OT Sad News - Page 3

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: OT Sad News


doesnt matter which way u look at it , michael jacksons still a pedophile.



Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: OT Sad News


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Rarely have I seen so few words demonstrate such enormous ignorance.

The spelling (or lack of it) didn't help.

Steve
--
http://www.fivetrees.com



Re: OT Sad News


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Oh, do you know something that we dont ?

Were you an eyewitness to
him allegedly performing such an disgusting act ?

Do you even know Jackson personally and can say what he is really
like, in order
to make any sort of judgement of him ?

If not, then you know as much as the rest of us -
no actual facts, or even opinion based on your own knowledge or
experience with the
man, just media hype and talk that is probably 99% lies and
distortions made up
 in order to get the greatest sales of newspapers, magazines, TV
ratings etc.
Its not as though the media never lies.

Just be careful who you judge like this, lest someone one day does the
same to you.
If you are male in Australia (probably all western countries), then
you are a potential
target for similar false accusations yourself, and what you would do
in those circumstances.
I doubt many would believe your word over that of some "poor little
victim", and along the way you can have the pleasure of giving most or
all of your house to the legal industry to try and defend you.........


(None of my comments are intended to imply that you or anyone on this
group is a pedophile)


Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: OT Sad News


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Just to be a little bit pedantic, being a "paedophile" does not involve
any acts, and is not in itself a crime - it's considered a psychological
disorder.  A "paedophile" is simply a person who is sexually stimulated
in some way by children.  It's only when acting on these impulses to the
detriment of a child that it becomes a crime - most paedophiles are not
criminals and are not dangerous to anyone, because they do not act out
any desires they may have.

So MJ could well be a paedophile, but not guilty of any crime because he
may not have committed any abusive act (note that "sleeping" with a
child, in the direct literal sense, is not a crime AFAIK).

Re: OT Sad News


Quoted text here. Click to load it

"Not proven" is slightly different from "not guilty", and as far as I
know only exists in Scottish law.

That aside, I believe most democracies still have the notion of
"innocent until proven guilty".  A court found him not guilty - he is
therefore legally innocent unless and until someone proves that the
court made a mistake.

Re: OT Sad News



Quoted text here. Click to load it

In fact "not guilty" simply means the prosecution has failed to prove it's
case beyond a reasonable doubt. There is NO verdict of "innocent" anywhere
using a legal system similar to ours that I know of.

 > That aside, I believe most democracies still have the notion of
Quoted text here. Click to load it

In name only, otherwise people remanded for trial and subsequently found not
guilty would recieve compensation wouldn't they.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

In fact many cases have been found guilty by one court and not guilty by
another. Criminal and civil courts in the USA have different standards of
proof required, often causing different outcomes.Where does that leave your
argument?

In any case people can always believe what they like, I do not claim he is
in fact guilty, however the payment of millions of dollars is rarely done by
truly "innocent" people. It's a rather moot point now however.

MrT.





Re: OT Sad News


Quoted text here. Click to load it

I don't agree there, unless there have been clear mistakes or bias
involved, or particularly hard treatment of the innocent (i.e., not
guilty) party.  I don't know about where you live, but here in Norway
people *do* get compensation if something has gone badly wrong.  But
otherwise, it's not often that completely unconnected and innocent
people end up in a criminal trial, and that risk is one of the prices
that must be paid for having a solid justice system.

Still, once a trial is over and the defendant found "not guilty", they
are legally innocent, even if they have had to defend themselves in court.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I believe that is the case in most judicial systems - civil courts have
a more balanced burden of proof, while in the criminal courts the
prosecution has the burden.  When you get a situation where a person has
been cleared of criminal charges yet the victims have successfully sued
for compensation, it is very difficult to say what is "true" or "right".
  Innocence and guilt are often very grey areas, which courts attempt to
turn into black or white answers.  But the person is /legally/ innocent
of the crime, because he was not proved guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Agreed.

Re: OT Sad News




Quoted text here. Click to load it

Easy to see that you have had little to do with any legal system.


Re: OT Sad News


Quoted text here. Click to load it

The payment of X dollars is done when people believe that not
paying X dollars will result in something worse (e.g. payment
of N*X dollars where N>1).

--
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! You mean you don't
                                  at               want to watch WRESTLING
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: OT Sad News



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Exactly. Legal systems are used by people to extort money.


Re: OT Sad News



Quoted text here. Click to load it


Exactly, and why would they think that when they have far more money for
better lawyers than the others?
Just maybe they think there is actually a real reason to worry about losing
even more.

MrT.



Re: OT Sad News



Quoted text here. Click to load it

when you get involved in those games, only the lawyers win; a BIG cheque
from both parties.



--
Great advances in Debian Linux; post a bug report and get spam in three
days.


Re: OT Sad News



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Which is why the richest person can afford to bluff a poorer person from
taking action regardless of merit, and usually do!
Only an idiot takes legal action when there is no merit to it at all.

MrT.



Re: OT Sad News



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yawn, you don't get it.
--
Great advances in Debian Linux; post a bug report and get spam in three
days.


Re: OT Sad News


Quoted text here. Click to load it

There is a real reason, but it often has little to do with
"guilt" or "innocence".  Look up "jury nullification".  While
that term technically applies to criminal law, the same thing
happens in civil trails.  I remember a quote from one curor in
the breast-implant suite agains Dow-Corning: the juror stated
the evidence clearly showed that the implants didn't cause the
various health problems suffered by the plaintiff, but the
juror voted in favor of the plaintiff becuase the plaintiff was
a nice woman and had all sorts of health problems and large
medical bills, and Dow-Corning had lots of money.  

Dow-Corning lost big time even though there was never a shred
of serious evidence (at the time or since then) that they were
at fault for the plaintiff's conditions.  You don't think
Dow-Corning had plenty of money for lawyers?

--
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! I'm DESPONDENT ... I
                                  at               hope there's something
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: OT Sad News



Quoted text here. Click to load it

That's because there's no need for one.  It would be utterly pointless
to issue a verdict just to state the obvious fact.  If you weren't
proven guilty, you're innocent by default.  It's as simple as that.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


That conclusion is invalid.  Innocence before the law doesn't mean you
don't owe society some cooperation in finding the facts.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

That's got nothing to do with the issue of guilt vs. innocence.  Civil
courts don't get to make any decisions about that --- they're about
compensation.

Re: OT Sad News



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Another manufactured phenomenon along with the monkees, milli vannilli and
countless others. He just managed to hold his position in the limelight a
lot longer than most, thanks to a modest amount of talent, confidence and
quirkiness. Come to think of it, for a lot of that time his notoriety had
very little to do with musical achievement. Thanks Michael, along with the
hordes of writers, session musoes, producers and other hangers on that went
along for the ride (and the dough).

<snip>



Re: OT Sad News


Quoted text here. Click to load it

You forgot Ed McMahon.

And now Billy Mays is dead too!

Re: OT Sad News


Quoted text here. Click to load it

McMahon and Fawcett were really expected.  The others were not.  I
believe Mays was also 50.  That makes me nervous that the evil
things are gathering to collect me.

--
 [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
 [page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: OT Sad News



Quoted text here. Click to load it

The "evil things" to which you refer are called "years of bad living"
I daresay.

After all the recreational surgery Jackson had, it was a miracle he
was still alive.

Site Timeline