He was found innocent of murder. Period. If the prosecutor sucked that bad to let a murderer go than they should have been disbarred.
Posted on 07/08/2009 10:06:06 AM PDT by vaper69
This was predicted. Not a surprise.
Why is this issue so important to so many people?
Damn, where have I been ..
He was found innocent of murder. Period. If the prosecutor sucked that bad to let a murderer go than they should have been disbarred.
I had a discussion yesterday with my sister who loves Jackson and his music; she argued his innocence. My sis is also raising her 8-year-old grandson. Interestingly, when I asked her if she’d have allowed her grandson to stay the night with Wacko she said no. It’s my guess most who argue his innocence would never have allowed the creep near their child.
Somebody correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought Jackson was only found innocent in one court case. Were not there other cases that did not go to a court conclusion, because huge monetary settlements were made, instead?
Jordan Chandler is the boy who accused him in 1993. Jackson paid him off to drop the charges.
Get a Life!
So we got an attractive woman, wearing a bra, no top, walkin’ around in broad daylight. She's flouting society's conventions! That's totally inappropriate. It's lewd, lacsivius, salacious, outrageous!
Wow. You can’t provide any meaningful debate. Why are you even on Free Republic? It seems like a waste to me. Oh well your loss.
So if a Jackson supporter says the pay-off didn’t mean he was guilty, then you have to ask why Jackson took the later case all the way to a court verdict.
If you’re innocent, you should take all court cases of that magnitude/importance to a verdict.
In the first incident. MJ paid the kids family of to make it go away.
In the most recent incident MJ was not found innocent, although the Duke lacrosse players were in their court case.
It was simply that there was not enough evidence to prove beyond doubt that MJ was guilty. Millions of dollars worth of lawyers tend to produce that.
The Lacrosse players produced a mountain of evidence which proved sex at all, let alone rape did not occur. They have spent the time since litigating those falsely accused them.
Jacckson, on the other hand, flew off to Bahrain - a known sex tourism spot for the NAMBLA crowd. Sex with little boys is legal there. Later MJ converted to Islam so he could spend more time there.
You can believe he is innocent all you want. You can even believe in the tooth fairy.
Incorrect.
No, he was found "not guilty" there is actually a difference. Sometimes the difference is small, but ask the Duke Lacross kids about the difference.
If the prosecutor sucked that bad to let a child molester go than they should have been disbarred.
Don't fire or disbar prosecutors for screwing up a case. I'll take a guilty person going free (of any crime) over an innocent person in jail for a crime they didn't commit any day of the week. Can get the guilty person again sooner or later.
Said by one of the jurors, "I think that Michael Jackson probably has molested boys...But that doesn't make him guilty of the charges in this case".
Fortunately, or unfortunately depending on how it's viewed, the jury found correctly for the case presented in front of them. They did the correct thing. May not have been right, but it was correct.
It’s whitey’s fault.
Guilty or innocent in a flawed justice system means nothing to me nor others who want real justice and not legal mumbo jumbo bull$h!t created by bottom dwelling lawyers.
The sh_tbird is dead.
Let him rot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.