There's only one reason he got off: He's Micheal Jackson. Same reason O.J. didn't go to prison, becasue he's O.J., i.e. rich and powerful famous people. Although Jackson is 3 million in the poorhouse, let's not forget the rights to all those Beatles songs he owns. He has his own fucking Pirates of the Carribiean ride at his house. There's no way somebody with that much money goes to jail, ever. When was the last time somebody rich and famous went to prison? Martha Stweart? Oh, 18 months being pampered in club FED and now she's even fucking richer than before, not to mention untouchable and every housewife's personal hero. ("She went to jail, she stood up to the patriarchy trying to keep her down!") Fuck Martha Stewart. Fuck Michael Jackson. God damn I hate celebrities. Personally I didn't think he was guilty in the first place, but I could have told you from day one he wasn't getting convicted. That's just how it works here in this country, and problably every other country too. All this time and energy trying to bring down Micheal Jackson and they FAIL, in the meantime there's crack dealers and dity politicians running around causing all the real trouble. God damn the cops have thier heads up thier asses. We should kill them all. Hey, how about we consolidate the three threads into one? Can you do that, move posts from one thread to another?
The Smooth Criminal walks away scot-free!! :-D :-D Personally, I'm wondering what took them so long to acquit him of everything - I could see through that greedy family's story months ago, and I'm just some random guy reading from AP news reports. I wonder what tipped the jury off - the fact that the family has a history of stalking and attempting to extort celebrities? Or could it be the fact that their stories were never told the same way twice, much less meshed with any other testimonies given? Ain't nothing gonna keep the King Of Pop down! Now let's hope he starts working on another album already.
I agree with Hawanja and GSL. I don't really know if Jackson's guilty or innocent of other child-molestation cases. But... This particular one, you could tell he was innocent - just looking at the accusers. Just being Michael Jackson doesn't make him guilty. It makes him weird and icky, sure, but not guilty. They should start trying to indict other, less "popular" but more dangerous people - and they should stop wasting the state's time on "celebrity" trials and frivolous lawsuits that make scammers rich.
Yep none of you can say anything because you werent in the court and you dint hear the evidence... just accept he was found not guilty and let him live his life... Its people like you that drive the negative media coverage...
I'm no Michael Jackson fan, but I still thought it was some psychotic family looking for quick cash. I think he's a (very) strange man, but I didn't think he was guilty.
3millions bad but worth 500millon at all and the beatles rights wherend they taken from him cause he couldnt pay some bills
But reconstructions of the court (taken from transcripts and stuff) where on Sky One/Sky News (and whatever other channels elsewhere) pretty much daily for the last few months (or however long it's been going on for) - so we did pretty much hear all the evidence! My opinions - I wouldn't trust anything the Arvisos say - they were full of shit. I'm still not sure there's any real proof Michael Jackson really is a molester, but regardless he's got SERIOUS ISSUES...
I saw some of the "transcripts" on the E! channel (what? they were on at the time I go to sleep!) and in what I saw, the prosecution really shot itself in the foot with its attitude. Even with the terrible E! actors, you could tell they were gold-diggers. I don't know whether Jackson has diddled kids or even is doing so right this moment, but he's innocent in this particular case.
In fact they did. Even with that, the prosecution had so little credibility they still failed miserably. That's how bad this kid and the mother looked in the eyes of the court.