Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Well, the judge today ruled that he will allow testimony from earlier accusations to be brought as evidence in this trial. I've heard on talk radio today what some of that evidence is and it sounds pretty devestating to Michael Jackson. Example, a former employee is going to testify that she saw Michael Jackson in bed with 4 boys and their underwear was on the floor next to the bed. That is pretty fvcking creapy. I also read through the deposition of one child and the stuff in there would get anyone thrown in jail for a very very long time. I'm not going to go into it but it is more than just "fondling."
BTW-Any man tries to "fondle" my son, even once and I'm going to expect the sick motherfvcker be locked up for life and be labeled a child molester. :|
What happens if a woman fondles your son? I'm sure you've noticed this apparent rash of women raping their young male students occurring over recent months.
The allowing of previous accusations into the current trial might backfire on the prosecution. Of the 5 cases, 2 of the boys involved have claimed publically that the abuse never happened. (It will be their parents claiming abuse occurred.) 1 of these kids sued for emancipation from the parents. The ex-employees of MJ claiming to have seen inappropriate touching taking place actually sued MJ in the 90s and lost (over an unrelated matter). Their previous unsuccessful lawsuit against MJ does make their testimony appear somewhat questionable, i.e., it looks like they have an axe to grind. And then you have people like Macauley Culkin - some of the prosecution witnesses will no doubt claim they saw MJ inappropriately touching Macauley. Macauley himself claims this never happened. It seems to be more hearsay from people with axes to grind.
Uhm? So what? It's still sexsual abuse, might not be as mad. It's still is abuse.
2 out of the 5? Okay that still leaves 3 others...
If it's a unrelated matter why'd you have to bring it up? It really seems to be all you're doing is destroying the other sides credbility and not proving them wrong.
It might be hearsay, but so what?
Lets look at the main points of evidence mounted agaisnt him...
1)We've always had that "hunch" that there is something just werid with Micheal Jackson.
2)He was exposed to sex at an early age. His older brothers would bring their "groupies" over to the house.
3)His father was extremely violent. Micheal hated his father and was scared to death of him. It's been said that his nose reseambled his father nose, and thats why he got surgery.
4)It's clear that his father more than likely may have abused him, we know that abusies(sp?) almost always become abusers.
5)He was shoved out into a world of fame and in the public spotlight. Professsing that he's gay would remove all of this and his father would have more than likely killed him.
6)He sleeps with kids and walks around naked with kids being present. He does a extremely poor job of defending it. Why is he walking around naked?
7)Kids were able to easy identify his penis. They called it a "barber pole" micheal bleechs his skin and when his johnson is erect it has a baberpole apperance. Why do these kids know this?
8)He gave a very sick child alcholol, why? Does he even know the child's exact medical problems? Does he know what will happen with the use of alcholol on the child.
9)Settled the previous case in 1993 for 15 Million.
10)Has porn lying around the house a enviorment which child will be in, why?
11)7 other allegations of child molestation.
There is certainly enough evidence here that would make anyone think twice about Micheal Jackson as a "good" person, agreed?
Facebook
Twitter