General Chat

The trial is over and I have not intention of saying again whether I think the Jury were right or wrong, I think I said on a previous thread. However, I will add: Perhaps the some of the jury were affected by his celebrity stutus as were the crowds of fans outside who declared him not guilty before hearing any evidence. A six year old girl once told me how she was abused by her father, earlier that day. No action was taken as there was no evidence. The parents of all the children left in his care must have been dazzled by his celebrity/godlike status. I thiink it best to leave it there. David

Patty Again I totally agree with what you have said and the way you have written it. I have updated my last reply slightly as I meant to say what is there now rather than what I had originally written. Just shows one word missing out of what I had written made all the difference to its meaning. Pat x

i think gavin arviso's mother put the spanner in the works.i still doubt his innocence only he knowsxxxx):

Thank you Dave and Pat. I should add that my interest in this case is from a legal perspective. I consider Michael Jackson one of the greatest artists of my own time, but am unimpressed by celebrity or it's pretentions and am selective about what I read and watch. So am inclined to view him more as a human being who is an artist than as an artist who is a freak, a god or whatever. As well, the benefit of my doubt would always belong to the child in any charging of sexual abuse by an adult, until proven otherwise. My advocacy always has and always will remain with those who need it most, that being the children of society. In this case just ended. I would consider the child/now young adult who brought charges against Michael Jackson to be more likely a victims of his parents. If the earlier child's charges which have been mentioned here, had been brought to trial, they may or may not have been as easily proven as some without benefit of all the available and as yet unavailable facts, appear to presume. Patty

Dave you know i agree with you on this subject. I really wish Michael Jackson hadn't paid Jordy off too, what sort of people would forget an alleged abuse on their child for a price? No way should a genuine case of abuse be allowed to be forgotten and children used in this way for monetary gain. I believe that Michael Jackson was targetted again because of the stupid mistakes he has made, but he cannot be put on trial for being stupid. Surely people didn't really want to believe that Michael Jackson would abuse children, well I didn't I was hopeful it would be the opposite, I didn't want to think of children being abused by ANYONE let alone a singer I had been a fan of when I was growing up. Patty very well said and agree totally with you. Pat x

Very well said Patty Justice has been done no matter what our feelings are towards MJ everybody is entitled to a fair trial no matter what there status is,it is a basic right of every human in a civilised country.12 persons on that jury know more about this than we do sitting in judgement here on the facts presented to us by the media and not the court. Davex

Twelve jurors 'cleared Michael Jackson' of the charges against him, the number expressing doubt about his overall innocence, is three. The first vote on the charges being deliberated, was nine to three for acquittal. The second vote was unanimous. The three jurors acquitted on the second vote, based on the premise of reasonable doubt. Putting a 'slant' on what has been presented in a courtroom is not the job of the jurist. Otherwise we could dispense with the trials and all the professionals who make presentations to the jurists, along with the the judge who instructs the jurists on what they should and should not consider for deliberation. In my own personal opinion, justice was served not by the prosecution of this case, but by the jurors who afforded Michael Jackson the same right to a fair and just verdict, as we would demand be given the normal working class person. As always I enjoy reading and respect, the opinions of others. Patty

Bev according to the news 2 of the juror's where acctually found to know Michael jackson, 1 was a relative of his doctor and the other once stayed at neverland as a kid that to me says it all and now he has only 20,000 pounds left in his bank where is all his money went. I am sorry but I still think he done it and we have just had another OJ Simpson if you got money and are famous you walk

He might be guilty of being sick in the head, he can't have been short of bedrooms in his mansion!!, so why does he need them sharing his bed?, may not have actually molested them, p'raps feels insecure and uses them as others would a teddy bear. He's not a very good role model for youngsters to follow. Val

Limmie, What a terrible world we live in when a father feels he should not bathe with his daughters. What school of thought is it that thinks that everyone is a potential child molester and makes us all feel the same way. Just for the record I think Michael Jackson was innocent as I have stated on other threads. I am delighted that justice prevailed. What I would like to see now is the press leave him alone. Is there any chance of that? I think not. Jean x.

Yes Bev as they say I disagree with your opinions, but I would fight hell and tooth for your right to say them.Thank you it was great,Now Ive got to go up to Longsight to see my Mum for her 80th Birthday buffet in her house.. Dx

Dont think every body will ever agree and that is what I like about this board...differing opinions! So cheers everyone for a good debate and its been great being able to have one without it turning into an argument!!! Bev x

limmie - I agree.... one even thinks twice when its your own children (the bath thing and nowadays talking photos of them) but someone elses child is unthinkable. Again in my supermarket yesterday from young to old everyone thought it was strange for a man of his age to share a bed with children - boys don't forget not children BOYS

i believe he is guilty altho i would have loved to belive otherwise. just to quote wat my mum said ' wat 47 yr old man has kids in there bed anyway' it baffles me ...... my partner is 24 and wont even have a bath with our 2 girls coz he dont feel comfortable doin so , and thats his own kids so wat does that say wen a complete 'stranger' thinks its normal?? watever the jury decided i know wat i think. and as dave siad hes a celebrity... exactly 'celebrity' says it all dont it limmie xxx

Yes you are right Debs thanks for great debate! Dx

So she should be in prison Julie best place for her,she is not interested in her child just the money is £3000 the price of what her poor child has been through! Dx

Dave - sorry one more thing It's been said MONEY is POWER - not just MJ - there are lots of examples of 'it doesn't smell right' to name but a few the Kennedys, the OJ Simpson, the War in Iraq etc etc . I have spent years in the USA - they do as they are told as in their press is not like ours - they have freedom of the press but not if it is going to upset the people! I spent something teaching Amercians their history because we know more than they do!

Dave can I just say that a woman in Blackpool is now in prison because she covered up the rape of her daughter in return for £2 - 3,000.00 and a car. The fact that she took the money doesn't mean her daughter wasn't raped just that the mother is a money grabbing b**ch. Sad world we live in! Julie xxx

I agree Dave but then again at the time of Jordy Chandlers accusation he wasn't to know that! As far as Jordy would have been concerned MJ was as famous and well loved as you could possibly get and I think MJ used that fact!! Bev x

Ok Dave as Bev says..... me a nobody saying MJ has abused my child - pressure from his people as in 'U Nobody who's going to believe u'. Pressure to take the money and say nothing because they will rubbish u and your family in court. Things have a habit of coming out and I believe in innocent until proven guilty but only time will tell in the case.