Posted on 06/13/2005 12:36:01 PM PDT by Dog
LOL!
I'm amazed that you would think that something wasn't VERY wrong with a 47 year old odd ball, sleeping with young boys.
Do you still believe in the tooth fairy and the Easter Bunny??
Imagine if this was a NORMAL 47 year old man (not a freaky celebrity) sleeping with young boys. Do you think he would walk away a free man?! No way!
When you had your sleep over with your buddy in the 5th grade, which one of you was 47 years old??
One other question. When are you sending YOUR children over to "play" with Michael??
I'm not going to defend Jacko as man of the year - but I said this in about week two of the trial - he was going to be aquitted simply because the prosecution brought a crappy case. It's one thing to have jurors connect the dots, but another to put three dots on a piece of paper and call it the Mona Lisa.
I've found that I have some decent ones. I need to get
them graded. A few will fetch a pretty good $ I think.
(12x$1,000,000 {jurors}+ $5,000,000 {judge}=LIFE "CHEAP"
Damn, off on the View count by a whole factor plus!
Since this stuff was admissible (was it?) I presume the judge found a colorable connection to the crime alleged.
But, as this DA just proved, you can't build a case regarding specific acts on innuendo and porn.
I think what we have here is not an "evil judge" but an overconfident, underprepared DA with a case built on shaky inferences and witnesses with credibility problems. And if he indulged in courtroom antics, he finished the job of alienating the jury that his witnesses started. That's a recipe for a loss, especially when the defendant can afford the best defense around.
There is one semi-intelligent guy on the juror, a gray haired engineer called Ray. On Larry King last night he was saying that he believed Jackson had molested boys in the past.
This is going to make people very cynical about serving on juries.
I believe it was the jury who was not thinking, obviously.
We're talking about California. You REALLY need to define the word "NORMAL" :-)
And these are considered a "jury of his peers?" I think not.
ROTFL! ;-D
yeah if you can put up some certified PS8s you will start pulling down some major bucks depending on who the players are
That's so disgusting-looking. I shake my head in disbelief in that it is obvious this woman has no life. People are so lost, so blinded...it is such a sad commentary on the state of affairs in this country....a sad commentary, indeed.
The creep factor on those paintings is pretty damn high if you ask me.
Forgive me Jesus for what I am about to say.
Poor Bubbles. Now he will go home and "spank the monkey."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.