General Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Jackson found not guilty.

Page 1 + 1 of 5

  1. «
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. »
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

McDitzy

McDitzy Report 13 Jun 2005 22:48

It wasn't child porn that they found in his house, but 'usual' porn. That's not a crime.

susie manterfield(high wycombe)

susie manterfield(high wycombe) Report 13 Jun 2005 22:48

kaye sorry if i upset you but i still think hes guilty and nothing will change my mind however,i dont think we will have to worry much longer cos im convinced he'll commit suicide the reason being is because hes finished now.he has nothing left susie

Lucky

Lucky Report 13 Jun 2005 22:50

Must say I thought he would top himself too.

Shirley Ann

Shirley Ann Report 13 Jun 2005 22:52

Well i for one do not believe he is Peter Pan.

(¯`*•.¸JUPITER JOY AND HER CRYSTAL BALLS(¯`*•.¸

(¯`*•.¸JUPITER JOY AND HER CRYSTAL BALLS(¯`*•.¸ Report 13 Jun 2005 22:54

im not quite sure what i think,on one hand i,d hate someone to be found guilty if there inocent,but theres this nagging doubt in my mind,he has 3 kids of his own,as a mum and nan that should keep him plenty busy,why always boys who bring him to court and not girls,why after jordy did he not think well i can help in other ways,you dont need to take a boy to bed to heal the world,i dont know what to think,would i let my boys sleep with him at 13 ,hell no,

Lucky

Lucky Report 13 Jun 2005 22:54

I don't believe they would have charged him if they didn't have a case, it's too high profile and a lot of money. To do it on the off chance they would get him and end up with egg on their faces. Just doesn't sit right.

Phoenix

Phoenix Report 13 Jun 2005 22:55

Some of you sound like you are baying for blood - it's quite scary!!! I hope he doesn't commit suicide - I wouldn't wish that on anyone. Kaye x

Pat

Pat Report 13 Jun 2005 22:58

I said it before on another thread a while ago and I will say it here we were not privy to the evidence that the Jury had before them, we do not know anymore than anyone else. Personally I think people are innocent until proven guilty what is wrong with that what is wrong with trying to find the good in people and why do people always want to see the bad? OK I believe Michael is an unstable sad character Like Dave said, but I also believe he has never grown up mentally and he obviously never will he made mistakes, paying the first case off Jordy I think the name was, he also made the fatal mistake of sharing his bed with boys very stupid but I believe he did this in innocence. He is more to be pitied than lynched, I am very pleased he has been found innocent and so innocent he is. The man is ruined no matter verdict was going to be, that I find sad. Pat x

DAVE B

DAVE B Report 13 Jun 2005 22:58

On what evidence as he been proved to be a perv only the press have condemmed him to that?The press are very good at that and it is easy to make a accusation from here,I did till today, the evidence as proved him not guilty so that is what he is. He is a sad man probaly mentally ill but not a perv. Dave

Debby

Debby Report 13 Jun 2005 23:03

I'm with Pat and Dave. He certainly needs some form of counselling and mental help - can't spell phsychiactric (!) but I don't think he is a child abuser. Debby

lynnchalmers70

lynnchalmers70 Report 13 Jun 2005 23:17

all 10 came back as not guilty. he's a free man, name tarnished for life, greed get's the better of people. i dare'nt say more incase i get linched as well!!

Fred

Fred Report 13 Jun 2005 23:25

I HATE TO ADMIT, I AGREE WITH WEE SCOTTIE. THE MAN IS TARNISHED FOR LIFE AND UNFORTUNATELY, WE WILL NEVER KNOW THE TRUTH. HE HAD SO MUCH MONEY, FAME AND ACCREDABILITY THAT PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO BELEIVE THE TRUTH. WE WILL NEVER KNOW. ALL, I THINK, IS THAT EVERYONE AGREES - HE IS ONE WEIRD SON OF A GUN!! IF HE IS ACTUALLY GUILTY - WOT GOES AROUND, COMES AROUND. GOD HELP HIM. ITS IS ALL TOO STRANGE TO COMPREHEND. I PERSONALLY THINK HE PLAYED HIS PART TOO WELL. HE MAY BE RICH AND FAMOUS, HE MAY BE MESSED UP IN THE HEAD, BUT SURELY HE KNOWS RIGHT FROM WRONG. WHO KNOWS EH????? PERSONALLY, I LOVED HIS RECORDS. NOW HE JUST SEEMS LIKE A FREAK. IT IS SO SAD! MICHEAL, WISE UP

Stelly ♥♥

Stelly ♥♥ Report 13 Jun 2005 23:32

This situation SHOULD NOT happen again! He has had a jury say he is innocent. His career is in tatters......and nobody will trust him again! He is....finished .... No matter what I think...... You have to believe that justice was upheld. STEL.

Pat

Pat Report 13 Jun 2005 23:32

Roz far too late for Michael to do that, I pity him and see him as a very sad and haunted man, who never really grew up and will never know happiness. Very sad end to what could have been a great life. Pat x

Fred

Fred Report 13 Jun 2005 23:34

DAVE B. I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU. I DO NOT BELIEVE HE IS A PERVERT AT ALL. BUT YOU HAVE TO ADMIT, HE AINT NORMAL. I KNOW PEOPLE HAVE THEIR QUERKS, AND I AM SORRY, I CANNOT BELEIVE THAT MICHEAL JACKSON HAD IT SO BAD HE ENDED UP SO STRANGE. IF SOMETHING HAS EVER HAPPEN TO HIM, YES HIS MIND WOULD BE UNUSUAL. I THINK HE HAS HAD SO MUCH MONEY AND NO BOUNDARIES. AS A TEACHER, KIDS NEED BOUNDARIES, BEIT MONETARY, MORALISTACILARY OR JUST PLAIN HUMANISTIC. MICHEAL JACKSON HAS BEEN ABLE TO DO EXACTLY WHAT HE WANTS AND HAVE EXACTLY WHAT HE WANTS.... DO YOU THINK HE KNOWS WHAT HE WANTS. POOR BUGGER!!!!!!

Sue Lambrini Smith

Sue Lambrini Smith Report 13 Jun 2005 23:36

all i know is i would not let him babysit my son ! would you ? sue.

Sue from Wakefield

Sue from Wakefield Report 13 Jun 2005 23:36

Michael brought that great life to a sad end himself. He knew after last time what would happen....and he still allowed young lads into his bed Sue xx

Julie

Julie Report 13 Jun 2005 23:39

Michael Jackson as a young boy wasn't allowed to do what he wanted. At 4 years old he would look out the window and see all the children playing, his father would tell him to come away and practice his singing and dancing if he didn't he knew he would be beaten

DAVE B

DAVE B Report 13 Jun 2005 23:44

Sue of course you wouldnt let him babysit your son you dont know him personally neither would I! But you dont know me would you let me babysit your son I wouldnt expect you too even though we have spoken here.! He has been proved innocent even though I think he is mentally unstable and a sad character. Davex

InspectorGreenPen

InspectorGreenPen Report 13 Jun 2005 23:44

Sadly, he is a pervert. No normal 40 year old takes 12 year old boys into their bed.