i do hes gay lol
2006-08-03 09:21:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Gabriella G 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Regardless of how we feel about it, Michael Jackson is innocent. Flip the script. (The following example is hypothetical, please don't take it seriously... it's just that... an example.)
For example, you're at school and James has a pen and is using the pen. When James isn't looking, the pen falls on the ground. James looks back, and the pen is gone. James says that you took the pen. James looks behind him and asks Laurie did you take the pen. Laurie says yes because she doesn't like you. But the pen fell on the floor!!
This was just an example, but use it in Michael Jackson's scenario. The facts of the most recent case.
-Gavin spent several months at Neverland with Michael, his sister, his brother, and his own mother!
-They did spend in the night in Michael's room (as most of the kids that stayed at Neverland)
- There is NO proof that Michael gave alcohol to the minors (no eye-witnesses). The witnesses that they had in the case were not creditable.
- There is NO proof that Michael molested that child. Remember the DNA evidence they took in December, 2004? Remember the matching fingerprints on the magazines? Remember the internet cache of the porn sites? NONE of this was creditable and linked Michael Jackson either molesting this child or doing anything improper with this child.
SO HOW can you convict a person based on the evidence at hand. Use the example of James and the pen. He accused you of doing something improper without having the necessary evidence to prosecute!
Making an argument that he is guilty because he is weird, strange, and what 47 year-old-man likes to play with children other than a pedophile. Michael Jackson, by the evidence, is neither a pedophile nor homosexual. Please people, look at the evidence before you convict someone of anything improper.
2006-08-03 16:07:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by Marcus W 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
For a Michael Fan you dont quite comprehend lots now do you? Doing it for a manner fact possibly? First it grew to become into Molestation expenses not Rape. next Its referred to as POP not Hip-Hop. Their is a distinction. So yeah in the previous you call human beings "haterzz" on something comprehend what it is your speaking approximately and supply up being a "Poser"
2016-12-11 06:09:19
·
answer #3
·
answered by vergie 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No a couple gold digging moms just want to make an easy buck! There was no evidence at the trial and that's why they had to find him not guilty!
♥♥We Love You Michael!!!!♥♥
2006-08-03 10:51:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by ♥Stranger In Maine™♥ (Thriller) 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think he does. Why in the world would he always invite children to him him for parties and sleep in the same bed with them, and do it for years and years and act like it's peachy-keen despite having the whole world ,practically, tell it's not only not normal, it's wrong?
2006-08-03 09:37:24
·
answer #5
·
answered by ccmonty 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
no, i think gold digger parents want to make a buck off of a millionaire. and i think that was proven in court. leave the guy alone already!!
2006-08-03 09:24:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by morgan 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think he does. He has practicaly said it without saying it. Who else sleeps in beds with little boys that are not your own children?? Who else would have an amusement park setup for little boys??
2006-08-03 09:26:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by pleasepassthepepper 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
i think mj is a child at heart. and i think he has made some stupid decisions, but no i do not think he rapes little kids.
2006-08-03 16:08:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by blubutterflys 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, people just accuse him of doing that cuz he's a billionaire and they want his money.
2006-08-03 09:28:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by BowWowIzMyMan 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes I really THINK so but I only THINK and do not KNOW. So I have a OPINION but no FACTS.....
2006-08-03 13:39:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
yep he does and needs to stop. Lil nasty
2006-08-03 09:30:46
·
answer #11
·
answered by Toni 2
·
0⤊
0⤋