was it Str8 or gay porn ?

He's done right there. Well, it looks as if he has a future of crotch-grabbing and screaming to look forward to in prison.

If this is porn in the traditional sense of the word, meaning it's illegal to distribute to minors, then that's game, set, match.

Jacko is toast.

FINALLY! We get a rich guy!

Martha doesn't count.

Maybe OJ, Kobe and Limabaugh could start a fundrasing golf tour on Jacko's behalf to help find the real molestor.

just out of curiosity - how old is his accuser now?
The one whose fingerprints they found?

Because if he is older, how long do people usually keep porn around and are the prints the size of his fingers now, or the size they would have been?

Whether or not he is guilty, that just sounds strange to me that he would keep a magazine like that around long enough for it to be discovered later - isn't that the type of thing that could easily be planted by somebody getting paid off to do that?

If he is guilty, he probably kept the magazine as a reminder: something to relive the moment.

I don’t like Wacko Jackson but planting evidence is easily done they say to the kid have you ever seen this at Jackson’s and hand it to the kid and the kid touch’s it and bang, now there’s a finger print on it. And while they drag Wackos butt through the courts the government pulls of another slight of hand with some decrepit legislation or more faulty information to attack and invade another country. The old bate and switch for something they don’t want the public to pay any great attention to. Just a thought I could be very well wrong.




[edit on 12/12/2004 by Sauron]

Originally posted by Countermeasures
was it Str8 or gay porn ?

The article does not say. I don't think it would matter in any real way, but I don't understand the psychology of child molesting in any case. But that does pose an interesting case of public psyhchology:

If it is gay porn are more likeley to think he is guilty that if it was hetro porn?

My inital reaction when I saw your post was Yes! But now I not as sure.

Originally posted by FredT

The article does not say. I don't think it would matter in any real way, but I don't understand the psychology of child molesting in any case. But that does pose an interesting case of public psyhchology:

If it is gay porn are more likeley to think he is guilty that if it was hetro porn?

My inital reaction when I saw your post was Yes! But now I not as sure.

The interview he gave, a couple of years ago, was his demise. I watched that special. I was 'blown away' by his demeaner. I mean, this guy has so much money, and I was surprised that 'his people' would allow him to give such an interview. My opinion is the prosecutor has been after him ever since this interview aired. I find it all too coincidental (his 'love' of children, his thinking 'sleeping' with children to be normal - children of whom are NOT his!) for him to be innocent. He is a sick man. Nothing he does is remotely 'normal'. All signs point to guilty. I really wish they'd get this case moving, he's got children at home that need to be protected!

I also found it odd that his attorney quit. I know that his attorney was working the Peterson case, but why not work the Jackson case as well? Was money the issue? Maybe Jackson doesn't pay his council? I say he'll be toasted at trial. The city is taking so long to bring their case about. Most likely getting enough evidence to 'fry' him. I can't see a judge allowing so much time and city money to be dumped into this case, unless there is very good evidence pointing towards guilt.

Edit to add:

I saw 'live' television of his arriving at the court house a while ago. There were hundreds of people with signs and yelling of his innocense. They say those 'hundreds' of people actually met at the ranch, bussed in to the courthouse, and even PAID for their appearance. He's still putting on a show! This man does not act like an innocent man. (IMHO)

[edit on 12-12-2004 by SourGrapes]

Originally posted by SourGrapes
The interview he gave, a couple of years ago, was his demise. I watched that special.

Yeah, the ground work was laid prior to but I agree the Basher interview was really the topping on the cake. He all but admitted it in the interview.

Im not at all surprised that he puts on a media show for the cameras. Fits with the fantasy world he is living in.

The interesting thing is that a while back I saw an article that said that the "Nation of Islam" was now influencing Jackson. Now thats scary

HAHAHA the man gets what he deserves.

Yes it appears the district attorney Snedon has finally gotten what he has been chasing all of these years, the downfall of the King of Pop.

All the kings horses and all the kings men, couldn't Michael together again. Sounds prophetic in more ways than one.

OJ Simpson and George W Bush are two more clearcut criminal cases where the laws have had to be subverted to see justice served.

It's hard to imagine that Jackson would arrive in Court without a plausible reason for fingerprints on his publications. If the evidence makes it that far.

Let me preface by saying I think Michael Jackson is a sick and twisted person. He's probably guilty of all sorts of child endangerment and molestation laws. This however, seems more like circumstantial evidence than anything. So Jackson likes to look at porn? The article states that the family had "free reign of the house" when he wasn't there. Isn't it entirely possible that the kid found the porn and looked at it himself? The first time I ever looked at a dirty mag I was like eight years old at a friends house. That doesn't mean his dad molested us because we picked up his magazine.

Originally posted by PistolPete
The article states that the family had "free reign of the house" when he wasn't there. Isn't it entirely possible that the kid found the porn and looked at it himself?

Yes, no doubt. However, this simply may be part of a bigger piece of evidenc collection that the DA is going to use to paint a picture of guilt. By itself, I would have to agree with you, but given all the other "evidence" that seems to be building, Its not looking good for the gloved one at all.

Maybe an internal examination of the kid would reveal jackos other glove!!
Now thats Evidence!

Seriously, he is rather his own worst ememy. Kudos for telling it like it is i say. I sleep with my kids on occasion when they are sick or upset, dosent mean I molest them for christ sake. Sleeping with your kids IS a loving normal thing to do. Jackos problem is that hes not fussed about treating other peoples kids the same way, thats askin for trouble. I would never consider doing that, ever! Part of me thinks he guenuinly loves kids and has no concept of what society considers ok or not, and part of me thinks maybe he is a spider.
I thought nothing of the first case, since the scenario of financial blackmail isnt exactly unheard of, but now ? copycats or real case? time will tell.

If Wacko did molest any child and regardless if he beats the rap he will get what he deserves one day these proofs or allegations aside the guy needs serious help and should have got it at least twenty years ago,if he does wind up in prison they better make a special little wonderland for him (and i`m sure big bubba and the boys will teach him what molesting is all about)because he ain't gonna last long in there.

[edit on 13-12-2004 by gps777]

not such a smooth criminal now...lol lol

Personally I see the paying off of a previous accuser proof of guilt in itself. Why else would he pay them off. I do not buy the not wanting too much media attention bit. He is just way to strange for my liking. I think he is guilty and should go down for it.

Originally posted by Kriz_4
Personally I see the paying off of a previous accuser proof of guilt in itself. Why else would he pay them off.

I have always wondered about that. If it was my child I would have NEVER settled. After he was convicted then I would go after his money in a civil suit.