Reply With Quote
Yes, it is a parent's responsibility. But some kids need to be protected from their parents, and that's where the state/CPS is supposed to come in. And they make mistakes, too.
Yes, it is a parent's responsibility. But some kids need to be protected from their parents, and that's where the state/CPS is supposed to come in. And they make mistakes, too.
So what is your point...what are you trying to get at now? That this child should be taken away from his mother? It has been quite evident that the mother is a very shaddy character.
I knew ahead of time he was getting off, guilty or not. Money and status does a lot for people. Simpson got off, Bryant got off, Blake got off. Guilty or not for all of these people money and status talk.
My opinion is that MJ is guilty, which means squat. But the state has a responsibility to see that it didn't happen again. They may have failed.
The mother definately should be looked at by CPS.
For everybody insisting MJ got off because of money, can you please explain the case that the Prosecution had against him that would have beaten the average person's Defense?
District Attorney is giving his press conference now...wow he looks like hes gona go under a rock and take cover. Muahhaha at the reporter asking him "do you think you have the wrong family on trial"?
DA: We all did our job...
No sir you didnt, you did not do your job. If you had done your job you would have known that you did not have enough evidence to convict him. You spent tons of tax payer money.
Then you screwed up by bringing the conspiracy charge, which may have thrown your entire case out the window.
LOL at another reporter asking him, is this the last time your office will be prosecuting Michael Jackson? DA: NO COMMENT...
Do any of you actually know why money makes a difference or is it just the thing to say?
Famous . Lock him up.
I was just being cynical and not really serious when I said "Money Talks" personally I don't know and don't care.
Of course money makes a difference...you can hire the best attorneys money can buy and afford to pay them $500hr+ for the lead attorneys plus their staff...they can afford to file brief after brief and challenge every single piece of evidence...Jacksons legal bill will be well into the multi millions...you can hire expert witnesses, hire private investigators to did up dirt on the opposition...do whatever it takes to create some doubt in the juries mind...and that is all it takes to win a case...a little doubt...even in one jurors mind...
our legal system is still the best ever devised but anyone that thinks money doesn't buy a better defense just isn't paying attention...
The case didn't come down to digging up dirt on the boy. Yes they did dig up dirt on the mother, but the mother wasnt on trial here. Yes money allows you to get top notch lawyers i agree with you on that notion. But let's be honest here the prosecution didn't have a strong enough case to prove the case.
No doubt, but there seems to be a lot of people assuming he only got off because of his strong defense team, but nobody can seem to explain the case the prosectution had against him.
If there is nothing sexual involved, expain to me a logical reason for finding a man sleeping in a bed with children so appauling?Yes, that's totally acceptable behavior from a middle-aged man.
What is socially unacceptable is far from an absolute. And since he apparently hasn't done it a first time, how can he do it again?Yes, that's much more important than preventing young children from being put in an inappropriate situation, much less being abused.
Don't let your crusade against authority blind you from the fact that:
1. His behavior is socially unacceptable
2. He will do it again.
The prosecution seriously messed up. Number one i dont know why they brought in the Conspiracy to commit child molestation. Listening to the DA at the press conference disgusted me...
DA: I HAVE UNFINISHED BUSINESS...hmmm wonder if there will be more charges brought up later.
If Jackson had been represented by the average public defender he would have probably been convicted on all counts if he didn't accept the obligatory plea bargain...
Oh of course i'm not doubting that for a minute. I know what goes on. Public defenders have such a heavy work load, that they would not be able to devote the time and effort as maybe a lawyer that you can pay big bucks for. I doubt this case would have gone on as long as it did either if he had a public defender. Many innocent individuals are screwed this way.
I agree with you, it's just that felt the presumption was because you had money you could somehow buy your way out of a guilty verdict, which just isn't true. You get a much more thorough defense and a very capable attorney, but money doesn't buy you the verdict. If you did something and the prosecution has the evidence, money is not going to buy the not guilty verdict. Sometimes juries find in strange ways that you would never expect, but they aren't paid any extra for whatever their decisions are and the defense and prosecution ultimately have an equal say in how the panel is chosen. Juries can get caught on a sticking point and hold on to that for a not guilty verdict, even if most of the evidence goes in favor of a guilty verdict. But, that seems resonable under the premise of how they are instructed in most directions that if they are convinced "beyond a reasonable doubt" on the case for a guilty verdict. Better if 10 guilty men get off than one innocent man go to jail.
The evidence for the prosecution in this case was super weak based on the facts I've seen reported. For most of the counts, I don't even think a civil court would have convicted him and there the preponderance of evidence is only more likely than not.
Weak case - justice would have failed if he would have been found guilty on the major counts (on the facts i've seen). Sorry conspiracy theorists.
So if Jackson had been from the ghetto and had absoutely no money then he would have been screwed?
However, if he were an average American who could afford a regular attorney he would still have been off the hook?
I bet they brought in conspiracy just because they could. It's two or more people planning an unlawful act so all they would have had to shown was that he talked to an aid about say keeping the door locked for example while he was molesting the boy. The prosecution pretty much threw all they could possibly throw out there and didn't get a hit on anything.
That charge i believe included a kidnapping charge if im not mistaken. i dont remember at all during the trial that being discussed, maybe thats because that wasnt involved im not sure. But no witnesses ever came fort to say that this did happen. Meaning that his employees conspired with him to hold a child against his will, or a family etc.
If it does go to trial again, the DA needs to be taken out back and shot. It would simply be an excercise in how to waste tax payer money because - and correct me if I'm wrong - the defense would be able to use the acquital in on these counts as admissable evidence in any other charges brought against Jackson.
of course he would have been screwed...his public defender would sit him down and present the DA's plea bargain agreement in a favorable light...and scare him with the danger of going to trial till he rolled to the lesser charge...
as for the "Average American"...there was nothing average about Jacksons legal team...The "average American" couldn't afford a 14 week trial...
"If there is nothing sexual involved, expain to me a logical reason for finding a man sleeping in a bed with children so appauling?"
I think it is a bit weird for a grown man to be sleeping in bed with 12 year old boys just because. I don't know any grown man that sleeps with boys because its fun.........
just because isn't logical.
The average American will go to great lengths to keep themselves from going to jail CC, and finding a way to pay for a halfway competent attorney doesn't exactly go out of the realm of possibility.
I'm not saying the average American would be able to afford Jacksons legal team. I'm saying that the average American would have been able to afford an attorney that would have beat the ty case presented.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
