Page 4 of 5

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:52 pm
by Elrond
Twitch wrote:You know the whole worship syndrome of Jackson and any other performer is bizarre. I mean why the hell should people be in complete awe of those that can sing for pete sake? Researchers slave away their lives unknown and unappreciated and a jamoke like MJ is adored by millions of truly sick mofos.

Exactly. I say if we see another line-up of those kind of worshippers start to line up in front of another accused singer's or celebrity's house, they should just be bombed. Scientists get absolutely jack-sh** while all the brainless people like MJ are the ones worshipped. It is truly sick, I definitely agree with ya on that. The 20th and 21st centuries quite certainly sucked big time in that way. Singers and celebrities are respected, rich, etc., while people like me who go through four years of college plus another 2+ years for a master's degree end up having to struggle to even find a job thanks to these brainless celebrities and singers who take all the money. Truly sickening.


"California: Where the only way you get convicted of a crime is if you're not a celebrity or singer AND unless you perform the crime RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE JURY."

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 3:03 pm
by Numbazix
The jury found the reasonable doubt thing in play. Now we'll see if this becomes a civil case which could bring in an entirely different result.

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 5:27 pm
by Elrond
Yeah. It just may become a Civil case. In my opinion, the initial poll here of guilty-not guilty could be split up into categories. I think that he is guilty for at least 4 of those counts - I mean, they found porn at his ranch, and he served alcohol to minors, etc.

But of course, the reasonable doubt system states that you have to prove without a reasonable doubt that a person is guilty (so that means if you're 99% sure that he's guilty and 1% that he's not, that means he goes free on said charge). In a way, it prevents the innocent from being accused of something they didn't do, but in most cases prevents the guilty from being convicted. But at the same time, a lot of taxpayers' money is being spent to do all this and it gets hella expensive. That in itself I think is highway robbery.

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:48 pm
by blindeye01
I personally feel that we cannot really know what happened. I think he was probably more guilty in that other case, but these accusers, whether the story is true or not seem like goldiggers. I will hold judgement on someone like Jackson simply because he is so wierd that we cannot tell his intensions

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:48 pm
by Numbazix
Even with "reasonable doubt", which is there to help insure that the innocent are not convicted, there are enough cases of the innocent receiving a guilty verdict due to the attitude on the part of the proscecution of "convict on move on to the next case". Basically there are two justice systems: One of the poor and one for the rich.

Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:58 pm
by Twitch
blindeye- Obviously the jury wasn't influenced by MJ's weirdness in their decision-making process at least.

If he would have been found guilty on any of the counts how fast would Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have played the race card? Yeah we have 2 justice systems allright, one black and one white, is what they would have said. :roll:

Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 2:37 pm
by Zered003
Race card? that is where MJ gets really wierd... I mean which race card do you play? The "they convicted him b/c he is a black man"card or the "they did not convict him b/c he is a white man"card? Color is only skin deep. So, which card would be played? The color he was born? or the color he changed himself into? As one of his own songs asked...Is he Black or White?

No matter what the outcome of the trial. Someone would have been screaming how it was done wronge So, I suppose all that can be said is legally this can not be held against him anymore. BUT in my personal opinion, I would never have anything to do with MJ. I would not even take money from the guy.

Did you hear they are talking a reality show staring him? But no network wants to even touch it. (no pun intended)... That is one show I definatly would NOT watch.

Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 2:40 pm
by Elrond
Of course - a reality show starring him - of course that would happen.

What's next? A reality TV show about what it's like to be a serial killer? Oi!

mad4.gif weapon15.gif

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 11:30 am
by Twitch
Reality show? How could he be on a reality show when he's the most bogus person in entertainment?

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 1:34 pm
by AFC
Who going to be the next little boy for him to play with?

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 1:58 pm
by Elrond
Twitch wrote: Reality show? How could he be on a reality show when he's the most bogus person in entertainment?
Yep, I'm sure they'd do it too. :lol: 8)
AFC wrote:Who going to be the next little boy for him to play with?
Hehe. We'll probably be finding out soon enough. And MJ will probably get away this time too. :x

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:03 pm
by AFC
No poop, well people are stupid anyways, He better stay away from my dog or i shoot him

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:32 pm
by Elrond
LOL. Yeah. Well, at least he's 3000 miles from here.

Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2005 6:08 pm
by Twitch
I relative terms he's in my backyard but the Earth is relatively close to the sun too. I've never seen MJ trolling the streets for boys in my neighborhood yet.

Posted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:11 am
by Zered003
I know that I will never see him in person. And niether will my 2 kids. That much is for sure!