[Ophiucus]

Funny, but isn't there this silly little thing in the Constitution about the right of the accused to face their accusor...

So someone who makes the charge they were abused should have to appear in the trial.

I know, that silly ole constatushathingy.

[capt. norm]

You know the Democrtaic presidential candidates have got to be feeling 'stood up' by the media.

All the Michael Jackson stories will ocupy the media, which always seems to go for the easy stuff. It's easy to beat a known story to death rewording it ad nauseum than to actually get out and do some reporting.

[Devil_Anse]

What Jackson appears to be doing is paying the parents of these very young boys a lot of money in return for their turning their sons over to him to molest.

Not speaking of the current accuser and his parents, but as for the other parents of other boys, we know that if they were confronted with my statement above, they would act surprised and claim ignorance of what is going on when Jackson is alone with the helpless victims.

The parents are selling their sons into prostitution. Prostitution = slavery. In this case, Jackson is the purchaser of the slaves.

How perfect.

[William Terrell]

I heard the comment. He said that, previously, a victim couldn't be compelled to testify. He then said, but the law had been changed. He didn't say specifically what the law had been changed to.

Want to become an instant millionaire and have a minor child? Let the child stay overnight with by Jackson.

[Mr. Bird]

Sneddon's mention of compelling testimony was especially puzzling, legal experts said, because he also stated that the child now making allegations against Jackson is willing to testify and has no plans to bring a civil suit.

More than likely, Sneddon was using the press to speak directly to Jackson and his lawyers; telling them to not even try to contact the family.

I'm not sure I understand the "experts'" puzzlement. Couldn't anyone have asked Sneddon to clarify his statements, maybe even before deciding to print them?

[NMFXSTC]

All I wanna know is how is it that this faggot child molester manges to "negotiate" the terms and conditions of his arrest?

Damn, we have a couple of joints in our possession and, "up against the wall", and "slam"...the door closes!

[an amused spectator]

What I'm trying to figure out is why there are no charges against the parent?

Could you imagine what a prosecutor in California would do to a parent who had a child accidentally killed by a gun in the house once, and then had the same thing happen again years later?

I mean, HELLO!!! The dude is creepy, weird and way too friendly with children. KEEP YOUR KIDS AWAY FROM HIM.

This "no charges against the parent" observation leads to another observation: Where were the authorities? I mean, you're watching the guy, you see kids going in and out. In their position, I would have warned the parents. It seems like this was NOT done.

Was the prosecutor Dom Sheldon (Tom Sheddon) hunting over a bait pile? I think this is personal payback for Whacko Jacko's beating the prior rap and his little "Dom Sheldon" song. That's an abuse of the system, though I agree with Bob & Tom.