I’m not sure they were saying it was okay. I believe that charge was regarded the same as all the others: the jury was not convinced that MJ did give alcohol to a minor. See, the kid said he did, but he’s a liar, right? And his mom’s a nutcase. That charge apparently hinged on the flight attendant’s testimony, who was not able to definitively state that she’d seen the kid drink out of the can that had the Jesus Juice in it.
So it didn’t happen. Nothing happened. Sure, they had video of a frightened, humiliated, tearful kid talking about a traumatic experience. But that means nothing, because what they didn’t have was video of MJ in the act of molesting the kid. It was the mother on trial, not MJ.
The fiend! Employing lawyers to protect his interests! Everyone knows the American thing to do when threatened with legal action is to just bend over and spread your cheeks.
Didn’t say that, no. But fear of those lawyers shouldn’t prevent the state of California fron doing it’s job when it comes to Michael Jackson’s children.
Hello, lynch-mob. I’d like to point out that with people like you, who sentence someone to a crime of being considered a child-molester without actually being found guilty, who needs a decent justice system anyway? Trial by media. Trial by public opinion. Why not? Isn’t it just one really big jury anyway?
We all agree that children are the bestest things in the world, but you can’t actually be nice to them, no, you better stay away from them, lest the lynch mob decides you are a child molester. :rolleyes:
So if MJ’s lawyers prevail, it must be because the state is afraid, not because of the merits of their arguments? What faith you have in our legal system!
If someone saying that they are desperate to be around children is enough for a conviction, there are a few infertility clinics that should be investigated.
I’ve heard too many wannabe parents say it, and who seem to base their entire self-worth on their ability to conceive.
check it out again - my recollection was that the alcohol related charge was something to the effect of : “providing alcohol to a minor w/intent to molest” ie, not simply giving booze to the kid (Which he seemed to have done) but doing so w/the intent to faciliate the physical abuse.
Are you a parent? Are you seriously saying that you find nothing creepy about MJ and his obsession with boys? Giving them alcohol, sleeping with them? These are admitted ( and what exactly is Jesus Juice?)
If expressing reservations about a 40-something male’s predilection for sleeping with 11 year old males in a locked room with an alarm systen is being a lynch mob. then hand me a rope.
I sincerely hope that he has been tried by public opinion and loses his wealth. Without it, he cannot construct the very environment that allows him to continue this behavior.
All along I have advocated for mental health care for MJ–and I still think he needs and deserves it. I would rather err on the side of caution re the boys at this point.
I know where you’re coming from. Really I do. In fact, as a molested child, you’d think I would be on your side. Unfortunately, the side of the law is more important in this instance. We can’t do anything about someone who wasn’t even proven to have “done” anything with a child.
They couldn’t prove that he administered alcohol to him, they most definitely couldn’t have proven that he gave the kid fellatio, there was no proven kidnapping conspiracy. Nothing. The only thing they can do to him is begin supervising his own children just to monitor his behavior with the kids, and teachers, doctors, Etc the same.
While we don’t have the “Scottish not proven” verdict, we do have a rabid media and a public that is prepared to damn any poetntial prepetrator of a crime such as this. We don’t need “not proven”, we have groups who will vocally damn the man for life. Trust me, only his minion and obsessed fans think he’s truly not guilty.
I think the dude’s a creep. I think he’s fucking weird. I’ve voiced my opinion of what I think really takes place at MJ’s house, and I personally don’t think he’s a molester per se. If he is, the microscope they have shoved up his ass will turn something up. Hopefully next time, the prosecution doesn’t present some wack, bullshit unproveable case and they nail him-or, he’s truly not a perverted molester(as I personally believe), and it’s never proven. Which would of course make all of this hoopla for nothing, and the condemnations being issued truly poinless.
The jury had the option of find him guilty of either charge. They found there was not enough evidence to convict him of even the simple ‘providing’ charge.
But, this is where we differ. I think that in this particular case, public opinion may be correct–but it is not something we should rely on. Not trusting PO is one reason FOR our legal system–everyone gets their day in court to present their “side”.
It just is so awful when the ones who have NO voice (kids) get shafted again and again by the court. We have all heard stories about the abusive parent getting custody or regaining custody of a helpless child.
This is a similiar case–he walks free to do what? His bizarre behavior is enough to convict this mom–but apparently there are parents out there who want their kids to be close to the aura (yuck) of celebrity. It’s the KIDS who get shafted, again. Is he gonna dangle one of them off a balcony? He is not stable and should not be allowed access to children, IMO.
But you are falling into the public opinin trap again, by presuming the so-called victim was telling the truth. The jury did not find him to be credible enough to base a conviction on. You apparently don’t agree with the jury, and prefer to stick with public opinion.
How about the kids who are put into strange positions by their parents and then told to lie to the world in the hopes of a payday? I really think the person who should be looked at more carefully and possibly punished is the mom of this young boy. Not only did she put her kid in the situation, but it appears that she hatched a plan to scam MJ-at least that’s what the jury decided.
I know you think he’s unstable(as does most anyone who’s ever seen the weirdo on TV), but the law doesn’t provide for pre-emptively taking a person’s children from them in the absence of any kind of evidence. If there comes a time when some proof of abuse of his children surfaces, I promise you that no high $$ mouthpiece can save MJ from a family court judge.
NO-I am not going by the victim here. I am going by the evidence of the alarm system and by the admission by MJ that he sleeps with pre-pubescent boys.
I understand that there was not enough evidence to convict him of molestation–I am not sure if he did all that he was accused of. I am saying that MJ has displayed abberrant behavior often enough in the past to give any parent pause. Any rational thinking adult pause, for that matter. I am frustrated because the Law seems very narrow here and doesn’t allow for other issues–he provided alcohol to a minor–if I do that-I’m going to jail, if I’m caught, of course. He has done very dubious things–I hope the state does watch his kids like a hawk.
You keep repeating this as if it is a matter of record, when in fact, there is no evidence proving he provided alcohol to a minor. The jury specifically exonerated him of this.