PureBasic Forums - English

Personally, i like that he didnt get in jail. I dont belive he has done such stuff!
I think it was something invented to get money.

To be honest (not wanting to get too graphical) any kid with enough pursation from parents will say they were in bed with Michael Jackson and was felt up for £20mill +

Its a tough one, he has kids of his own, wouldnt he just do it on them (IF he does it) so.. dosnt make much sense

I think that he did something. The parents of the child have to have a lot of responsibility too though for putting their child in that situation. I think that they did this knowing that Jackson may do something & they would reap the rewards when he did.

Who in their right minds would let their son stay the night in the same bed of another man? Nobody thats who, unless they had some motive to let it happen. Money!

Anyhow... Its only my opinion. But now he can do anything to any child and nobody would believe the child....

-Anthony

Who is this: Michael Jackson ?

I think he has a child-like mind and is truly innocent. He wouldn't harm them.
Remember, the kid that was supposedly molested said that Michael DIDN'T
molest him originally, but later changed his story after speaking to his mother.
She's a gold-digger, plain and simple.

Does anyone know what Occam's Razor is? It's the principle that whatever
is the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. So what's more simple:

(A) Michael Jackson had kids over at Neverland for some good clean fun.

(B) Michael Jackson had kids over and plied them with alcohol, showed them
pornographic videos, blackmailed their parents, taught them how to play with
themselves, and hushed it all up with elaborate stories and small payoffs.

Hmm. What does Occam's Razor show?

For Michael's own good, though, I think he should not invite kids around
to stay anymore, ever again. Too many people take advantage of him.

He isn't so innocent as people were lead to believe...

Remember he has previously stated on numerous occasions that he did not drink, now we learn that he did drink with coke cans laced with booze. He also had a large collection of bisexual porno films and magazines.

This shows a character whos public life (the innocent one) is not the same as his real life.

Nothing illegal it must be said...

But cannot lead you to the conclusion that he was truely innocent, it shows he is a convincing liar. (but the same could be said for the kid & his mother).

I think that sodium pentathol should be allowed in court cases such as this. This would clear up a case almost immediatly after his and the kids statements. If they don't want the drug to be administered then you can draw your own conclusions....

It would have saved a lot of time and both Micheal Jackson and tax payers money.

-Anthony

DoubleDutch wrote: I think that sodium pentathol should be allowed in court cases such as this.

first of all its not secure to use it. Second, its noramlly used as a torture drug and if the court began to use it i would really doubt how smart the people that said it should be used are in the real life. its basically just slows heart rate and lowers blood pressure, so the person in relaxed. most of the times it just makes the person sleepy and doesnt help just a little bit.

Well, it can remove your inhibitions against talking. The problem
is, you can be led to say just about anything desired.

Dude come home and i'll show you my porn collection... (well maybe I wont) I think every male has his own.

Thats not bad... Alcohol? you drink too I bet.. we all drink, what? beer, booze sometimes, depends... I preffer a nice beer or a coffee.

We should sue him for going to the bathroom too? hes human so you are so am I... I dont think he goes doing that crap with kids, I just think this kids mom is really an alcoholic whore who lives for money and thats about all. At least thats what she shows.


Now don't take me as a pervert... Buisness and personal life are different things, once mixed, bad things could happen. But I bet all of you has or had at least a nude picture ¬¬

Like the B man said:

Hey... If it's oral it's not imoral

I think the members of the jury were better informed than wie are.
If they say there are no evidences.... then there are none !!

I can't judge somebody if i don't know nothing about him.

Nevertheless i wouldn't let my kids spend the night with Micky !!

(french saying : mieux vaut prévenir que guérir !)

Too hard to call, for me.

They could all be ratbags in general, ratbags in this instance, have a case, not have case, not be ratbags in this instance, not be ratbags at all, or have a mix of the preceding and you can throw in a few other terms of your own. It all disappears in the muddy waters.

The whole thing is mind-boggling in so many ways.


PS:

Who thought he would (guilty or not) be convicted?
In the USA does anybody famous ever get convicted?

> In the USA does anybody famous ever get convicted?

Sure: Martha Stewart and Kelsey Grammer, to name two of the top of my head.

PB wrote:> In the USA does anybody famous ever get convicted?

Sure: Martha Stewart and Kelsey Grammer, to name two of the top of my head.

Who?

"So you dont know me boy? I decorated your bathroom!"



"Hmm look at me, and while you look at me, I seduce your teenage sister!"

I don't like Michael Jackson.
But it isn't my right to judge for him or against him.
I doesn't made any vote in this poll.

About the legal proceedings against M.Jackson......
It's a big,big show of the United States of Hollywood