General Chat

I have followed the reconstruction daily on TV and listened to all of the evidence that was televised over and over again... the accusing family were liars... out and out liars... the children were coached into saying what they did. This was proved by Jacksons lawyer many times... the accusers mother was a benefit cheat and tried on numerous occasions to weedle money out of celebrities, as was testified by them. Jackson was so childlike that he was taken in by this family, they set him up for a big fall, and the Authorities couldn't get him the first time through lack of evidence, so this time they said they had the evidence... every shred of it was lies and inuendoes. I Know he needs some sort of help for his unusual behaviour at times, but I do think the outcome was the right decision... just my view!! Anne :)))

Davo.....you did make a sweeping statement............ But I do understand what you mean...... Explain again in words we can understand!!! Stel.

Davo that still doesnt explain your statement please expand?

Davo so it is wrong for a loving Grandad or Dad to give his young grandson a cuddle on a Sunday morning please dont make it out all sordid.I agree Jackson should have not had young boys in his bed he was a fool and very naive.But anybody that gives his son or grandson a cuddle is not a perv and you have made a very sweeping statement. Dave

i'm sorry davo, but the only real evidence they had from neverland, was a PORN MAG. does that make every man/woman perv's?

Hi Dave When we were at school we were told that you are not found innocent, only that you were not PROVED to be found guilty. Dave S

Sorry Dave, I don't aggree with you. Any grown man who sleeps with boys is a Perv, whether anything else happened or not. When I went on a child abuse course, we were told that it is abuse to make a child eat something he doesn't like. If that is so then sleeping with young boys must be. Dave S x

Davo my dictionary says innocent means 'not guilty' please explain your version of it!! why is it entirely different thing I am puzzled. Dave

How many times have we seen celebritys targeted in this country, to make money either out of 'publicity' or in court cases. If you have got no money you havent got nothing to lose by taking a rich person to court they will pay whaever the outcome. David Beckham is a prime example he may have had affair with Rebecca Looes but she is a rich lady and minor celebrity now from a nothing,and so will the people who have pressed charges against Micheal Jackson even though they have lost they will be rich through media storys etc! Davex

Jacckson was not found 'Innocent' He was not found 'guilty' a completely differnt thing. Please will those who have their caps lock on please tuern them off, it's very annoying. David

i agree with you dave.. he made the mistake of paying chandler off by $20million, and like a fool, he left the door right open for others to follow suit. i personaly believe he's not guilty. lynnxx

Thank you Pat thank you Strump we will agree to disagree as they say. Davex

Would also like to support what your saying Dave. I think i've always known that even with a NOT GUILTY verdict, Joe public would still be casting stones.

Peter when my son was 12 he often used to jump in our bed on a Sunday morning,I know you will say that was my son it is ok.Micheal Jackson has been a fool and he should have learnt from his first experience with Jordy Chandler a few years ago. But Jackson is a very naive unstable character but not I believe a Perv,and that is what the court have found today. Dave

Dave i agree with what you say.....i feel he is Guilty though. I cant change the verdict.....i just have my opinion.

Dave I can only agree with you I haven't bothered keep adding to the threads but wanted to show my support for what you are saying. Pat x

Tell me if you think he is guilty somebody lay the evidence on here you cant can you! Only what you have heard in the press.The jury have found him innocent so that is what it is. I have said earlier he is a sad and probaly ill person but the jury have found him innocent of all charges so that is what he is Innocent.I went along with the Press evidence till today but I would like to think I am open minded enough to accept a jury that has SEEN ALL THE EVIDENCE'S judgement. Davex

DB He DID take young teens into his bed. That is not in dispute. It is what happened after that...

...and on that note I'm off to bed. My mind is made up so there's no point going on about it really. We will all have our own opinions on this. That's ok and how it should be. Sue xx

Sue, Your so right honey, they all knew that OJ was guilty, but again being part of the media coverage gave them their 15 mins of fame! Jackson is no different, how much money can the jurors make from the trial?? Face it guys thats what this country is about! Shame on them Debs x