White racist cops assault, bludgeon and maim Jackson

[Mill]

Jackson seriously beaten by racist white cops that want his negative networth.


Geragos said: fvcking little kids in the ass is Michael's right, and allowing him to be arrested is a purely Conservative racist plot. Geragos fears for his client Scott Peterson who was forced to kill his pregnant wife and maul her fetus because of the evil white people in our government.

PLEASE!!!!!! How can ANYONE feel sympathy toward someone who has continually molested children. I mean... still saying it is ok to sleep in the bed with them(children you are NOT related to or close friends to). He's a sicko.

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: Mill
Jackson seriously beaten by racist white cops that want his negative networth.


Geragos said: fvcking little kids in the ass is Michael's right, and allowing him to be arrested is a purely Conservative racist plot. Geragos fears for his client Scott Peterson who was forced to kill his pregnant wife and maul her fetus because of the evil white people in our government.

PLEASE!!!!!! How can ANYONE feel sympathy toward someone who has continually molested children. I mean... still saying it is ok to sleep in the bed with them(children you are NOT related to or close friends to). He's a sicko.

Poor guy.

KK

 

[Zebo]

Innocent until proven guilty or is that not going on anymore?

And he is differnet no doubt. I'd be perfectly willing to believe he actually thinks he's doing good by the children and it's an innocent affection. We'll see. He certainly makes himself an all-to-easy target for grifters.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Innocent until proven guilty or is that not going on anymore?

And he is differnet no doubt. I'd be perfectly willing to believe he actually thinks he's doing good by the children and it's an innocent affection. We'll see. He certainly makes himself an all-to-easy target for grifters.

Sure he is innocent in the eyes of our system, but don't expect me to withhold my personal opinion on his innocence. He's already settled suits before, so what makes anyone believe he stopped raping kids? I honestly have little tolerance for molesters; especially those that hide behind their Hollywood friends. I'm sitting here trying to think of how Jackson could even allay his guilt. It's obvious to me that he loves to molest children. It has been a long running gag in any comedic circle that he is a total Chester and the media lets him get away with it.

But like Geragos said, it is obviously a setup. There has been a huge collusion in the past 10 years among 1000s of people. Right...

 

[Zebo]

I agree nothing worse than robbing a childs innocence and should be a capital case or close to it.

But people sue and allege all sorts of stuff for financial gain. (why you think anyone of means has a lawyer on retainer 2-4-7?) Again we shall see. Physical evidence will be the key since MJ will put the screws to the prosecution with his very compitant representation.

I've only heard of one case which was settled. And cases are settled all the time to aviod public embarresment, legal costs, etc corporations and insurance cos. do it every day. Does'nt mean sh1t.

Remember without conclusive physical evidence every case breaks down to MMO. Motive, means and opportunity. This case is fundementally flawed for the prosecution in that thier client/case will have it.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Zebo
I agree nothing worse than robbing a childs innocence and should be a capital case or close to it.

But people sue and allege all sorts of stuff for financial gain. (why you think anyone of means has a lawyer on retainer 2-4-7?) Again we shall see. Physical evidence will be the key since MJ will put the screws to the prosecution with his very compitant representation.

They do that for sure, but last I checked most liberals don't want tort reform. Seriously, there is a chance this kid is doing it for money, but why the persistent rumors over the year? Persistent rumors are ALWAYS based in some truth.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Zebo
I agree nothing worse than robbing a childs innocence and should be a capital case or close to it.

But people sue and allege all sorts of stuff for financial gain. (why you think anyone of means has a lawyer on retainer 2-4-7?) Again we shall see. Physical evidence will be the key since MJ will put the screws to the prosecution with his very compitant representation.

They do that for sure, but last I checked most liberals don't want tort reform. Seriously, there is a chance this kid is doing it for money, but why the persistent rumors over the year? Persistent rumors are ALWAYS based in some truth.

See my edit.

And I'll have to remember that rumor thing next time I bring up the free masons controlling the world

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Zebo
I agree nothing worse than robbing a childs innocence and should be a capital case or close to it.

But people sue and allege all sorts of stuff for financial gain. (why you think anyone of means has a lawyer on retainer 2-4-7?) Again we shall see. Physical evidence will be the key since MJ will put the screws to the prosecution with his very compitant representation.

They do that for sure, but last I checked most liberals don't want tort reform. Seriously, there is a chance this kid is doing it for money, but why the persistent rumors over the year? Persistent rumors are ALWAYS based in some truth.

See my edit.

And I'll have to remember that rumor thing next time I bring up the free masons controlling the world

I disagree. If they were interested in purely financial means they would have gone straight to court. It is much easier to have a preponderance of evidence than it is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Now, it is true that they *could* be getting the prosecution to be doing their dirty work for them. A criminal conviction equals instant civil verdict, but a criminal verdict would also really hurt Jackson's fortune and their ability to recoup damages. If they really wanted money I think they would have gone straight to civil court. Unless you are saying they were so indigent that they couldn't even get a lawyer to take it on a % basis. Finally, the DA, the cops, and others obviously think something is there. What gain do they get out of it?

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Zebo
I agree nothing worse than robbing a childs innocence and should be a capital case or close to it.

But people sue and allege all sorts of stuff for financial gain. (why you think anyone of means has a lawyer on retainer 2-4-7?) Again we shall see. Physical evidence will be the key since MJ will put the screws to the prosecution with his very compitant representation.

They do that for sure, but last I checked most liberals don't want tort reform. Seriously, there is a chance this kid is doing it for money, but why the persistent rumors over the year? Persistent rumors are ALWAYS based in some truth.

See my edit.

And I'll have to remember that rumor thing next time I bring up the free masons controlling the world

I disagree. If they were interested in purely financial means they would have gone straight to court. It is much easier to have a preponderance of evidence than it is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Now, it is true that they *could* be getting the prosecution to be doing their dirty work for them. A criminal conviction equals instant civil verdict, but a criminal verdict would also really hurt Jackson's fortune and their ability to recoup damages. If they really wanted money I think they would have gone straight to civil court. Unless you are saying they were so indigent that they couldn't even get a lawyer to take it on a % basis. Finally, the DA, the cops, and others obviously think something is there. What gain do they get out of it?

Huge feather in the prosecuters cap by nailing Jackson. Book deals, national prominance, court TV contracts etc. Hell Martia Clask Lost and she a mulimillionare off the worthless prosecution she attempted. a first yer law student could have done better.

Next you have the family. As you correctly say, a criminal conviction is total death for jackson civily, however, even a not-guilty puts the case in the guilty spotlight and framework for months since there are many people like you who believe "he's charged he must be guilty of something" or "hes such a god damn freak, look at chester" it helps either way make thier civil case stronger for millions of clams.

Motive is there.



Edit: now that you bring that up about diluting his fortune. combined with how sure he is of his victory. combined with the very slow investigation and long arrest and low bail. I'm even more convinced they have ZERO physical evidence and the whole thing is sounding more like a he said he said. You may be very disappointed in your vengance wishes.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Zebo
I agree nothing worse than robbing a childs innocence and should be a capital case or close to it.

But people sue and allege all sorts of stuff for financial gain. (why you think anyone of means has a lawyer on retainer 2-4-7?) Again we shall see. Physical evidence will be the key since MJ will put the screws to the prosecution with his very compitant representation.

They do that for sure, but last I checked most liberals don't want tort reform. Seriously, there is a chance this kid is doing it for money, but why the persistent rumors over the year? Persistent rumors are ALWAYS based in some truth.

See my edit.

And I'll have to remember that rumor thing next time I bring up the free masons controlling the world

I disagree. If they were interested in purely financial means they would have gone straight to court. It is much easier to have a preponderance of evidence than it is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Now, it is true that they *could* be getting the prosecution to be doing their dirty work for them. A criminal conviction equals instant civil verdict, but a criminal verdict would also really hurt Jackson's fortune and their ability to recoup damages. If they really wanted money I think they would have gone straight to civil court. Unless you are saying they were so indigent that they couldn't even get a lawyer to take it on a % basis. Finally, the DA, the cops, and others obviously think something is there. What gain do they get out of it?

Huge feather in the prosecuters cap by nailing Jackson. Book deals, national prominance, court TV contracts etc. Hell Martia Clask Lost and she a mulimillionare off the worthless prosecution she attempted. a first yer law student could have done better.

Next you have the family. As you correctly say, a criminal conviction is total death for jackson civily, however, even a not-guilty puts it in the guilty spotlight and framework for months since there are many people like you who believe "he's charged he must be guilty of something" it helps either way make thier civil case stronger for millions of clams.

Motive is there.

If the evidence isn't there then who honestly believes they would benefit with book deals and the like? If anything they would be vilified and run out of town on a rail. The difference with OJ was that the evidence was there, but the Police and DA badly bungled pretty much anything you can bungle. I did a poll on AT a few years back and around 97% of people think OJ was guilty and so does every FBI profiler and anyone who deals with criminals. Even if Marcia Clark got a book deal, I don't see how there could be a trial without evidence that would be beneficial to the prosecution. If anything a trial without evidence would be beneficial to Jackson's fledging fortune. Maybe Jackson is doing this on purpose? Now that is a conspiracy for you to explore, Zebo.

 

[Zebo]

Do a poll now, on jackson. I gauantee you'll get enough to gain a bit of market share on court TV by hire this man victorius or not. He's instant ratings and noterioty for being in a high profile case, even higher than OJ internationally. And most certainly will be when its over.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Do a poll now, on jackson. I gauantee you'll get enough to gain a bit of market share on court TV by hire this man victorius or not. He's instant ratings and noterioty for being in a high profile case, even higher than OJ internationally. And most certainly will be when its over.

I don't think the American people are as dumb as you think. There was plenty of evidence there with OJ, and there is plenty of reasonable suspicion here now with Jackson. We haven't, however, seen any evidence, and if there is none the people will not like it. If there is no evidence then the people will not have the same reaction as with OJ. Furthermore, if there is no evidence then Jackson would be clear to sue in Federal Court for a violation of his Civil Rights and recoup buckoo damages. Lord knows the government has deeper pockets than Michael.

 

[Zebo]

I don't even like to talk about OJ. Other than to say how flawed the court system is


Don't try and paint it as if I think people bring cases w/o evidence...They'll be plenty on evidence in this case too. (definity child phychlogists, interviews, maybe even DNA or other physical, etc) Question is beyond a reasonable doubt to those 12.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Zebo
I don't even like to talk about OJ. Other than to say how flawed the court system is


Don't try and paint it as if I think people bring cases w/o evidence...They'll be plenty on evidence in this case too. (definity child phychlogists, interviews, maybe even DNA or other physical, etc) Question is beyond a reasonable doubt to those 12.

Juries are pretty finicky. Most of the time they have to have the evidence to convict. Prior history and the like sometimes doesn't matter to them because they want cold hard evidence. Geragos needs to hope he can find his client a Mark Furman quick.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Zebo
I don't even like to talk about OJ. Other than to say how flawed the court system is


Don't try and paint it as if I think people bring cases w/o evidence...They'll be plenty on evidence in this case too. (definity child phychlogists, interviews, maybe even DNA or other physical, etc) Question is beyond a reasonable doubt to those 12.

Juries are pretty finicky. Most of the time they have to have the evidence to convict. Prior history and the like sometimes doesn't matter to them because they want cold hard evidence. Geragos needs to hope he can find his client a Mark Furman quick.

just curious would you be opposed to "professional jurors" ie three judges like in japan who judge every case. To me the whole jury system is flawed and way to open for emotional appeal. Would'nt need looser pays, or tort reform, and OJ's ass would be... well...

I gauntee if I was ever arrested I would let the one judge decide my case than turn it over to a bunch of yahoos. how bout you?

 

[rbV5]

It has been a long running gag in any comedic circle that he is a total Chester and the media lets him get away with it.

Are the Media dropping their kids off at Neverland Ranch?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Zebo
I don't even like to talk about OJ. Other than to say how flawed the court system is


Don't try and paint it as if I think people bring cases w/o evidence...They'll be plenty on evidence in this case too. (definity child phychlogists, interviews, maybe even DNA or other physical, etc) Question is beyond a reasonable doubt to those 12.

Juries are pretty finicky. Most of the time they have to have the evidence to convict. Prior history and the like sometimes doesn't matter to them because they want cold hard evidence. Geragos needs to hope he can find his client a Mark Furman quick.

Hmmm, from the commentaries I have heard and read (yes even of Fox) most of them believe thatthe Prosecution has a rather weak case. Of course if that were true then why would they even bother?

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Hmmm, from the commentaries I have heard and read (yes even of Fox) most of them believe thatthe Prosecution has a rather weak case. Of course if that were true then why would they even bother?

Ego

They were played before and shorted by the settlement.

This may also be where the witnesses have been coached by the parents/lawyers.

Lawyers want/have to twist the truth :disgust:

 

[EagleKeeper]

Why does it take over a month for this to now come out.

If there was any substance, this would have been in the media within a day of him being released.

The Spin Doctors have arrived.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Why does it take over a month for this to now come out.

If there was any substance, this would have been in the media within a day of him being released.

The Spin Doctors have arrived.

Trauma can be the only valid explination. Some rape/assault victims wait years. Jackson could be the very "sensitive" type.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Zebo
I don't even like to talk about OJ. Other than to say how flawed the court system is


Don't try and paint it as if I think people bring cases w/o evidence...They'll be plenty on evidence in this case too. (definity child phychlogists, interviews, maybe even DNA or other physical, etc) Question is beyond a reasonable doubt to those 12.

Juries are pretty finicky. Most of the time they have to have the evidence to convict. Prior history and the like sometimes doesn't matter to them because they want cold hard evidence. Geragos needs to hope he can find his client a Mark Furman quick.

just curious would you be opposed to "professional jurors" ie three judges like in japan who judge every case. To me the whole jury system is flawed and way to open for emotional appeal. Would'nt need looser pays, or tort reform, and OJ's ass would be... well...

I gauntee if I was ever arrested I would let the one judge decide my case than turn it over to a bunch of yahoos. how bout you?

I've wondered that myself. I sometimes think it would be a better system to have professional jurors, but that just means a group of judges really. We want to use laymen for some odd reason.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Zebo
I don't even like to talk about OJ. Other than to say how flawed the court system is


Don't try and paint it as if I think people bring cases w/o evidence...They'll be plenty on evidence in this case too. (definity child phychlogists, interviews, maybe even DNA or other physical, etc) Question is beyond a reasonable doubt to those 12.

Juries are pretty finicky. Most of the time they have to have the evidence to convict. Prior history and the like sometimes doesn't matter to them because they want cold hard evidence. Geragos needs to hope he can find his client a Mark Furman quick.

Hmmm, from the commentaries I have heard and read (yes even of Fox) most of them believe thatthe Prosecution has a rather weak case. Of course if that were true then why would they even bother?

Honestly, this is the first article I've read on the mess since it first happened. I wouldn't know about how strong their case is. I just assume they have something.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Mill

I've wondered that myself. I sometimes think it would be a better system to have professional jurors, but that just means a group of judges really. We want to use laymen for some odd reason.

The reason I think it's the founding fathers wanted power to the citizenry.. However, jurors were very highly educated when they wrote the constitution, of similar mind and culture too, not today. (perhaps a litums test on law and intro to logic would be suffeint though).

But then I have no idea how they understand complex patent law cases, or some complicaed financial cases like the S&L's.

Seems society and it's cases have gotten more complicated but our juries not. I'd think a software enginner/patent attoney/judge (3 of them and that's all they deal with) would give much swifter and "fairer" justice.

Similarly with criminal cases. Have experts in the field judgeing them.. Anywho..Not gonna happen.