Sanding our assholes with 150 grit.

Michael Jackson, incredibly, will be acquitted

Can a fucking California DA put away ANYONE???

It's quite obvious that this family was looking to score big with a lawsuit.

It's likely Jackson fell for the bait and groped the kid, but this family is a bunch of crooks/liars and the jury now has enough for a not guilty verdict.
Permalink Great Expectorations 
March 14th, 2005
I was hoping for guilty and then Jackson would commit suicide. That way we could be rid of our embarassment.

A black man in a "melting pot" country grandly ashamed of being black because obviously, being anything other than white is shameful and; a famous example of how wealth gets you off in America.
Permalink httpBasicScrew 
March 14th, 2005
> It's likely Jackson fell for the bait and groped the kid

Bait? If you are groping a kid you aren't falling for anything. You are a pedophile.
Permalink t 
March 14th, 2005
so its agreed? all we need to do is prove michael jackson guilty and then we can imprison his (white) ass.
Permalink FullNameRequired 
March 14th, 2005
That stunt of showing up late the other day wearing pajamas probably didn't play well with the jury. He didn't seem that concerned over losing his $3 million bail money either, which is an amount that the working-class stiffs in the jury box would never see in their lifetimes.

I'm thinking he'll be found guilty because he isn't being respectful of the judicial process. It's just a game to him, and only when he's sharing a cell with Bruno, will it sink home to him.
Permalink example 
March 14th, 2005
He'll never serve prison time. Really. Even if he's found guilty, he'll never see a day inside a prison.
Permalink Aaron F Stanton 
March 14th, 2005
I was kind of looking foward to him being charged guilty and sent to prison. Seeing what he looks like with a prison haircut, how long his nose holds up without constant re-shaping by his sculptor, etc. Not that I ever saw what Martha Stewart looked like in prison, but maybe someone would sneak a photo and post it on the internet.
Permalink MarkTAW 
March 14th, 2005
One punch to the face and his nose would come completely off.
Permalink Aaron F Stanton 
March 14th, 2005
I have a theory that he actually had his nose chopped off except for that center piece, and had that reconstructed into a nose.
Permalink MarkTAW 
March 14th, 2005
I suspect he thinks prison will be like "Jailhouse Rock". Lots of synchronized dancing to a catchy beat.

( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050556/ for the youngsters out there)
Permalink example 
March 15th, 2005
I don't understand people at all. Here in the U.S. we call you 'haters'. All of you are basically saying that you WANT him to be found guilty, and you WANT him to have done the things that he is accused of. Shouldn't you WANT him to not have done them? I mean really, are you so fucking immature and jealous that you'd rather him ACTUALLY touch kids so he can go to prison rather him ACTUALLY be innocent and be free? WTF is wrong with you? Personally I hope he's innocent because that means the kids weren't touched. And IF he's innocent, I hope he's sent free. Just like if any of you were on trial, I would hope that the proper judgement would be dealt. So what if he's weird, is that a crime? If so, half of us would be in prison (albeit not as long of a sentence as Mike, but still). The OP sums it all up, your mad that the DA is going to loose this case, but you say yourself that the family is probably just out for money! Shouldn't the DA loose then?

Stop being immature, wishing for the rich kid to get in trouble with the teacher. I did that in like 2nd grade!
Permalink Jared M. 
March 15th, 2005
Sorry, "lose" not "loose". I'm not accusing the DA of being a whore!
Permalink Jared M. 
March 15th, 2005
As my nieces used to say about Michael Jackson on tv, "there's that girl!"
Permalink Bored Bystander 
March 15th, 2005
Two weeks ago there was a thread about this, and I implied that I thought he was guilty based on the evidence presented in the previous case and a bunch of people yelled at me for not being fair or whatever.

I predicted then (perhaps to myself) that in two weeks there would be a thread condemning him where it would be difficult to say he's innocent. Looks like I was right.
Permalink MarkTAW 
March 15th, 2005
>> I mean really, are you so fucking immature and jealous that you'd rather him ACTUALLY touch kids so he can go to prison rather him ACTUALLY be innocent and be free? <<

I think you're getting your cause/effect mixed up.

I believe he did it (the cause), and will go to jail (the effect).

I'd rather he hadn't done it, too. But he did, and now he has to face the consequences. Even the King of Pop has to (eventually) accept responsibility for his actions.

The sad part is that I don't think that he realizes what he did was wrong.

I never thought I'd drag out the "Think of the children" argument (after it's been misused so much in the past 10 years), but in this case I think it's applicable. The children he slept with/fondled/whatever will have to live with it for the rest of their lives.
Permalink example 
March 15th, 2005
Some of us thinks this is not a big deal.
Permalink Rick Tang 
March 15th, 2005
Some of us think people who comment on things they say are no big deal are hyportical and annoying. Some of us also think speaking of ourselves in the plural is even more annoying than the passive subject* as in "hyportical posts considered annoying."

* We're not sure this is the right name for this, so we hope we are corected so we can get it right in the future.
Permalink MarkTAW 
March 15th, 2005
Okie Dokie.

Someone have said in this forum that the impact of this type of child molesting would not damage the child for the rest of his or her life.

Is that better?
Permalink Rick Tang 
March 15th, 2005
They may, but that doesn't make it an ok thing to do.

If someone sticks their hands down your pants plays with your fundamental gender characteristics and walks away are you going to consider that an ok thing to do? You won't be scarred for life, remember?

There are people who become damaged and may grow up to abuse others later, Jackson's father by all accounts was physically abusive and he may never have stopped being a child emotionally. Simplistic assumptions are unwarranted, as is a verdict as the evidence isn't all in.
Permalink Simon Lucy 
March 15th, 2005

This topic was orginally posted to the off-topic forum of the
Joel on Software discussion board.

Other topics: March, 2005 Other topics: March, 2005 Recent topics Recent topics