Posted on 04/16/2005 10:04:11 AM PDT by Hawk44
The defense can always ask the jury, "Would you trust the word of a woman who could turn her small child over to a known pedophile?"
Right you are! In point of fact, credible or not, the prosecution has so far backed up most of her claims with solid evidence--documents, surveillance videos, and more. It IS a wild story, but Jackson is not a sane person. (I started to type "man" but obviously that would have been an error!)
What about the evidence the prosecution has produced that prove most of what she said was true?
Exactly right, Old Friend. I have nothing to add because you said it so well. lol
The thing is, it isn't just her word. This entire wild tale she's told seems to have been supported by solid evidence--audiotapes, surveillance videos, documents.
That doesn't change my opinion, though, that she's been pimping her son. Why else put him in the path of that freak?
Jackson is going to walk. Sneddon is going to look like an idiot.
Miz, I think you answered your own question, in post #25.
You are absolutely right, SolidRedState. Predators and pedophiles very seldom prey on the children of upstanding, law-abiding, Ivy league-educated, white-collar job working, perfect parents of the year. Just because the parent of an abuse victim might be the lowest of the low and the scum of the earth ( i.e. liar, welfare cheat, drug-addict etc) does not mean the molest/abuse did not occur. In fact, it is usually a prevailing factor in allowing it to occur in the first place. How many normal parents would allow their child to sleep with Michael Jackson? Not only has the victim been abused by the molestor, but the parent has usually been negligent and failed to protect the child from harm. It is up to the People of the State of California to protect those children from the pedophiles as well as their loser parents.
Seems that this dichotomy could well be reversed. Some here are quite sure of Jackson's innocence because of the character of the witnesses against him, but at the same time are convinced of the guilt of Schiavo even after 40 plus judges reviewed the case.
It's hard not to see the guilt of a person that would buy off at least two victims with multi-million dollar settlements and have the very visible history he has. He is either a classic pedophile or the most misunderstood human in history.
BTW, I still believe that OJ and Blake were guilty as sin, but accept the verdicts. Same will go here.
I've never schilled for MS's innocence, but neither have I stood idly by while freepers have used unsourced material vs. court testimony.
But go ahead and show us what a Class A liar you are.
Hi, Mac.
Good analogy!
Lots of problems here. Witnesses have not been the best in the world. All seem to have somewhat shady past. The mother seems to be a stone nut case. But my main problem is what was the molestation. Does it merit the millions to bring to trial. If the solid evidence doesn't fit, well you know what Cochran said, you have to acquit. But having said that, Jackson is a child. He never grew up. What made him famous is the support team that propelled him. I feel sorry for him and he needs help bad. If they find him guilty, what would they do with him? I feel he is guilty, but his guilt is that of 10 to 12 year old boys playing around. Grab ass is one thing, real molestation by a true adult is another.
Good trial lawyers can muster a pretty good poker face, even when their case is failing miserably. He must be pretty bad in court, or else he is mugging for the jury and media.
I haven't been following this too closely, but it certainly wouldn't be the first time that some "parent" has sacrificed his child at the altar of Moloch.
The author Lewis Carroll used a similar technique to get little girls to pose nude for him. He'd flatter the parents, who were usually upper-class English people, tell them how wonderful their child was, and then, after a few sessions, casually inquire whether he might photograph them in a natural state. If they objected, he got all indignant, and withdrew the request. If not, he got a subject for his jollies.
Thanks, Peach
I expect those of us who were on the "other side" on both the Schiavo and Magouirk cases will be reminded of it for some time to come.
Definitely. They are big cases and need to be discussed, although hopefully with calm and actual facts, which seem to be in short supply around here lately. LOL
From buckhead to this....
"Seems that this dichotomy could well be reversed."
Of course, it can be reversed!! That's obviated by the fact that many are still OJ supporters, Blake supporters, Peterson supporters, Manson supporters, etc.
Please note that two of the above were adjudicated guilty, two were not.
But, if Peach is going to rant on the Schiavo thread about FReepers not relying on court evidence, she should have the professional integrity to not come over to other threads and make absolute judgements about Michael Jackson, because she becomes the very thing that she is ranting about.
OH, BTW, Peach, you wrote to me "...But go ahead and show us what a Class A liar you are."
A bit testy, and more than a bit histrionic, don't you think? Take a deep breath..... there you go.
Please quit repeating the lie that 40 judges reviewed the case. At most 3 judges reviewed the case and even they left all fact finding to Greer. The other of the alleged 40 judges all merely refused to review the case.
#1. You seem to not know the rules about dragging arguments onto other threads.
#2. Since you have mischaracterized my supposed "support" for MS, then I can say that you are a Class A liar. No deep breaths required, but thanks anyway. LOL
#3. And then, let's see. Oh, yes. My "absolute judgement" about Michael Jackson. Well -- what did I say?
Oh, yes. I said that pedophiles prey on families that are dysfunctional. That's a pretty well documented little tidbit, not an absolute judgement.
You're cracking me up and I don't even know you.
Indeed. We're not all that far from the '06 campaigns, and lots of big issues, border control, social security, energy policy, and deficits to name a few. On another thread relating to Dean and Schiavo, I reflected that the Dems are well aware that their stark move leftward was likely the cause of their demise. They know that mainstream America is by and large not associated with either extreme. They will try and paint Republicans with the same brush we used on them so successfully. We simply must resist that at all cost.
But unfortunately, the deep division that developed right here on FR, I feel, shows that we do have a vulnerability that can be exploited if we cannot mend the rift.
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.