Michael Jackson: Guilty???

[RoaCh of DisCord]

Hmm...a very controversial topic...ever since 1993. Well, if you haven't heard of the very latest news, you must live under a rock. Michael's Neverland Ranch was raided a few days ago, because of more suspicions to child molestation (14 year old boy). Shortly after, he was told to surrender, or face a warrant for his arrest. He did in fact surrender, but paid the 3 million bail. He is now released.

From msnbc,

“He’s come back specifically to confront these charges head on,†Geragos said said earlier outside the jail. “He is greatly outraged by the bringing of these charges. He considers this to be a big lie. He understands the people who are outraged, because if these charges were true, I assure you Michael would be the first to be outraged.
“I’m here to tell you today, Michael has given me the authority to say on his behalf these charges are categorically untrue. He looks forward to getting into a courtroom as opposed to any other forum and confronting these accusations head on.â€

Now I ask you...do you think he's guilty?

I personally do not. I believe this is another stunt, from another greedy person. A parent, (possibly someone who plain out hates him), who wants money. The fact that the charges from 93 were paid off...and dropped (the parents were payed some where between 5 million to 20 million), makes me much more on the side of Michael.. If Michael actually did it, I don't believe the parents would have accepted money. If they did, and it actually really happened, then they are sick ****s. I would work my ass off to see him behind bars, if I knew that he did that to my child (if i had one).

I believe he does indeed love children. I don't mean this in the perverted way. He never had much of a childhood, so he feels if he can help disadvantaged children, he is also helping himself. I believe he is sincere in it what he says, and telling the truth.

If he were molesting children, why would he be so blunt to the public? Why would he hold that boys hand in the video he made?? If he were molesting children, I believe he would be more aware. He does these things because he is innocent.

I believe he's a wierdo, and obsessed with his image. I believe he's very childish, and probably very immature around his home and children. I DON'T believe he is a child molester.

Take a vote, and explain.

 

[Tokin]

Well, I voted no. Except, I really dont know.

I think he loves children, but dont THINK he would actually do things like that to them. If the kids parent thought he was a freak and may have molested children, why would they leave their kid alone with him?


Anyway, I really cant say yes, or no. Because, he is weird, but I dunno if he is that wierd..

Ironically though, him and R. Kelly working on a video together, and they are both in trouble for shit like this...coincidence I suppose.

 

[shutupandgoaway]

He would not be eager to face the courtroom and his agent would not have said such things was he not confident of victory,which most of the time means the defendant is innocent.

 

[Flag]

He's admitted on television he sleeps with 12 year old boys in the same bed (A 12 year old boy was there to talk about it). Does this mean he molests them? No, though I would be lying if I didn't say it was very odd/weird and personally disgusts me.

I'd say there is definitely a chance he has molested a child given his very radical nature and history with children (this is only in my opinion). However with no clear evidence I'd vote no.

Unless the prosecution can offer not just a single testimony but also some material evidence I'd have to say they have no case.

 

[munchyman]

See, this is why the entirety of Europe and most of Asia thinks our legal system is a joke. Cases are brought forth based on hearsay and media. I think the re-institution of the old hammurabi-era eye for an eye policy is in order.

 

[FZ. | gOsu]

i dont see how this is contraversial...he ****ed little boys, he should be lokced up for the duration of a few years...or maybe more...

it may just be because ive seen all the things the news says he has done...and i'm just believing what im told, but in my mind, he is...and i think he did do those aweful things to those poor kids...but, who am i to say, i dont know the evidence...im just stating my opionion

 

[Phoenix2003]

And you know this how?............................ This isn't about YOUR opinion. Either he's guilty or he's not.

 

[bamthedoc]

As you know, I'm not one to listen to the media. I, however, have recently finished my one-year long term as a grand-juror (officially over at the end of December), and, so, I believe the "burden of proof" for a trial has been met. I, however, would prefer to see the evidence on both sides. I'm not going to believe the media in making my decision.

RoaCh Of DisCord, ask me again after the trial is underway and both sides have had a chance to call witnesses, but before the jury gives a verdict. If, however, the parents accept a pay-off... I'd be more likely to believe Michael Jackson was not guilty, but I do see the possibility of him still being guilty. I just prefer to see both sides arguements, and we aren't really getting it yet -- we're getting their "media banter".

I did not vote.

 

[Tempest Storm]

The guy has definitely got problems. Personally, I think he's a whack job, and his own testimony he gave on those interviews will make the prosecutors job much easier. I wouldn't be too surprised if he was guilty, but I'll wait untill I know more about the case and evidence before I judge him.

 

[Zaku]

My friends and I were talking about this in school today.

What kinda of parents would send their son to a ranch named "Neverland." These parents must have been looking to get a large amount of money out of this. They planned for their son to go there.

 

[~DemonicPyro~]

Yeah we all have to admit he said he likes to sleep with children and that he's not exactly normal but i don't believe he malested them.......but who knows he might've

 

[bamthedoc]

Michael Jackson's brother is saying that Michael said he slept in the same room, but not in the same bed. I'm wondering if the media is "against" him by only saying "slept with children" or if Jackson just royally messed-up not specifying.

 

[¥ôÜ §úçK]

He is a fruit. There is nothing controversial about that but I also believe that he loves children too much to do that to them. I also believe that it was most likely not the childs choice to lie about this. it was probably his parents. jackson treats kids to well to do anything like that. of course i may be wrong but i seriously doubt it. Most people thta voted yes probably do not like him because hes different and that should be discouraged.

 

[Induhvidual_1]

He's definitely guilty. He got away with it only because he's dirty rich like Bill Gates and his monopoly trials (you know he has a monopoly but he has the money to get away with it). Truthfully, it is the screwed law system. That pervert, but then again, we may never be sure.

 

[RoaCh of DisCord]

Why would the parents accept his money? Honestly...if someone did that to my kid, if I had one, no money in the world would matter. I would want justice. His ass in prison. I would do everything humanly possible to see him behind bars.

I believe most people would agree with me too.

That's why, I believe the 93 case was about money, and money only.

 

[I_CANADIAN_I]

He only wants to relive his childhood because his was so bad because his dad beat him. He has sleep overs with them and they watch movies and they have a lot of fun together.

I think someone set him up.

 

[shutupandgoaway]

I would agree with Roach,that if some guy raped my kid, i would want him in prison for a long time,if not his head on a silver platter. I also believe,like Canadian, that due to the abuse Jackson suffered as a child, he is in fact attempting to relive his childhood. I also believe that he would not molest these children for two reasons:

1.He knows the psychological toll that abuse as a child causes. True, his father beat him,not molested him,but as far as i know the effects end up at about the same thing. Because of this, he would not want any one else to have to live this, and as a result, would not molest these children. I think his 'victims' are just saying they were molested because their parents told them to.

2. If Michael Jackson can afford $3 million bail, he can definetly afford some pretty good hookers, so why get off on little kids?

In conclusion, i believe that the true victim here is in fact Michael Jackson; the victim of childhood abuse, and of money hungry parents.

 

[bamthedoc]

1) Pedophelia (sp?) is often a result of such torments as a child (psycolochists have argued this).

2) Greed can sometimes "over passion" lust for revenge (hence possible reason acceptance of a hefty settlement).

3) He did try to drop a baby out a window... (was he doped up?)

4) There are pedophiles who do "get off" on hookers and children -- hookers and onlder women tend to be for show to hide a crime.

Hey, as much as I hate his music, I'm not tryint to say he's definetly guilty or not. I haven't voted yet, as the trial hasn't really started yet, and arguements haven't had enough time to develop. Judgement, at this point, is very difficult if you follow the letter of the law and development of the case. Is it possible that he did? Yes. However, it is equally possible, at this point in my mind, that he didn't.

 

[FuLouZero]

I think hes innocent he just doesnt seem like a person who do somthing like that but then again he did do the baby over balcony...
But its closer to the no side

 

[sonicboom]

yeah i think he is guilty as hell.
and you know he is just look at em.
did you gus see his pic in the paper of his mug shot.
it gave me ****in nightmare's for day's.
and he has said efore he love's the kid's.
(r kelly said that too and look what happend to him)

im gonna just end it there keep it short and sweet.
btw im back in birmingham now woot woot.