already been accused once, and he STILL didnt learn his lesson..... gullible would have been the word used the first time.... now the word is just STUPIDITY!!!!
But did he sleep with boys after this second time around Mystic? Nope! You're still going back into the old stuff when he didn't know any better. His spokepeople now say MJ has learned his lesson the hard way. (no pun intended) So no more molestation cases in the future. But I would venture to believe that all the disappointed people out there will continue with joking about his nose, skin color and other kind of stupid stuff to poke fun of him.
These are all stupid but funny, as if people reliving their childhood behaviors.
#1. Q: What did Michael Jackson say when a boy in a car mooned him going down the road?
A: "I'll be there!"
#2. Q: What do Michael Jackson and Miss Bobbit have in common?
A: They both played with little wieners.
#3. Q: Why did Michael Jackson get kicked out of the school cafeteria?
A: Because he ate all the kids' wieners.
#4. Q: What do Michael Jackson and Walmart have in common?
A: They both have small boys pants at half off!
Cast: Michael Jackson, Diana Ross, Nipsey Russell, Ted Ross, Mabel King, Thelma Carpenter, Richard Pryor, Lena Horne; Directed by: Sidney Lumet - See The Movie @ Cost $19.99
06-16-2005 05:25 AM
Here Michael looks black, doesn't he? Some things might have occurred but NOT for molestation purposes. More reasonably inadvertently or for innocent purposes. Life isn't the way you view things in absolute terms. Lots of interpretation and lots of room for error. Lots of distance between the rainbow of shades of gray. You have nothing but a swiss cheese theory thinking negative of people trying to do good for humanity. What if you were mistakened to harm the good deeds he poured his heart out to help the world? Jackson has a good heart as opposed to THIS accuser in this case making ALL these unproven allegations. 
Lots of people see actor McCauley perform. Could s/he be mistakened? Then that someone should have filed charges to the police and NOT come to another trial or say on the street that McCauley had a sex act performed on him. BFD. Only showed that he's horny too. How does that make McCauley being molested by Jacko or Jacko going down on him. No evidence in court against Jacko to prove molestation, right? 
These are all stupid but funny, as if people reliving their childhood behaviors. 
The Wiz
