Nope, no whoosh, I firmly believe he’s guilty as charged. I also believe that OJ got away with murder due to the ignorance of the jury that couldn’t follow the DNA testimony and the incompetence of the prosecution team. MJ may well be acquitted, but given what we already know about the guy, ESPECIALLY the $20 million payoff and the admission that he sleeps with boys in his bed.
Yes, I know about the presumption of innocence, but there’s also the idea of being able to see what 's right in front of you.
Oops, that bit should read “but given what we already know about the guy, ESPECIALLY the $20 million payoff and the admission that he sleeps with boys in his bed, there’s not a chance in hell that he’s innocent of hanky panky with boys.”
Blacks must be hard to find in Las Vegas as on last night’s local news, they found a chubby white chick with walls of Michael Jackson posters in her house, blathering on and on about how Michael has been framed and will be found innocent of all charges.
I will be amazed if this trial turns into a big racial divide. I think most people, black and white, consider Michael Jackson as close to an alien being as we are ever going to experience on earth…so maybe this will turn into a debate between those who wear tinfoil hats, and those who don’t.
You’re basically an asshole aren’t you. I don’t know if you have been watching the trial coverage, but I see more white people out there with signs than black people. The idea that powerful black people are targeted by the gov’t, white people, etc. is not unfounded. I would supect that many of the people you heard saying this may be over 40. These people have the misfortune of remembering seeing black people targeted. You guys act like that shit has never happened. Sure it may be misapplied, as it may have been in the OJ case, but stop trying to pretend like these people pulled the shit out of their ass.
I imagine that he is suggesting that because a rich black man married a white woman and hung out with white people it does not follow that he is denying or ignoring his ethnicity. It just means that he married a white woman and hung out with people in his socio-economic bracket (possibly colleagues in his media work). None of which impacts on his widely perceived status as a wife murderer.
No, that he did so in order to “strive to be white” (and that’s a quote from Agrippina.) Or, you know, that ANY person would marry or hang out with people of a different background because they themselves were striving to be of that background. What the fuck is “striving to be white” anyway?
I know fighting ignorance takes a while, but surely we’ve beaten THIS bit of bullshit back already?
I must confess a certain personal enjoyment of thread titles which appear inflammatory until you open the thread and discover the various caveats or alternative interpretations, but I’m just perverse like that.
And I will be spending the next six to eight months desperately attempting to avoid MJ trial crap in the media. If I had my way there would be a ban on reporting anything about the trial until the verdict was announced.
Aw, bullshit. One thing is certain: Michael Jackson is an odd fellow. It’s far from clear that he’s a filthy paedophile.
He’s used to conditions that few of us can relate to – and he has no practical governor on his behaviour. It is just possible that he’s taken the whole Peter Pan “innocence and imagination” thing to heart much more than anyone else has ever had the ability or inclination to do. Weird, but not criminal.
I’m not making my mind up until the trial’s over – but it’s far from a “slam dunk,” given the previous history of the accusing family’s multiple for-profit scams, some of which involved the boys in sickening ways.
Collecting welfare while the boyfriend makes 80k p/a? No biggie. Organizing a fundraising drive for their sick kid and failing to mention that their insurance covered them 100%? Well, that’s pretty shady, but hey… Claiming J.C. Penny’s security guards beat them senseless and sexually abused the mom “for no reason,” asking $3 million in damages? Hang on, I’m going to be looking pretty closely at the testimony and cross-examination before taking them at their word.
In short, folks on both sides of this drama seem a bit whiffy. I wouldn’t take either side on faith.
