Put him away:he's guilty >:(

PAEDOPHILES ARE NOT WANTED!!!!!!
>:( >:(

We've got "nothing"?  You're right, because "we" are not involved in the case.  You, on the other hand, are so blinded by his celebrity, his "musical genius" that you can't see ANY of his faults.  Doesn't it get tiring defending him against us "simple minded folk"?  Since, after all, we don't see him as "God" ::)

You are doing what the prosecution are doing. You good at it, you should join the prosecution team.
The prosecution's #1 golden rule is that if you keep saying something over and over again, even if there's nothing to back it up, people will believe it. All I seem to be reading is you people saying fans worship Michael Jackson as a God. There is no fan that treats Michael Jackson like that. Again, it's a misconception and no matter how many times I have stressed that Michael is not a God, you still say it.
I am not blinded by his artistic genius, or his celebrity. I read the damn bloody transcripts. I know what goes on in that courtroom. It's simply unbelievable that people choose not to believe what happens in the courtroom.

You are doing what the prosecution are doing. You good at it, you should join the prosecution team.
The prosecution's #1 golden rule is that if you keep saying something over and over again, even if there's nothing to back it up, people will believe it. All I seem to be reading is you people saying fans worship Michael Jackson as a God. There is no fan that treats Michael Jackson like that. Again, it's a misconception and no matter how many times I have stressed that Michael is not a God, you still say it.
I am not blinded by his artistic genius, or his celebrity. I read the darn bloody transcripts. I know what goes on in that courtroom. It's simply unbelievable that people choose not to believe what happens in the courtroom.
No, It's simply unbelievable that people still believe in Flit Boy! And basing your facts on what E! says?! Whether he's found guilty or continues to make this a circus and gets away with his sickness, he WILL answer to a higher power and then he can sing "Beat It" while in some real "Heat" As for the Golden Rule you speak of...It's the "Defense" that has that along with the motto to all Whacko's sick fans..."If you're a little boy and flash your underwear, he WILL come :o

No, It's simply unbelievable that people still believe in Flit Boy! And basing your facts on what E! says?! Whether he's found guilty or continues to make this a circus and gets away with his sickness, he WILL answer to a higher power and then he can sing "Beat It" while in some real "Heat" As for the Golden Rule you speak of...It's the "Defense" that has that along with the motto to all Whacko's sick fans..."If you're a little boy and flash your underwear, he WILL come :o

I don't base my facts on what E! says. I like the people who report for E! That's all. It' so basic, I just simply read the official court transcripts. That's what I abs my facts on, what actually happens in the courtroom.

It's a fact that the accuser admitted to telling his school teacher that Michael did nothing wrong.
It's a fact that he gave a contradicting testimony.
It's a fact that his brother couldn't possible have seen the bed from where he was standing.
It's a fact that his mother has a long history of making allegations against celebrities and big companies.
It's a fact that she is charged for welfare fraud.
It's a fact that the family went straight to lawyers instead of contacting authorities.
It's a fact that the lawyer they initially contacted was Larry Feldman (the same lawyer who was involved with te 1993/94 case against Michael Jackson). 
It's a fact that there was no DNA evidence found at Neverland.
It's a fact that the only porn found at Neverland was adult, heterosexual magazines.
It's a fact that the "past acts" were from 1990-1994 and there's a significant gap between 1994 and 2003; what happened in this time period of 9 years?
It's a fact that out of the five "victims", only one boy is testifying that Michael molested him.
It's a fact that every witness to "past acts" has sold ther story in the past to tabloids.
It's a fact that every witness to "past acts" never contacted authorities and went straight to tabloids and lawyers with their allegations.
It's a fact that every witness to "past acts" has previously sued Michael Jackson because they felt they were unfairly terminated from their job at Neverland.
It's a fact that every witness to "past acts" was actually fired because they stole items from Neverland.
It's a fact that every witness to "past acts" was found guilty of stealing from Neverland.
It's a fact that most witnesses to "past acts" have since filed bankruptcy.
It's a fact that Michael Jackson and June Chandler were having an affair (which states that it's most likely Michael brough June a bracelet to buy her affection rather than her silence).

All this I know because I simply read the official court transcripts. 

It's ALSO a FACT that after accusations in 1993 he KEPT having young boys sleep with him...he's an idiot!

It's ALSO a FACT that after accusations in 1993 he KEPT having young boys sleep with him...he's an idiot!

No he didn't. He's never had a young boy sleep with him. All he said was that he shares his bed with children and they go to sleep.
If the fact that after 1993 he had 1 more boy share his bed with him, is all you have, then the prosecution's case really is a joke and I can't see the reason why anyone would think he's guilty. There has only been one boy come forward since 1993. One. Considering his motive and his family background, I see no reason why this one boy can be the reason why people think Michael Jackson is a peadophile. If everyone who ever had someone accuse them of sexual abbuse, was automatically a peadophile in then public's veiw, then they might as well throw the justice system out the window. If all it takes for someone to be a peadophile, is for someone else to accuse them, then why bother giving that person a trail?

No he didn't. He's never had a young boy sleep with him. All he said was that he shares his bed with children and they go to sleep.
STILL WHACKO :D

STILL WHACKO :D

Whacko.... but not guilty.

Whacko.... but not guilty.
Too bad it's not illegal to have young boys sleep in the same bed with you, dangle your own child over a balcony and be an egotistical jerk...but he will "Burn" in the afterlife ;)

Too bad it's not illegal to have young boys sleep in the same bed with you, dangle your own child over a balcony and be an egotistical jerk...but he will "Burn" in the afterlife ;)

Strong words. I guess maybe you're abit jealous. I think you mentioned being a Beatles fan. So you hatred for Michael Jackson obviously steems from that.
Michael Jackson is in the record books for the person who's contributed the most money to the most charities. Michael Jackson brings joy to people's lives. His music makes people feel good about themselves. His charitable work is unmeasured by any other person. He's made some mistakes in his life, but all what he does is pure and innocent. There's nothing wrong with sharing your bed, it's part of the African culture and it's something Michael Jackson grew up on. He learnt from an early age that sharing your bed is the most loving thing to do. He's not going to burn in hell. That's a cruel, racist and inhuman thing to say. If Michael's going to hell then where's Tom Sneddon, Larry Feldman, Janet Jackson, Diane Dimond, Nancy Grace, Jay Leno, Will Anderson, and numerous other people who've devoted their lives to destroying Michael Jackson, going?
I'm sure God did not want us to spend our lives trying to ruin the life of another person. Expecially someone so loving, caring and talented as Michael Jackson.

;D


They guy is a total loser man. I would love to see him go to jail.

They guy is a total loser man. I would love to see him go to jail.
He has not lost yet, Mr Michael Jackson is still innocent until proven guilty.

He has not lost yet, Mr Michael Jackson is still innocent until proven guilty.


Get outta here! Man this guy is a total loser. How can he be innocent after he admitted to playing with Macaulay Culkin?

Get outta here! Man this guy is a total loser. How can he be innocent after he admitted to playing with Macaulay Culkin?
In the eyes of the law he is still innocent, until the convicted. I would start reading law books if I was you.

Did he actually ADMIT to that????

Get outta here! Man this guy is a total loser. How can he be innocent after he admitted to playing with Macaulay Culkin?
When did he admit to this?

Karaoke Queen I would check your facts first,

he hasn't admitted to that at all.

Karaoke Queen I would check your facts first,

he hasn't admitted to that at all.


Well maybe not but the court says he did and i'm behind that judge 100%.

Well maybe not but the court says he did and i'm behind that judge 100%.
If you are 100% sure on this admittance, when did MJ state this account?

Strong words. I guess maybe you're abit jealous. I think you mentioned being a Beatles fan. So you hatred for Michael Jackson obviously steems from that.
Michael Jackson is in the record books for the person who's contributed the most money to the most charities. Michael Jackson brings joy to people's lives. His music makes people feel good about themselves. His charitable work is unmeasured by any other person. He's made some mistakes in his life, but all what he does is pure and innocent. There's nothing wrong with sharing your bed, it's part of the African culture and it's something Michael Jackson grew up on. He learnt from an early age that sharing your bed is the most loving thing to do. He's not going to burn in hell. That's a cruel, racist and inhuman thing to say. If Michael's going to hell then where's Tom Sneddon, Larry Feldman, Janet Jackson, Diane Dimond, Nancy Grace, Jay Leno, Will Anderson, and numerous other people who've devoted their lives to destroying Michael Jackson, going?
I'm sure God did not want us to spend our lives trying to ruin the life of another person. Expecially someone so loving, caring and talented as Michael Jackson.
;DYeah right, Jealous of him....NOT!! And please,  Lose the racism...No what's cruel and inhumane is to molest little boys from a person in a position of trust. Maybe he can finally be decent enough to pay for all those boys therapy. I'm not jealous of a person who thinks money and power are the most important thing. Thankfully when he dies he can't take it with him. Being a Beatles fan has nothing to do with how I feel towards an overated has been who can't find some way to put on a pair of pants for court. He disrespects people and thinks he's above the law. If it weren't for him molesting kids, believe me, any comments or thoughts I have of him would be a total waste of time and energy. I'm against child molesters, not blacks or any other race, so knock of the whining about racism, it's been done to death

Well maybe not but the court says he did and i'm behind that judge 100%.

The judge never said such a thing. What BS are you on about?
Everyone who says Michael Jackson is guilty have no idea of the facts, they don't read the papers, they don't listen to what any legal experts have to say, the don't read the court transcripts, the don't know a darn thing.
People keep bringing up that the media says the evidence point to him being guilty, and all this. Last time I checked, people in the media were proclaiming his innocence and saying what complete BS'ers the witnesses are.

Wait ???  If we don't "read the papers...listen to what any legal experts have to say", how can we keep bringing up what the media says?  And, for the record, the ONLY "media" I have heard "proclaim his innocence & say what complete BS'ers the witnesses are" is E!  I suggest you watch CourtTv or CNN or a REAL media outlet, not one who's programming basis is "Entertainment" (that's what the "E" stands for):P

Even Diane Dimond, from CourtTV, has admitted that the witnesses are uncredible and the prosecutions case is not looking good. She even once stated that she is starting to believe that Michael Jackson is innocent afterall. If you understood the prosecution/dimond connection, who'd understand why I don't believe CourtTV is a credible source.
I will say it for the last time, I do not get my info from E! ... I attend court on my day's off, and when I'm working, I know someone who did attend court and they tell me what happened in there. Even when that happens I still download and read the transcripts. That's where I get my info.
You have to admit, Michael Jackson and the defense are winning this case, at the moment. You have to admit it right? I'm not saying, admit he's innocent - admit the prosecution is failing miserably and the defense are kcikin @$$, because that's what I here when I turn on my TV. That what I'm seeing when I read the transcripts. That's what I see when I go to court.
The defense are winning, and they start their case next week!!! :)

Hey, you've said a number of times "E! says blah blah blah" so don't blame US for thinking you get your info from E!

I don't have to admit anything.  Just as you would never admit he did anything even if he was FOUND guilty.  Not that I think that will happen because he's MJ.  If OJ got away with murder, surely he can get away (again) with a little case of child molestation.  It's a catch-22, if he's convicted, people will say that he was set up and if he's not convicted, people will say he got off simply because he's Michael Jackson.  At this point, I just wish the ENTIRE trial would go away because I'm sick of hearing about it.  It's brought up quite a few bad memories that I don't care to rehash, and reading the transcript of the boys' testimonies literally made me vomit.  If you had ever been molested, you'd realize how truthful they were being and how sick it was of Mesereau to treat them like THEY were the criminals.
Maybe he soesn't know the meaning of the word "Molestation"...I mean, if sleeping with children is so loving then who's anyone in the Jackson camp to say that molestation is just a form of expression for love ::)

Umm...Robbo what African culture are you talking about when you said that "It's part of African culture, sharing a bed is the most loving thing to do"?

I know that most Black parents(or parents period) WOULD NOT let their children sleep in the bed with some grown man.

What's so loving about sharing a bed anyways? you fight for covers and space. Sometimes the person next you might lay a hot one under the blanket. I think sharing food is more loving than sharing a bed. You can go through life without a bed, but food forget it,

that's my 2 cents

how sick it was of Mesereau to treat them like THEY were the criminals.

Last time I checked, perjury is a crime. So is drinking under the age of 18, breaking and entering etc.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/050415/19/tzqn.html

Saturday April 16, 08:57 AM 
Jackson lawyer shreds accuser's mom's credibility in fiery showdown



Click to enlarge photo 
SANTA MARIA, United States (AFP) - Michael Jackson's lawyer savaged the credibility of his child sex accuser's mother, making her admit she lied under oath and suggesting she wanted to cash in on the star's wealth.

In one of the most explosive showdowns of the seven-week-old trial, attorney Thomas Mesereau launched an intense attack on the 37-year-old woman he has branded a rapacious money-grubber and "professional plaintiff."

In a grilling so fiery that trial Judge Rodney Melville warned the lawyer and witness to tone down their rhetoric, Mesereau accused the woman of acting and suggested that her claims against Jackson were "in her mind."

In his bid to undermine claims that Jackson and his aides kidnapped her family and implicitly threatened their lives, Mesereau forced her to concede she lied in a deposition she made when suing a department store in 2000.

ADVERTISEMENT


"You lied under oath to increase the amount of money you could get ... correct?," Mesereau asked, referring to her claim she was sexually assaulted when she and her children were detained on suspicion of shoplifting.

The woman had claimed she was never abused by her now ex-husband, who she later reported to authorities for beating her and abusing their three children.

"How many lies do you think you told in the JCPenney case?" Mesereau asked. In evasive responses, she reluctantly conceded she lied about anything to do with her then husband until his subsequent arrest.

Jackson's team claims the woman is a con artist with a history of coaching her children to lie under oath to win financial settlements, including the 152,000 dollars they won from the JCPenney store.

The pop icon, 46, is accused of molesting the woman's son, then 13, plying him with alcohol and conspiring to kidnap him and his family and hold them prisoner at his Neverland Ranch and a Los Angeles-area hotel two years ago.

Legal analysts said Mesereau, who listened quietly to the testimony of the crucial prosecution witness for two days, seriously damaged her credibility.

"The more she talks, the worse its gets for the prosecution," said trial watcher Michael Cardoza. "She won't answer the simplest of questions," he said. "If this was a heavyweight fight, it would be stopped right now."

Mesereau suggested the defiant witness's stories of kidnapping were a tissue of lies and that she was in fact living in the lap of luxury as Jackson's guest at Neverland.

"How many times, in your mind, did you escape from that dungeon, Neverland?" Mesereau persisted, getting the woman to admit that she had left and returned three times during her alleged captivity.

"You didn't escape from Neverland at all, did you," he asked provocatively. "Oh yes I did," she retorted.

In a surprise revelation, she also conceded she was once investigated for allegedly abusing her own child -- the alleged victim in the case.

The witness gave as good as she got in her extremely testy sparring match against former boxer Mesereau, prompting the judge to warn he would cut the hearing short if the pair did not behave.

She pointedly corrected Mesereau, turning directly to jurors to say: "His statement is inaccurate."

She also hit back at suggestions that she made charges against the faded "King of Pop" to set the scene for a lucrative civil lawsuit. "We'll never file a claim against Mr Jackson," she said. "I want justice here."

But she admitted under questioning that she had recently been in touch with the lawyer that brokered a settlement worth more than 20 million dollars for a boy who accused Jackson of abuse in 1993.

The war of words came a day after the woman wrapped up a complex and disjointed account of how Jackson aides allegedly used fear and intimidation to keep her family prisoner for three weeks in February and March 2003.

Prosecutors claim the panicked singer and his aides hatched the plot after the airing of a television documentary in which Jackson he held his future accuser's hand and admitted sharing his bed with children.

The woman claimed her family was then coerced into making a "rebuttal video" in which they described Jackson as a beloved father figure.

She said she did not want to make the video, which was played for jurors Friday, and claimed everything in it -- even the laughter -- was scripted: "I am a poor actress." But Mesereau shot back: "You are a good actress."

When Mesereau asked how it took to memorise her lines or how long the script was, she could not answer.

Analyst Cardoza said the entire case, including the molestation charges, could hinge on whether the jury believes the woman and her son.

"If they believe the mother put the son up to it, then this case is over," he said.

Jackson has pleaded innocent to 10 charges that could see him jailed for up to 20 years if convicted.

----------------------------------------------------

;D Didn't I tell ya the mother's testimony was gonna be a crack-up! She's something different.
This has definately been the best day for the defense. It's only a matter of days now, until the defense start their case. It's such a bonus that their allready ahead. They've got nothing to worry about now. It's smooth sailing until the verdict day.

More good news for the defense. I can just about smell victory! :)

-------------------------------------------------

http://au.news.yahoo.com/050417/19/u029.html


Sunday April 17, 03:02 PM 
Jackson's defense in dramatic recovery as key witness crumbles

 
Click to enlarge photo 
SANTA MARIA, United States (AFP) - Michael Jackson's lawyers are poised to deal more punishing blows to his child sex accuser's mom, in a dramatic recovery after three rough weeks for the "King of Pop."

The trial has entered a make-or-break phase as jurors size up the woman at the heart of allegations that have the pop star fighting for his freedom.

Court watchers say lead defense lawyer Thomas Mesereau has already badly damaged the witness, and there's more to come when cross-examination continues Monday.

"He will keep her on the stand. He will wear her out. This is going to be like a heavyweight fight," attorney Michael Cardoza said of Mesereau, a former boxer.

ADVERTISEMENT


The pop icon, 46, is accused of molesting the woman's son, then 13, plying him with alcohol and conspiring to kidnap him and his family and hold them prisoner at his Neverland Ranch and a Los Angeles-area hotel two years ago.

But Mesereau exposed gaping holes in the woman's story in a fiery showdown Friday, and got her to admit that she lied in another lawsuit.

"You lied under oath to increase the amount of money you could get ... correct?" Mesereau asked, after forcing her to concede she lied in a deposition she made when suing a department store in 2000.

Jackson's team claims the woman is a con artist with a history of coaching her children to lie under oath to win financial settlements, including the 152,000 dollars they won from the JCPenney department store.

Mesereau suggested the defiant witness's stories of kidnapping were a tissue of lies and that she was in fact living in the lap of luxury as Jackson's guest at Neverland.

"How many times, in your mind, did you escape from that dungeon, Neverland?" Mesereau persisted, getting the woman to admit that she had left three times during her alleged captivity.

"You didn't escape from Neverland at all, did you," he asked.

"Oh yes I did," she retorted.

The 37-year-old mother of four was combative and evasive, earning reprimands from trial Judge Rodney Melville who also scolded the defense attorney and at one point threatened to shut down the trial if the two did not behave.

The war of words came a day after the woman wrapped up an extraordinary account of how Jackson aides allegedly used fear and intimidation to keep her family prisoner for three weeks in February and March 2003.

Prosecutors claim the panicked singer and his aides hatched the plot after the airing of a television documentary in which Jackson held his future accuser's hand and admitted sharing his bed with children.

The woman claimed her family was coerced into making a "rebuttal video" in which the woman and her children praise Jackson as a beloved father figure.

She insisted Friday that almost everything in the 20-minute video was scripted "word for word." But when Mesereau asked how long it took to memorise her lines, she could not answer.

"I think the prosecution's case for conspiracy is in severe jeopardy. I don't think she can be rehabilitated," trial watcher Jim Moret said.

Her testimony could endanger the rest of the 10-count case against Jackson, if jurors believe she coached her children to lie.

"If they believe the mother put the son up to it, then this case is over," Cardoza said.

The prosecution meltdown came after jurors heard several days of graphic testimony about Jackson's alleged molestation of five boys in the early 1990s.

Melville ruled late last month that prosecutors could air the accusations, which have never been proven, in their bid to show that the star has a pattern of preying on boys.

The prior cases wrapped up Monday when jurors heard from the mother of a boy allegedly abused by Jackson in 1993, who told how her son spent numerous nights with Jackson after the sobbing pop icon begged her to allow her the 13-year-old to sleep in his bed.

The family won a 20-million-dollar out-of-court settlement from Jackson in 1994 that averted criminal charges against him and bound the family to silence.

Jurors earlier heard from a 23-year-old man who wept as he told jurors Jackson groped him three times between the ages of seven and 10.

The man won an out-of-court settlement reportedly worth two million dollars from the singer in 1994.

Jackson's lawyer's tore at the credibility of former Neverland employees who said they had seen Jackson fondle and kiss young boys, getting them to admit they sold stories about the superstar or lost lawsuits against him.

But the prior cases painted "a very damaging portrait" of Jackson as someone who likes to spend time with young boys, travel with them, shower with them and have them sit on his lap, according to Moret.

Jackson has pleaded innocent to all 10 charges that could see him locked up for 20 years if convicted.

Judge: " Has the jury reached it's verdict? "

Foreperson: " Yes your Honor, we have "

Judge: " What say you? "

Foreperson: " We the jury have deliberated for 46 minutes and have come the the unanimous conclusion that the accused, Michael Jackson, is guilty of being a freak. His musical contributions to the world cannot outweigh that he looks like a tran$vestite in bad make-up. Sleeping with boys 30 years younger than you regardless of whether or not any impropiety took place is wrong. However, we find Mr. Jackson incapable of forming intent to commit any wrong doings as his brain is as messed up as his face is. We hereby sentence him to cryogenic stasis until a time comes when we can revert this pervert back to some semblance of NAMBLAcy, oops, that should have read normalcy. We further order that Mr. Jackson shall pay for this stasis by selling the rights of The Beatles songs back to Paul McCartney so they cannot be mutilated or use in NIke commercials. "

Judge: " I understand your verdict ladies and gentleman. However, Mr. Jackson is a celebrity and has money. I am over-ruling the jury verdict and declaring Mr. Jackson a free man. The charges against Mr. Jackson are summarily dropped. "

Michael: He-he


Okay, now that I've wasted nearly 10 minutes typing out one of nearly infinite outcomes, who really cares about the verdict? Everyone will still have their opinions on him as they do O.J. regardless of the verdict.

Note: I do not know much about this case ( obviously ), and MJ has done many great things in his life. He also has screwed up alot. And he does look like a freak ( I think that is a universal opinion ).

The legal system when it comes to celebrities is a huge joke.

Has anyone else found the timing of Johnny Chocran's death kinda freaky?
He was one of Michael's attorney's in 1993, and he "died" just as the 1993 allegations were being brought into this current case. Kinda weird. ???
Also, just before his death he was investigating Sony. That right, Sony.
Now don't tell me that after reading the above sentence, the thought never crossed your mind that maybe Sony somehow aided the death of Johnny Chocran.
To me, it's just to bizarre to let the thought just drift through one ear and out the other. It's stuck in my head. I think Sony killed Johnny Chocran.
Ofcourse, there's no evidence or facts supporting my claims... but there's no evidence or facts that say Michael Jackson's guilty of child molesting, but people still believe that. So I am well within my right to say "SONY KILLED JOHNNY CHOCRAN!"
I dearly hope that anything Mr. Chocran found during his investigations of Sony, is passed onto someone in Michael Jackson's legal team. This whole Sony conspiracy is just too big to ignore.
This ish is gonna go down in court. T Mez is really gonna get stuck into the Sony conspiracy, and I hope he knows something of Johnny Chocran's invetigations.
I know Johnny Chocran planned to testify for the defense about his investigations, and I know Sony would've done anything to stop him from testifying. There's nothing backing it up, but I believe, Sony killed Johnny Chocran. If that is the case, the lives of Michael Jackson, Tom Mesereau, Robert Sanger, Brain Oxman and any other people that may know something about the Sony conspiracy, may be in danger and I think this Sony mob need to be stopped! 

Sounds like someone's been sipping too much Jesus Juice ::)


It sure does.

Dude, Cochran had brain cancer.  No mysterious circumstances.  Cancer kills every day.  Stop looking for conspiracies where there are none.

Has anyone else found the timing of Johnny Chocran's death kinda freaky?
He was one of Michael's attorney's in 1993, and he "died" just as the 1993 allegations were being brought into this current case. Kinda weird. ???
Also, just before his death he was investigating Sony. That right, Sony.
Now don't tell me that after reading the above sentence, the thought never crossed your mind that maybe Sony somehow aided the death of Johnny Chocran.
To me, it's just to bizarre to let the thought just drift through one ear and out the other. It's stuck in my head. I think Sony killed Johnny Chocran.
Ofcourse, there's no evidence or facts supporting my claims... but there's no evidence or facts that say Michael Jackson's guilty of child molesting, but people still believe that. So I am well within my right to say "SONY KILLED JOHNNY CHOCRAN!"
I dearly hope that anything Mr. Chocran found during his investigations of Sony, is passed onto someone in Michael Jackson's legal team. This whole Sony conspiracy is just too big to ignore.
This ish is gonna go down in court. T Mez is really gonna get stuck into the Sony conspiracy, and I hope he knows something of Johnny Chocran's invetigations.
I know Johnny Chocran planned to testify for the defense about his investigations, and I know Sony would've done anything to stop him from testifying. There's nothing backing it up, but I believe, Sony killed Johnny Chocran. If that is the case, the lives of Michael Jackson, Tom Mesereau, Robert Sanger, Brain Oxman and any other people that may know something about the Sony conspiracy, may be in danger and I think this Sony mob need to be stopped! 
I think even Johnnie Cochrans living relatives would tell you to...calm down...there's plenty of places in the world with a nice soft rubber room for ya :D

It sure does.

Dude, Cochran had brain cancer.  No mysterious circumstances.  Cancer kills every day.  Stop looking for conspiracies where there are none.

Everything you say makes me believe more and more that Sony killed Johnny Chocran.

You say he died of cancer.
Who said that? The news papers.
What news station was first to report his death and to report his "cause of death"? NBC. (This is dead true)
Who owns NBC? The same guy who owns Sony!

C'mon. You can't seriously tell me this crap doesn't freak you out even a little bit?

Sony is linked to NBC.
NBC is linked to Diane Dimond.
Diane Dimond is linked to Tom Sneddon.
Tom Sneddon is the lead attorney for the prosecution of Michael Jackson.
Michael Jackson was a recording artist signed with Sony. He also owns 50% of Sony ATV.

This case leads back to Sony. That fact is undeniable. What the question is, is Sony conspiring against Michael Jackson and using their connection with NBC, Dimond, Sneddon, as aids? 

Other facts that seem to lead to the answer of that question are... 

Martin Bashir's brother worked for Sony.

The key player's in the conspiracy charges against Michael, worked for Sony.

Johnny Chocran "died" at the same time he was investigating Sony.

The first major tabloids story against Michael Jackson started just after he brough the Beatles catalogue, a catalogue Sony wanted their hands on.

Michael's publishing company, ATV (which owned The Beatles and Elvis Presley's music aswell as his own music), merged with Sony's publishing company to form Sony ATV. Michael gained 50% ownership. Not long at all, after this business deal happened, Michael was accused of child molestation (1993).

The first reports of Michael Jackson being bankrupt, came just after he gained further ownership of the Sony ATV catalogue. In 2003.

Pellicano, an investigator that had been looking into the Sony conspiracy, was jailed on the day before police raided Neverland, and arrested Michael Jackson for child molestation in 2003.

There's just too much of this Sony conspiracy crap going on, that it's impossible to ignore. You can't ignore it. I'd hate to think what Sony are plotting next. If they don't go to jail, I'd hate to think what will happen.
We all ready know, and Michael all ready knows, that Sony want him dead, and they are all ready planning his death to make it look like a suicide.

I think Robbo is just being funny. You know, satire?

Next he'll be telling us how Michael "Aquired" the rights to the Buddy Holly catalog...from Buddy himself! :D

Everything you say makes me believe more and more that Sony killed Johnny Chocran.



Ok, you're right.  Sony shot special cancer rays into his head to stop him from investigating them.  ::)



C'mon. You can't seriously tell me this crap doesn't freak you out even a little bit?


Um, yes I can.  Not freaked out in the slightest.



We all ready know, and Michael all ready knows, that Sony want him dead, and they are all ready planning his death to make it look like a suicide.


Oooookay.

As I said before, my belief of the Sony conspiracy is based on no fact at all. I am trying to prove that thinking Michael Jackson is a peadophile is like thinking Sony killed Johnny Cochran.

Anyway, I've had my rant about Sony and I've put forward a conspiracy theory that may or may not be true. Now lets gets back to the trial.

More good news for the defense. I can just about smell victory! :)


Yea, but to bad that victory does not equal justice.  Look at Robert Blake and OJ.

There have been people talking about this kind of behavior from MJ since the 1980's.  In the past though, he had enough money so he was able to buy his way out of trouble, kinda like the Catholic Church and the sex scandals.  It was only when local archdioces started to go broke paying the victums off that it finally came to light.

As I said before, my belief of the Sony conspiracy is based on no fact at all. I am trying to prove that thinking Michael Jackson is a peadophile is like thinking Sony killed Johnny Cochran.

Anyway, I've had my rant about Sony and I've put forward a conspiracy theory that may or may not be true. Now lets gets back to the trial.
I've just aquired some beachfront property in the Arizona Desert...and YOU are the perfect person for me to sell it to. There's even been a "Big Foot" sighting there :D

Hey, is that the one with the BIG golden bridge? :D
You mean YOU seen it too :D Seriously, if believing that crap about Cochran is kinda like saying OJ was innocent ::)

No, it's not even close.  How many people (other than you) have accused Sony of this?  Probably only some of the others on your "forum".  How many people have accused MJ of molesting little boys?  Quite a few.  Oh, but that's right, they're ALL lying ::)
I may be one of the few that have wondered about the bizarre timing of Cochran's death, but I'm not the only person who think (or knows  ;) Sony is up to something.
Johnny Cochran would not have been investigating the Sony conspiracy if there was nothing to back it up with. You don't just jump into an investigation without there being even a slight supicion that Sony may be up to something.

Back to the Jackson trial.

I have heard that Janet Jackson (the accuser's mother) is the pro's last witness. Which means the defense will definately be underway by next week. I think they'll probably start next Monday.
Although, some media are reporting that another witness has come forward for the prosecution. But there's been nothing said in court about it.
I think the defense's case will nearly double the time the prosecution's case took. T Mez is going to destroy the allready damaged credibility of every witness the prosecution has put forward. He's going to spend atleast a day on each witness, presenting evidence and witnesses that will clearly show that every pro witness was paid to say things about Michael, was bullied into it by the DA, and there is even tapes that show DA's and members of the media threatening the lives of these people, unless they testify in court that they saw Michael molest a boy.
Mez also has a number of women that have dated/slept with Michael. He has a large number of children that have stayed at Neverland and are now adults, who can testify that they were never molested by Michael, nor have they seen Michael molest or even think about molesting someone else. They are not all boy's either, there will be just as many girls testify as there are boys.
T Mez also has seized evidence from Tom Sneddon's office. What he took as evidence were plans Sneddon had drew up to turn Michael's Neverland estate into a winery. He had the budget, the maps, and everything ready to go and his intentions were to turn Neverland into a winery, and to that he needed Michael out of the joint.
I cannot wait for the defense's case. It's gonna be one hell of a show. 

You know, something struck me today when I was reading the paper and there just happened to be an article about the trial (I know, people, it's hard to believe, but honest, I swear, there WAS ;))  MJ supposedly paid off the 1993 accuser to avoid going to trial.....how many other people has he "paid off"?  He's already paid off "victims", why would it be such a stretch to think he has paid off HIS witnesses to say they saw nothing inappropriate?  How many of them would be so afraid of losing their jobs and falling off the MJ bandwagon that they would be willing to tell the truth?  After all, the former employees are "lying" because he fired them, it makes perfect sense that the current employees would be afraid of being fired as well ???

Okay. Good point.
For the next few minutes you are the biggest selling pop artist in the world. You've just released a new album, it's hit #1 and sold over 20 million copies allready, you've released a string of #1 singles from the album and you're right in the middle of touring the world. Then the son, of a woman you had an affair with for a shot period of time, accuses you of molesting him. You are now faced with a civil trial and you know that even if you are found not guilty, you're image will be still be tarnished and you'll never enjoy the same success as you have with your last 4 albums.
The father of the boy, comes to you, and asks for $35, 000, 000 so he can make a movie (the movie later becme, Robin Hood - Men In Tights). If you pay him, he says he will drop the charges and you wont be faced with public humliation (at this time, the papers don't know about it yet).
You hire a lawyer, and he advises you not to pay him. He says your fame is at such a high level that this civil case wont do you any harm. He thinks that allegations wont even go to papers, because they are so minor.
He was wrong. The allegations did go to papers and it was the biggest thing since John Lennon got shot in 1980.
You consult your lawyer and he says you have the option of reaching some sort of financial settlement to avoid this thing going to court.

What do you do?
Do you reach a financial settlement with the family to avoid this situation getting any bigger?You've got a tour to finish, you've got a record to promote, and this is not helping at all. Do you want it to end right now?

So, what do you do?

I may be one of the few that have wondered about the bizarre timing of Cochran's death, but I'm not the only person who think (or knows  ;) Sony is up to something.
Johnny Cochran would not have been investigating the Sony conspiracy if there was nothing to back it up with. You don't just jump into an investigation without there being even a slight supicion that Sony may be up to something.

Back to the Jackson trial.

I have heard that Janet Jackson (the accuser's mother) is the pro's last witness. Which means the defense will definately be underway by next week. I think they'll probably start next Monday.


If you know anything about MJ you would know that Janet Jackson is not the accuser's mother but MJ's sister.
all of your stories are getting more and more scary, you know that. I am getting worried that you may not know the difference between reality and weird fantasies.

So the African culture is not important enough to give a rats about?
Well...here in America they have laws against that ;)

If you know anything about MJ you would know that Janet Jackson is not the accuser's mother but MJ's sister.
all of your stories are getting more and more scary, you know that. I am getting worried that you may not know the difference between reality and weird fantasies.

Yes. Actually the accuser's mother's name is Janet Jackson, as bizarre as it sounds.
Her maiden name was Janet Arviso, but in 2004 she married her boyfriend, Jay Jackson (no relation to Michael or his family) and is now Janet Jackson.
When she took the stand, the common procedure is that the court askes you to stand and spell your name. She said her name was Janet Jackson, but the court asked if she refer to herself as Janet Arviso, as it gets confusing (because Michael's sisters name is also Janet Jackson).

Please don't start personally insulting me. I feel that there's just as much evidence saying Sony killed johnny Cochran, as there is Michael Jackson molesting Gavin Arviso. I was making a point, there was a hint of sarcasim, that obviously you don't get!

:D ;D ;D Now THAT'S entertainment! It's views like yours that make me actually consider that "Pro" Wrestling is "Real"  ;)

Well...here in America they have laws against that ;)

You have laws against sharing your bed?

You have laws against sharing your bed?
"Morally"...with young boys...absolutely. So, you think OJ was "Framed" as well?

If I'm truly innocent, I don't care HOW famous I am or WHAT I've got to finish.  If someone falsely accuses me of molesting children (which I have spent my life "helping"), I fight it.  I don't care if it takes my last $$, paying someone off to "end it" makes me look guilty.  If I fight it and am found "not guilty", it harms my career a hell of a lot less than "paying someone off".  I don't care what the charges are, if someone accuses me of something I didn't do, I'll fight it until the day I die.  ***also, see my comment in bold print that I added in the above quote*** BS.  There's no way these tapes exist.  That's witness tampering and is a punishable offense.  There's no court in this country that wouldn't prosecute. So, MOST child molesters also participate in sexual acts with members of the opposite sex.  Doesn't mean jack squat.  They know what Mikey was thinking?  Not to mention that THIS also means jack squat.  MOST child molesters do not molest every child they come into contact with.Hey, we actually agree on something....it's gonna be one hell of a show....a freak show ::)
I can't WAIT to hear what he has to say abouth that, Kim! BTW, I totally agree...if I'm falsely accused of molesting a child and I'm innocent, I fight it! Maybe "Flit Boy" is worried about going broke...oh wait...he's only "Morally" bankrupt :)

If I'm truly innocent, I don't care HOW famous I am or WHAT I've got to finish.  If someone falsely accuses me of molesting children (which I have spent my life "helping"), I fight it.  I don't care if it takes my last $$, paying someone off to "end it" makes me look guilty.  If I fight it and am found "not guilty", it harms my career a hell of a lot less than "paying someone off".  I don't care what the charges are, if someone accuses me of something I didn't do, I'll fight it until the day I die.  ***also, see my comment in bold print that I added in the above quote***
First, do your homework. Everyone knows Evan Chandler (the father of Michael's 93 accuser/liar), asked Michael for money to make Robin Hood\Men In Tights. He publicly stated it, he has never denied it.
Second, you are not getting my question. You want this over as quickly as possible. You've got a tour to finish, and album to promote. If you had the money, and the option to end thsi thing NOW, dont' tell me you wouldn't take it.
Everyone would get scared, regardless of whether or not they're guilty. Everyone gets scared if they know they might get convicted. In every case there is a 50/50 chance of a conviction. Don't tell me you wouldn't be scared if suddenly you were faced with that.

If it were me. I was not guilty, I had enough money, and I had the option of ending this thing NOW, I'd take it by all means. But, if ten years later, I was faced with the same false allegations, I'd have to fight them. If it happened again, I'd probably be convinced that it'll happen again, and again if I don't fight it now.

With all that aside, it was yet another great day in the courtroom for the defense. I think it's safe to say the defense blew the kidnapping charges out the water.
That's the kidnapping charges gone.
The molestation charges still loom in the air, but are just hanging on by a thread. If the defense can convicne the jury that the mother put these ideas into the kids head, the molestation charges are as good as gone.
The conpiracy charges, pfft. Sneddon doesn't dare to touch them. He hasn't addressed those charges properly yet, I don't think he will because he fears if he brings up the conspiracy charges, Mex will bring up the Sony conspiracy. So all I have to say about the conspiracy charges is pfft.

BS.  There's no way these tapes exist.  That's witness tampering and is a punishable offense.  There's no court in this country that wouldn't prosecute. So, MOST child molesters also participate in sexual acts with members of the opposite sex.  Doesn't mean jack squat.  They know what Mikey was thinking?  Not to mention that THIS also means jack squat.  MOST child molesters do not molest every child they come into contact with.Hey, we actually agree on something....it's gonna be one hell of a show....a freak show ::)

First, do your homework. Everyone knows Evan Chandler (the father of Michael's 93 accuser/liar), asked Michael for money to make Robin Hood\Men In Tights. He publicly stated it, he has never denied it.
Second, you are not getting my question. You want this over as quickly as possible. You've got a tour to finish, and album to promote. If you had the money, and the option to end thsi thing NOW, dont' tell me you wouldn't take it.
Everyone would get scared, regardless of whether or not they're guilty. Everyone gets scared if they know they might get convicted. In every case there is a 50/50 chance of a conviction. Don't tell me you wouldn't be scared if suddenly you were faced with that.

If it were me. I was not guilty, I had enough money, and I had the option of ending this thing NOW, I'd take it by all means. But, if ten years later, I was faced with the same false allegations, I'd have to fight them. If it happened again, I'd probably be convinced that it'll happen again, and again if I don't fight it now.



you seem to forget, or delibritly falied to mention that he made two payoffs before, the only reason he is "fighting" it now is because the law changed and any molestation allegations are automatically dealt with by the police and the person is automatically charged.

Here is a great little parody. Follow the link, I'm sure some of you will like it.

http://www.flowgo.com/funpages/view.cfm/10562

Here is a great little parody. Follow the link, I'm sure some of you will like it.

http://www.flowgo.com/funpages/view.cfm/10562
http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/yelrotflmao.gif
I'm sure the "Blind" followers won't be amused ;)