Jackson guilty or not?
Discussion
dick dastardly said:
I don't think he's guilty of abusing the boy, but I do think he was probably looking at naughty stuff and got pi$$ed with them. IMHO to him it's just hanging out with his mates and would do stuff that young boys (as he sees himself) do together.
I agree. Plus there are too many nasty parasites after his money. There are people who have no problem lieing under oath when they know it will make them rich.
dick dastardly said:
I don't think he's guilty of abusing the boy, but I do think he was probably looking at naughty stuff and got pi$$ed with them. IMHO to him it's just hanging out with his mates and would do stuff that young boys (as he sees himself) do together.
Whether they are his 'mates' or not, a 40 year old inviting pubescent boys to his house is just asking for trouble.
meagain said:
IMHO if he isnt guilty, why pay the 30 million dollars to the other boys family 7 years ago?
Bad legal advice - saw it as quicker and easier than trawling through the courts.
IMHO he's probably not a kiddie fiddler, but he is a seriously emotionally disturbed individual who should be kept away from kids for his own safety...
I'd say not guilty verdict.
In my mind, I'd say he is not guilty also. He is in a situation that no other person on the planet has ever, or possibly will ever be in, and has 'grown up' with the whole world having full view.
I don't think the guy is as nasty as people make out to be, simply that he has no correlation of his age difference, and that he is just the world's most easy target.
As for his accuser + his mum, money grabbers.
In my mind, I'd say he is not guilty also. He is in a situation that no other person on the planet has ever, or possibly will ever be in, and has 'grown up' with the whole world having full view.
I don't think the guy is as nasty as people make out to be, simply that he has no correlation of his age difference, and that he is just the world's most easy target.
As for his accuser + his mum, money grabbers.
My prediction:
Given that the jury have been given the option of clearing him of the paedophilia charges but convicting him of supplying alcohol to a minor, I think that's what he'll go down for. 1 year custodial sentence, with possibly early parole on medical grounds.
Personally I don't believe he is a kiddy fiddler, but I do think he's an emotionally unbalanced weirdo with a mental / emotional age way below his chronological age. He's also bloody naive and stupid to have let this situation come about in the first place.
Given that the jury have been given the option of clearing him of the paedophilia charges but convicting him of supplying alcohol to a minor, I think that's what he'll go down for. 1 year custodial sentence, with possibly early parole on medical grounds.
Personally I don't believe he is a kiddy fiddler, but I do think he's an emotionally unbalanced weirdo with a mental / emotional age way below his chronological age. He's also bloody naive and stupid to have let this situation come about in the first place.
I'm not sure who to believe.
One thing is for certain though - the guy is a certifiable nutcase and if it wasn't that he was really famous and had sold lots of records, he'd be 'that weird bloke' who collects garden gnomes and twitches his curtains when the kids are coming home from school.
I reckon there's just something in his brain that hasn't developed properly, so part of his personality is still under ten or something. Mix this with the adult bit, with a sex drive and a taste for alcohol, and you've got a danger to children.
I have a feeling that he'll be found not guilty, but I'd sooner bang him up in an asylum than a prison.
One thing is for certain though - the guy is a certifiable nutcase and if it wasn't that he was really famous and had sold lots of records, he'd be 'that weird bloke' who collects garden gnomes and twitches his curtains when the kids are coming home from school.
I reckon there's just something in his brain that hasn't developed properly, so part of his personality is still under ten or something. Mix this with the adult bit, with a sex drive and a taste for alcohol, and you've got a danger to children.
I have a feeling that he'll be found not guilty, but I'd sooner bang him up in an asylum than a prison.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
commercial expediency may be fine, but what about self respect?
someone has accused you of something sinister, do you a) buy them off b) have your day in court showing that you are totally innocent.
if had done the latter a) he'd not be in this case now b) he'd probably be richer.
(or c) be in jail already)
I honestly don't know what to think.
Some people say he has the mental age of a 14 year old and that's why he used to invite the boys to stay over. I can understand that bit.
But then, to actually sleep in the same bed? From my recollection of 14 year old boys (20 years ago), all they wanted to do was lose their virginity and get laid and not much changes when they get older!!!
Judging by Jacksons choice of reading matter, which appears to be gay porn, he's obviously not averse to the odd game of hide the sausage, which says to me that his actions were not as innocent as people have made them out to be.
However, there is the argument that the boy and his family have tried to pull the same stunt on other celebrities before.
Also, I'd be damn sure I wouldn't let my child (of any age or gender) sleep in the same bed as an adult, regardless of his mental age or how much money he/she has got.
If Jackson is found guilty, then I think the parents of those kids should be put on trial too, because letting your kids hang out with a 40 year old man and moreso, to let him sleep with them makes those parents as f
d in the head as he is.
Some people say he has the mental age of a 14 year old and that's why he used to invite the boys to stay over. I can understand that bit.
But then, to actually sleep in the same bed? From my recollection of 14 year old boys (20 years ago), all they wanted to do was lose their virginity and get laid and not much changes when they get older!!!
Judging by Jacksons choice of reading matter, which appears to be gay porn, he's obviously not averse to the odd game of hide the sausage, which says to me that his actions were not as innocent as people have made them out to be.
However, there is the argument that the boy and his family have tried to pull the same stunt on other celebrities before.
Also, I'd be damn sure I wouldn't let my child (of any age or gender) sleep in the same bed as an adult, regardless of his mental age or how much money he/she has got.
If Jackson is found guilty, then I think the parents of those kids should be put on trial too, because letting your kids hang out with a 40 year old man and moreso, to let him sleep with them makes those parents as f
d in the head as he is.
Will he be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of being a peadophile.....unlikely as there is a mass of evidence in his favour. As has been suggested he may well get a guilty verdict on the provision of alcohol to a minor but he's unlikely to do any time, I shouldn't imagine.
A slap on the wrists is the likely outcome all IMHO of course.
Personally, I think he's a very strange individual and there is NO WAY on God's earth, my Annie would ever be allowed near him.
A slap on the wrists is the likely outcome all IMHO of course.
Personally, I think he's a very strange individual and there is NO WAY on God's earth, my Annie would ever be allowed near him.
.Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff