The Paranormal/Current Events Michael Jackson Poll

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by BPSCG
Think about it. Having heard none of the testimony first-hand, what do you think the probability is that he's guilty? Twenty-five percent? Fifty? Seventy-five?

I tried to avoid learning of the trial, but I have to admit my wife and I got sucked in. It was the E networks re-enactment of the trial which we first watched just to witness the appalling poor taste of the show, which we have continued to watch for reasons that shame prevents me from discussing.

Having said that, I tend to favor his innocence. Weirdness aside, I think his accusers have a great deal of credibility.

 

[Kerberos]

Having said that, I tend to favor his innocence. Weirdness aside, I think his accusers have a great deal of credibility.

Great lack of credibility right?

 

[TragicMonkey]

My theory, and like most of my theories, it doesn't speak very well of people, is that the boy's mother set the whole thing up, pimping her children in the hopes of cashing out on it. So yeah, it was a trap. But I think MJ fell into it, which he shouldn't have done, and is guilty of molesting the kid. As for the kid, he's underage so by law he can't consent...but I think the little bastard was perfectly willing. Not that that matters, legally.

So they'll all terrible people.

Can anything be done about the mother, putting her children into harm's way? "Yeah, I know he bought off another kid he was accused of sleeping with, but I felt it was totally okay to leave my children alone with him and share his bed." You hear about crappy parents having their kids taken away for a lot less than that!

 

[Rolfe]

I simply have no idea whether he's guilty or not.

I watched the entire Martin Bashir documentary, and I really couldn't tell at all. He could be an evil child-molester hiding behind his wackiness, or he could be so out of touch that he really believes this platonic slumber-party stuff and can't fathom why people won't take him at his word.

I know there are cases from less judgemental times, where things happened that would have put certain people exactly where MJ is now, but in which it sems that nothing at all happened. Lewis Carroll was really into photographing little girls in the nude, but no woman who was in any of these pictures ever hinted that he'd laid a finger on her, even when he was long dead and gone. Benjamin Britten used to take up with boy trebles and coach them and lionise them and have them to stay at his house and all that. Some parents didn't allow their children to go because they suspected funny business, but others thought there was nothing wrong in it. Britten died in 1976 and these boys are now in late middle age. They all realise now that there was more than simple admiration of their vocal skills going on, but all firmly maintain that at the time they were entirely at their ease and nothing in the slightest way improper ever took place.

It is actually perfectly possible that MJ is entirely platonic, and just likes to be with children and have them around him. Or not.

I'd hate to be on the jury on this one, because on the evidence I've seen, both sides of the story look plausible.

Rolfe.

 

[Batman Jr.]

I'd hate to be on the jury on this one, because on the evidence I've seen, both sides of the story look plausible.

But the decision really isn't that difficult. If you find yourself grappling with significant questions, then you can't convict him. You have to be absolutely positive that the prosecution's case is true to do that.

 

[Kodiak]

"It is much better to burn out, than to fade away..."

 

[BPSCG]

But the decision really isn't that difficult. If you find yourself grappling with significant questions, then you can't convict him. You have to be absolutely positive that the prosecution's case is true to do that.

You're absolutely right. But that having been said, how would you sleep at night knowing you had done your duty and acquited someone who you were 90% sure was guilty?

I think that's why Rolfe is glad not to be on that jury.

 

[davefoc]

well, my choice wasn't in the list of options. I think he'll be convicted on the giving alcohol to underage children and some number of the remaining charges will end in a hung jury.

I don't feel particularly strongly about this, but I'm going with this as what seems the most likely right now. I suppose I could wait a little bit and see if I couldn't gather a little more info before the poll deadline but I'm just going to go for it and pick the giving alcohol to a minor conviction option in the poll.

As to whether he's guilty of child molestation or not I suspect that he is guilty of some inappropriate behavior but probably not of having actual intercourse sex with the children. But I also think the evidence is too weak to justify a conviction on the molestation charges. I think though I might be dissuaded from this view if I was more familiar with the evidence.

 

[NickW]

well, my choice wasn't in the list of options. I think he'll be convicted on the giving alcohol to underage children and some number of the remaining charges will end in a hung jury.

This choice is on the list as "Convicted on Impairing Morals of Minor- Giving Booze." This is also the one I chose. I feel that the stories of all the witnesses agree on the giving a minor alcohol, however all the witnesses have varied their stories in how the molestation took place. The child himself, his brother and his sister all had differing stories as to the manner that Jackson presented himself to the children. However, the jury may be won over on the molestation charge by the mere fact that the testimony of the accuser has been so chilling. Depends on how much the impact of his sad testimony has had on the jury and how much weight the jury gives to the actual law.

An example of disturbing testimony that could persuade the jury to overlook the burden of proof (view at your own risk, its gross): http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/Entertainment/story?id=407301&page=1

P.S.: I love Tom Mesereau's haircut!

 

[davefoc]

I just meant that in addition to the guilty veridict on the alcohol issue there would be a hung jury on some of the other charges, so I wasn't sure my exact guess was one of the options.

I think a big factor as far as the other charges is going to be the huge financial incentive that the alleged victim and some of his family members have to lie.

I just haven't followed this thing close enough to know exactly what they're saying but if I was on that jury I think without very strong corroborating information I would just say ok, it's really likely this guy is guilty, but I just don't think it measures up to beyond a reasonable doubt if so much of the key testimony is from individuals with huge financial stakes. What would be bad news for MJ is in a civil trial where preponderance of the evidence is the standard there could be a slam dunk verdict against him.

 

[davefoc]

BPSCG asked:

You're absolutely right. But that having been said, how would you sleep at night knowing you had done your duty and acquited someone who you were 90% sure was guilty?

Actually, I think I'd feel fine. I've thought about this a bit and I see the purpose of serving on a jury as not to determine if an individual is guilty or not guilty but rather to determine if there was sufficient evidence to determine that the individual should be found guilty under the law. I suppose this is a subtle distinction but in one case you will have failed if you have incorrectly determined guilt or innoncense and in the other you will have only failed if you made the wrong decision based on the evidence presented.

So if I vote not guilty and the guy later turns out to be guilty it is still possible that I made the correct decision. It is society and its laws that have determined that to find somebody guilty requires evidence that suggests a very high likelyhood of guilt, if I'm on a jury I'm just trying to be consistent with the rules that have been laid down by others on when to determine that a person is guilty.

 

[Rob Lister]

This just in!!!

MJ decides to improve his image by helping out in Iraq.

Joined the Navy!

 

[DivaLasVegas]

I voted for * guilty on all counts*

I was sick to my stomach, when he got away with it the last time unfortunately i believe my vote is wishful thinking, because after the OJ Trial nothing surprises me anymore.

In the end he will get away with it again. I hope i`m wrong though.

 

[richardm]

he got away with it the last time
...
In the end he will get away with it again.

What makes you so certain that he's guilty?

 

[DivaLasVegas]

What makes you so certain that he's guilty?

I believe he is guilty because of the huge pay off for Jordy Chandler.
If nothing happened i would have never ever paid any money to some sceeming, lying little boy and his family.
I would have fought tooth and nail to proof my innocence in court.

I believe he is guilty with all my heart. But heck...i also believed OJ guilty with all my heart, but who cares ?

 

[Ian Osborne]

I believe he is guilty because of the huge pay off for Jordy Chandler.
If nothing happened i would have never ever paid any money to some sceeming, lying little boy and his family.

That's easy to say in the comfort of your armchair. Would you be so sure if you really had a potentially ruinous (albeit false) lawsuit hanging over your head?

Jackson's accuser has been caught lying over and again. He's admitted telling his teacher he was never abused by Jackson. His mother has a history of taking out extortionate lawsuits against the famous. The guy's weird and has little common sense, but from what we've seen so far, he may well be innocent of the charges he now faces.

 

[Darat]

I believe he is guilty because of the huge pay off for Jordy Chandler.
If nothing happened i would have never ever paid any money to some sceeming, lying little boy and his family.
I would have fought tooth and nail to proof my innocence in court.

I believe he is guilty with all my heart. But heck...i also believed OJ guilty with all my heart, but who cares ?

But it is just as easy to argue the other way round. e.g. If a parent of a child knew their child had been assaulted by someone you would expect them to do anything to make sure that person was brought to justice and not be satisfied with just money.

Interestingly since this thread started I've paid a bit more attention to the case and from what I've read of the case (and the testimonies of the accuser and his brother) so far I would not be surprised if he is acquitted. However I presume the prosecution also has a lot more evidence to bring forward.

One thing I have been pleasantly surprised about is that the Judge seems to be running a very tight court, hopefully this will continue and perhaps even this will be the end of “showtime” trails?

 

[DivaLasVegas]

That's easy to say in the comfort of your armchair. Would you be so sure if you really had a potentially ruinous (albeit false) lawsuit hanging over your head?

Jackson's accuser has been caught lying over and again. He's admitted telling his teacher he was never abused by Jackson. His mother has a history of taking out extortionate lawsuits against the famous. The guy's weird and has little common sense, but from what we've seen so far, he may well be innocent of the charges he now faces.

Hmmm, i think there is nothing more damaging then a disclosure of a huge pay off to escape a law suit.

The News was out anyway that he was accused by Jordy Chandler.

I think it is and was more damaging to him NOT to go to court to proof his innocence, then to pay the millions.

I have read the whole indictment and i believe this kid. It is always difficult to remember definate times and places and not just for a little boy.

I cant remember for sure what i did last Tuesday.

 

[DivaLasVegas]

But it is just as easy to argue the other way round. e.g. If a parent of a child knew their child had been assaulted by someone you would expect them to do anything to make sure that person was brought to justice and not be satisfied with just money.


One thing I have been pleasantly surprised about is that the Judge seems to be running a very tight court, hopefully this will continue and perhaps even this will be the end of “showtime” trails?

This is where i agree with you.
As a parent myself i would have gone all the way, but i dont know what priorities Jordys parents have set for him. Maybe they wanted to protect him from the excruciating defense cross examinations.

What is the price for a childs lost innocence? I dont believe there is one.

I also think the judge is the right one for this trial. He is not letting himself being taken for a fool.

 

[BPSCG]

I cant remember for sure what i did last Tuesday.

You were drinking a lot of beer and playing poker, badly, with me. At 2:00 am, you put your pair of sixes and the 812 euros that you had left against my full house. When you saw my cards, you grabbed your money and your coat and ran.

If you wire me the money today, I'll tell my cousin Raymond (The Wolf) he doesn't have to go visit you.