Please do not comment on his sexual preference (because none of us know)... Please make a logical argument.
Personally, I am an avid Michael Jackson fan and will defend him to death. I have a pretty solid opinion on the trial and verdict. I would just like someone to give me a solid argument on why he should or should not have been convicted other than he is creepy or gay.
2006-09-02 07:11:02 · 10 answers · asked by Marcus W 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Previously answered by Rob 08291958
2006-09-02 13:30:01 · answer #1 · answered by Rvn 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If SOLID evidence points to conviction then he should be convicted no matter his financial or "celebrity" status. The law IS the LAW!
I personally thing the whole thing stinks to high heavens all the way from the way he was treated as a child up until now. I like his music but I find his personal actions questionable. However, those questionable actions HAVE been overblown and USED by Opportunistic Liars to cheat him out of his hard earned money. This is NOT fair, either.
2006-09-02 07:21:35 · answer #2 · answered by x_southernbelle 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think justice prevailed despite him being guilty until PROVEN innocent!! The media and most of America had already convicted him before he ever went to trial!! They had to find him not guilty because there wasn't a shred of evidence!! I just hope that he doesn't give any more gold diggers an opportunity to try and extort money from him again!!
♥♥We Love You Michael!!!!♥♥
2006-09-02 09:53:59 · answer #3 · answered by ♥Stranger In Maine™♥ (Thriller) 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He does have a history (if it can be believed) of inappropriate behavior with underage people. However, the prosecution team wants him convicted so badly and still could not do it. I am assuming, from everything I watched, it was because THERE WAS NOT ANY EVIDENCE. This is the law. He was not being tried for being "different," "creepy," etc. He was being tried for a specific crime and there was not any evidence.
2006-09-02 07:18:06 · answer #4 · answered by Patti C 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
A 40+ year old man sleeping with children is bound to get into trouble regardless if he interferes with them. He was accused once and the charges dropped, then accused again.
If he is innocent he should know better than to continue sleeping with children, if he enjoys it maybe he will be charged again, now he has shacked up with some rich middle-eastern prince who hires young boys from pakistan as camel jockeys
If he is innocent he has done nothing to help his own reputation
2006-09-02 07:24:10 · answer #5 · answered by angle_of_deat_69 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
If hes guilty he should pay the consequences simple as that.
If not then he should go free.
If he is guilty he knows it ,his victoms know it and the one who holds the scales of justice in his hands in the end he the same one who holds the keys to hell in his hands
Evey one will answer for their own sins even mj you and me.
2006-09-02 07:16:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Answering this question skill stereotyping. most of the point ought to nicely be actual for some for a even as. no longer unavoidably all factors will be actual for all females all time. for this reason, that is a good question yet appreciate lady as she is is the reply.
2016-12-06 03:58:41 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It seems to me that when there is more than one accusation, it just may be valid. The boys mother smeared his creditability, because she came across as trash. I would never let my son spend the night at MJ's home.
2006-09-02 07:15:37 · answer #8 · answered by Gorgeoustxwoman2013 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, let's see...the evidence pointed to the fact that MJ fondled an underage child. Previously, he had settled a case that showed the same evidence.
There's a pattern here...can you not see it?
2006-09-02 07:14:21 · answer #9 · answered by Royalhinney 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
hmmmm............!!
2006-09-02 07:22:03 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋