|
Post by ela on Jun 14, 2005 14:41:54 GMT -5
I actually gained sympathy for you. YES ME!! but when it comes to serious stuff you'd rather be sarcatic. I appreciate a dry sense of humour but prefer it in a situation where EVERYONE can enjoy and undersatand it. Your humour 99% ISN''T FUNNY. How you use your sense of humour is a problem. Just for me??? As I've already told Mike once.... I am "using" him as personal trainer for tolerance..... And it's working! Mike I love youuuuuuuuuuuu
|
|
|
Post by mikebook on Jun 14, 2005 14:47:38 GMT -5
Thank you...
I love you too...
|
|
|
Post by freerob on Jun 14, 2005 14:49:44 GMT -5
I'd noticed on the Pro site, they were all outraged at Michael Jackson's verdict, (surprise surprise) saying he'd weasled his way out of it. They claimed that "This is a victory for NAMBLA (the North American Man Boy Love Association)" Another argument was . . . "From where it sit it looks like injustice served, pedophilia served, high-priced flim-flam lawyers served, and anything but justice served. Did I say pedophilia served? Definitely pedophilia served. It's the same open barn door that so many guilty murderers have used to escape justice (open barn door = reasonable doubt). He looks like he just stepped out of Madame Tussaud's wax museum in London. He's a freak who got away with it because he has $$$" This is shocking. So suddenly they're attacking him as a pedophile because hes gotten plastic surgery, and has money??? Which is wrong. Michael Jackson has serious money problems, and is in debt of something like $200 million! They're even accusing Jackson of crimes he did not commit, like giving alcohol to children. Hes just been proven innocent of this, and all of his alleged offences. "When he gave booze to the little boys, do you think he was just being sociable?" Can anyone explain to me how Pros are always so sure the judge and jury who condemns offenders to death are always right, and just in their sentencing, yet when they do not condemn a man, who is clearly innocent, the judge and jury are suddenly wrong?!?!? Regards, Gill of course they are outraged about the M.J verdict on Pro-Site...they just WANT everybody on trials to be guilty it doesn´t seem to matter if they´re really guilty or not as long as they have somebody to hate and to vent on PLUS M.J is BLACK, famous, and rich (or was rich)...so black, famous, rich and eccentric = guilty and to be scorned ? i dont think on pro-site as it currently is they are about justice anymore..it´all seems to be about hate and wanting to punish everybody to get rid off own problems of hate, complexes, frustration and wishes for vengeance...guilty or innocent doesn´t seem to matter anymore as long as they have somebody they hope they can punish, execute, scorn or whatever.....i just dunno what happened to that site .....well but sometimes they even come up with funny and oh so true words..one of the posters once created the word MURDERPHILES for penpals for DR inmates...well i think some of the Pros might be more MURDERERPHILE than every Anti could be..murderer-PHILE says there is a passion, maybe even sexual passion or obession in it...well so right, especially for the Pro who invented the word since he´s constantly getting off and verbally masturbating on DR inmates which shows that HE himself is what he calls murderer-PHILE...maybe thats why he came up with that word..HE knows the real meaning so dang well.... ok but back to Michael Jackson..after such a big trial with so many witnesses and hard-working lawyers and prosecutors he was found innocent....that´s the fact....i didn´t follow his case but if they now say he´s innocent i believe it...hope he really is..hope it for him and for the children of this world Mo-DAWG Hey dawg! I personally do NOT believe for a second MJ is inocent. Like the guys on DR, they have NO MONEY to help their case, MJ HAD access to zillions of $$$ to help him. That's my problem with the US. Money & Politics TALK. OK, MJ may be in debt forever, but SO WHAT? HE's FREE! Sad that the DR inmates haven't got his CASH to 'BUY' top Lawyers to represent THEM.
|
|
|
Post by mikebook on Jun 14, 2005 14:56:55 GMT -5
Part of the problem is that talent costs $$$. We can all agree on that. People on the margins do not have a lot of money and we can all admit to that as well... So unless you can get a lawyer that has a stellar reputation that is willing to work cheap, you go with what you can afford. I would take a law student to help me if I could, if he was interested in my case and believed in me more than expensive talent that did not. That is the difference right there... who believes me more...
|
|
Mo-DAWG
Settlin' In
Yes... this is the real Mo-DAWG ..
Posts: 47
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on Jun 14, 2005 14:59:08 GMT -5
of course they are outraged about the M.J verdict on Pro-Site...they just WANT everybody on trials to be guilty it doesn´t seem to matter if they´re really guilty or not as long as they have somebody to hate and to vent on PLUS M.J is BLACK, famous, and rich (or was rich)...so black, famous, rich and eccentric = guilty and to be scorned ? i dont think on pro-site as it currently is they are about justice anymore..it´all seems to be about hate and wanting to punish everybody to get rid off own problems of hate, complexes, frustration and wishes for vengeance...guilty or innocent doesn´t seem to matter anymore as long as they have somebody they hope they can punish, execute, scorn or whatever.....i just dunno what happened to that site .....well but sometimes they even come up with funny and oh so true words..one of the posters once created the word MURDERPHILES for penpals for DR inmates...well i think some of the Pros might be more MURDERERPHILE than every Anti could be..murderer-PHILE says there is a passion, maybe even sexual passion or obession in it...well so right, especially for the Pro who invented the word since he´s constantly getting off and verbally masturbating on DR inmates which shows that HE himself is what he calls murderer-PHILE...maybe thats why he came up with that word..HE knows the real meaning so dang well.... ok but back to Michael Jackson..after such a big trial with so many witnesses and hard-working lawyers and prosecutors he was found innocent....that´s the fact....i didn´t follow his case but if they now say he´s innocent i believe it...hope he really is..hope it for him and for the children of this world Mo-DAWG Hey dawg! I personally do NOT believe for a second MJ is inocent. Like the guys on DR, they have NO MONEY to help their case, MJ HAD access to zillions of $$$ to help him. That's my problem with the US. Money & Politics TALK. OK, MJ may be in debt forever, but SO WHAT? HE's FREE! Sad that the DR inmates haven't got his CASH to 'BUY' top Lawyers to reprent THEM. Hey Miles, i really dunno what to think about the MJ case so for myself i just give him the benefit of the doubt and really hope he WAs innocent..actually not even hope it for him cuz he´knows the truth but i DO hope it for the children of this world... DR inmates are the sad side of the story..oh yes u so right..if they had the money to pay a good lawyer they wouldnt get executed...unfortunately we can´t help all of them but we all can do at least SOMETHING and make things happen..i got a real good private investigator for my buddiez and i do call this P.I the BEST (u know who that is ..right?) and we got them REAL good lawyers..so they´ll at least have REAL chances...now all we can do is wait and see what´s gonna happen..no matter how much all of this will cost us it´ll be worth it cuz at least we try to give our best to do something... Mo-DAWG
|
|
terri
Settlin' In
Posts: 45
|
Post by terri on Jun 14, 2005 15:10:18 GMT -5
I don't think he was guilty. I just don't. I admit he has problems, and sleeping in beds with little boys is not right. If it was some random guy from down the street, he wouldn't stand a chance. But look how much Jordy Chandlers case was settled for $18m. If I really thought my kid had been abused, I wouldnt drop the case for any amount of money. I do think people are sick enough to lie about things like this to get money. I really think that it was never Michael Jacksons intentions to harm a child, he's just a very lonely person. I know a lot will disagree with me but you know.....
|
|
|
Post by jojo29 on Jun 14, 2005 16:40:48 GMT -5
No. You're right that America doesn't like to convict it's entertainers, just those in lower economic circumstances. But if there was a shred of evidence against Jackson, he would have been found guilty on at least one charge. He's innocent, as proven. Gill Well actually he was not found innocent, he was found not guilty. From what I have heard today on TV the jurors have all said that they think he did do it but couldn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. It was juror #1 who said that he believes that MJ does molest children. So it is not a case of no evidence.
|
|
|
Post by ex member on Jun 14, 2005 20:22:20 GMT -5
I'd noticed on the Pro site, they were all outraged at Michael Jackson's verdict, (surprise surprise) saying he'd weasled his way out of it. They claimed that "This is a victory for NAMBLA (the North American Man Boy Love Association)" Another argument was . . . "From where it sit it looks like injustice served, pedophilia served, high-priced flim-flam lawyers served, and anything but justice served. Did I say pedophilia served? Definitely pedophilia served. It's the same open barn door that so many guilty murderers have used to escape justice (open barn door = reasonable doubt). He looks like he just stepped out of Madame Tussaud's wax museum in London. He's a freak who got away with it because he has $$$" This is shocking. So suddenly they're attacking him as a pedophile because hes gotten plastic surgery, and has money??? Which is wrong. Michael Jackson has serious money problems, and is in debt of something like $200 million! They're even accusing Jackson of crimes he did not commit, like giving alcohol to children. Hes just been proven innocent of this, and all of his alleged offences. "When he gave booze to the little boys, do you think he was just being sociable?" Can anyone explain to me how Pros are always so sure the judge and jury who condemns offenders to death are always right, and just in their sentencing, yet when they do not condemn a man, who is clearly innocent, the judge and jury are suddenly wrong?!?!? Regards, Gill I have to admit, I was hoping for a guilty verdict. I truly believe deep in my heart he is guilty. I believe he was able to buy his way out of it with good lawyers. And for the record, I was the very first one to post a comment on the pro board when the verdict was read. Some of you seem so caught up this battle between the pros and the antis.. they say looky over there at ccadp at what someone said, here it is said ohh looky over there at the pro site, its shameful really. Rather than banter back and forth about how bad this one is or that one is, or who said this and who said that, why not use that same energy to do something productive for this cause. This is just my opinion... I have many friends both here and at the pro site and I could'nt ever throw mean names around about anyone. No one is perfect, we all have our faults.
|
|
|
Post by ela on Jun 15, 2005 4:52:54 GMT -5
you are right Pam, and I am the first who try to no make polemic of everything... But you have to admit, that it is hard to go over it when what you read is only grievance, insult, and people who make tease of others. Here we react to dares... we never attack... did u notice it?
|
|
|
Post by moghirl on Jun 15, 2005 7:50:23 GMT -5
No adult man should take young boys into their bedroom, full stop. I am not sure about this, i hope he IS not guilty, but it looks like a case of $$$ buys you freedom.
|
|
|
Post by gill on Jun 15, 2005 14:37:34 GMT -5
If my child had been sexually abused by a sex offender (and Michael Jackson is anything but!) then I would blame myself for allowing my child to keep in the company of a grown man, and spend nights. Michael Jackson has a profile of child abuse, and even though I believe him to be innocent, such a profile will haunt him for the rest of his life. This, is the fault of the parents! Who would demand money of someone who had sexually abused their child in exchange for their freedom. Isn't it ironic that the person they are accusing has money! This is a case of a naive man being targetted by fanatical women using their children for $$$$. And even if it isn't - I'd like these parents to explain to me why their child was in Michael Jackson's company in the first place. Gillian
|
|