• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Michael Jackson verdict decided

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Justice bought simple as that!!

In this country if you got money, lots of money like 4+ million you can usually beat any charge. Look at lay, he's got so much money they don't even bother charging him.
 
Originally posted by: ahurtt
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: Harvey
They'll get him next time.
Click to expand...

That is what they were saying this last time.

Originally posted by: bjc112
I can't believe they didn't get him for ANYTHING, not even the serving alcohol to minors..
Click to expand...
If it was illegal to serve to minors; a good chunk of the country could be convicted.
Click to expand...

If it were? It IS illegal to serve minors! J.F.C! Do you really not know this?!
Click to expand...

If it is so illegal, then why are the laws not enforced. Selective enforcement gets shafted by the ACLU types.

It may be illegal to sell to minors; but where is the enforcement on serving them on private property.

The complete MJ fiasco was a political vendetta and the verdict showed it as such.

Now I do not approve of him, however, the DA went well beyond the bounds; looking for a case and then trying to patchwork together evidence accordingly.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top