[inwaterby8]

What is your verdict in the Michael Jackson case? Does anyone really think this weirdo is innocent?

[alanmzifa]

You'd really need to have attended the whole trial as the jury have to judge this one - see the whites of the eyes of those put on the stand .

If he is found guilty of a lesser offence which seems likely , I'd like to see him get some sort of fitting sentence - something like he has to give the court the name of someone he thinks is really weird and then allow HIS kids to sleep in the same bed with them .

I wonder how many nights he would allow this to happen before he conceded it was not "normal" .

I'm guessing none .

[coderitr]

Guilty.

[WarC]

I'm unsure whether or not he is guilty in this particular case with this particular boy. But, I think a pretty clear pattern of ill behavior has emerged from MJ...On that, I think he's guilty. I'll never look at the guy the same again regardless.

[teengeekgrrl]

ditto. guilty

[inwaterby8]

I say fry him

[inwaterby8]

OOH! verdict is coming!!

[SIR****TMG]

they say he is ...not guilty......

[teengeekgrrl]

[coderitr]

Lynch mob anyone? (kidding) (not really)

[teengeekgrrl]

why not make this a poll? I would make a poll, butthere are already two threads devoted to this one-man(?) freakshow.

[iltos]

Originally Posted by teengeekgrrl

why not make this a poll? I would make a poll, butthere are already two threads devoted to this one-man(?) freakshow.

lol ...this is one thing, at least, that everybody can say they are sure about him.....he is one messed up puppy

[Fidelista]

Originally Posted by SIR****TMG

they say he is ...not guilty......

Hello SIR!. You make a good point with few words.
"they" is what is important---the jury. Not guilty means Not guilty, under the law.
The State had every chance to prove otherwise and failed.
One thing is missed by many in regard to the law, a hunch, a feeling, a opinion, is not what you convict by--- proof works! or at least convincing a jury.
I wouldn't venture to say if he is guilty under the law without having been listening , had access to all the evidence--ie a jurer.
In some cases I would vote not guilty, while believing the person may in fact be guilty, the reasons??? guidelines given by the court.
The bottom line is---the State must prove or convince a jury a defendant is guilty AS CHARGED , or ...........he is innocent---end of story.
As far I have observed, the people making charge are trash--in worst way
and I am reasonably sure this was on minds of jury.
Do I think MJ is capable of what was charged? or possibly engaged in this kind of actividy? -- I WOULD'NT LET A CHILD OF MINE WITHIN A MILE!!!!!. He is a freak ---obviously to me.
It is however my opinion only, and like I said--- the State had its chance.
Before someone thinks otherwise --- I "believe" he is guilty of something! , but that is not proveable, just a opinion, neither here nor there. >f

[XL Guru]

From my own personal experience (which I can't really go in to), a case can be about (i) justice being done (ii) ensuring a legal process is carried out. Occasionally, both things even occur at the same time.

Hopefully I can say without fear of legal repercussion that the outcome of this case was the "person" in question was found not guilty.

Did I expect anything else? (apparently the Pope is Catholic, and bears do do, you know, that thing).

^ infinity.

[somefellow]

he makes me sick ...........