BobDylan Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Jun 14, 2005 -> 02:24 PM) But as bad as this is it pale's in comparison to what's going on in IL. In 2002 a 16 yr old Naperville girl was drugged with ecstasy & gang raped by a group of men. They video-taped the event. When the police went looking to charge them with rape many of them fled the country. Two stayed. One was convicted for taping the incident & is serving less than 6 months. The other was acquitted of all charges on the basis that it appeared consensual on the tape. Never mind the fact that the girl had been drugged. Now one has returned from Serbia (supposedly the ring leader in this affair) & is confident he will be cleared as well. The girl & her family have filed civil suits as well. This is a horrible precedent & if the remaining rapists get off it will make it very difficult to prosecute rape cases like this in the future. Apparently it's ok to gang rape a 16 yr old girl in the state of IL as long as you drug her up good & tape the affair. Apparently it's reasonable to assume that a 16 yr old girl would consent to being spit upon & written upon with a major marker as well. At least for her sake Sonny's conviction means the state acknowledged that the tape was made w/out her consent. At least she has legal recourse to keep it off the internet. As one who is raising an early/pre teen this story scares the s*** out of me. I consider child molestation in the terms of Jacko worse than what went on with those four boys. Two of them went to my former high school and I had an inside beat on pretty much everything that went on. It's a scary thing indeed, but I've heard of much worse that didn't even get taken to court. Terrible thing to say or know, but things happen...and raising children that age, you have a lot more to worry about then you think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 The kid is having a hard time understanding why no one believed him. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n.../n095552D96.DTL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 07:20 PM) The kid is having a hard time understanding why no one believed him. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n.../n095552D96.DTL Only Jackson and that kid know what really happened, but regardless, the kid is the victim. If his allegations are true, he's the victim of Jackson. If they're false, he's a victim of his mother. Which is worse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted June 15, 2005 Author Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 02:24 PM) Only Jackson and that kid know what really happened, but regardless, the kid is the victim. If his allegations are true, he's the victim of Jackson. If they're false, he's a victim of his mother. Which is worse? I'd say being molested is worse.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted June 15, 2005 Author Share Posted June 15, 2005 Jurors think he molested before.. http://www.elitestv.com/pub/2005/Jun/EEN42b04b4f868d6.html What I was led to believe is that this is specifically why the 1108 was bought in to make them see he's a pedophile, show a pattern. Also, the morning after the verdict was delivered, Juror #1 told Nancy Grace that he did not believe the testimony of McCauley Culkin, Wade Robeson or Brett Barnes. He thought that all 3 had lied on the stand and that they been molested by MJ. IMO all future jurors should have to attend a half-day class before their trial begins. "Jury Duty 101" should include, among other things, the definitions of Hearsay Evidence, Circumstantial Evidence, and Reasonable Doubt. JMO anyway.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 07:45 PM) Jurors think he molested before.. http://www.elitestv.com/pub/2005/Jun/EEN42b04b4f868d6.html What I was led to believe is that this is specifically why the 1108 was bought in to make them see he's a pedophile, show a pattern. Also, the morning after the verdict was delivered, Juror #1 told Nancy Grace that he did not believe the testimony of McCauley Culkin, Wade Robeson or Brett Barnes. He thought that all 3 had lied on the stand and that they been molested by MJ. IMO all future jurors should have to attend a half-day class before their trial begins. "Jury Duty 101" should include, among other things, the definitions of Hearsay Evidence, Circumstantial Evidence, and Reasonable Doubt. JMO anyway.. Steff, what happened in the past was not what they were instructed to deliberate on. The pattern was presented as evidence, but they were to consider it, not base their decision on it. In this case, the prosecution was flat out terrible, and based on the evidence presented in this case he gets to walk, and it's a damn shame. This trial wasn't based on the evidence of the past... it was allowed to be introduced only to establish the pattern, not to convict. I hate to say it, but the jury is right on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted June 15, 2005 Author Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 02:48 PM) Steff, what happened in the past was not what they were instructed to deliberate on. The pattern was presented as evidence, but they were to consider it, not base their decision on it. In this case, the prosecution was flat out terrible, and based on the evidence presented in this case he gets to walk, and it's a damn shame. This trial wasn't based on the evidence of the past... it was allowed to be introduced only to establish the pattern, not to convict. I hate to say it, but the jury is right on this one. I understand that... however if they were to ignore the past - to show a pattern - then the 1108 NEVER should have been brought into play. If they had used it in any part of the logic he would have been convicted. I simply don't understand why it was allowed in if it was basically not to be used. Makes no sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 07:51 PM) I understand that... however if they were to ignore the past - to show a pattern - then the 1108 NEVER should have been brought into play. If they had used it in any part of the logic he would have been convicted. I simply don't understand why it was allowed in if it was basically not to be used. Makes no sense. You're right. That's how poor this case was managed, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 07:53 PM) You're right. That's how poor this case was managed, IMO. The best or worst decision, depending on your take, was to put the Mom on the stand. EVERYONE from Jay Leno to Chris Tucker to the jury said she was a freak and as transparent as they come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted June 15, 2005 Author Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 02:58 PM) The best or worst decision, depending on your take, was to put the Mom on the stand. EVERYONE from Jay Leno to Chris Tucker to the jury said she was a freak and as transparent as they come. Jay Leno claimed it was the dad that was the freak.. and George Lopez flat out called Jackson and Mezz liars when they tried to claim the mother went to him for $$. Tucker owes MJ his life since it was Jackson who pulled his sorry butt off the crack infested streets he was living on before he made it.. Every single person that testified for Jackson had a reason not to cross him, IMO. From what I've read not all the jury had issue with her, but that's really not my point. My point is that based on the 1108 the jury believes that he DID molest children based on a pattern of behavior. It's a proven fact that pedophiles DO NOT rehabilitate. They, based on their gut feelings.. allowed a pedophile to walk free. I hope they are proud of themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 08:06 PM) Jay Leno claimed it was the dad that was the freak.. and George Lopez flat out called Jackson and Mezz liars when they tried to claim the mother went to him for $$. Tucker owes MJ his life since it was Jackson who pulled his sorry butt off the crack infested streets he was living on before he made it.. Every single person that testified for Jackson had a reason not to cross him, IMO. From what I've read not all the jury had issue with her, but that's really not my point. My point is that based on the 1108 the jury believes that he DID molest children based on a pattern of behavior. It's a proven fact that pedophiles DO NOT rehabilitate. They, based on their gut feelings.. allowed a pedophile to walk free. I hope they are proud of themselves. Well it happens ever day, just like those who appear to be, or are innocent, get locked up. It's the system and that's how it works. I'm done with MJ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted June 15, 2005 Author Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 03:29 PM) Well it happens ever day, just like those who appear to be, or are innocent, get locked up. It's the system and that's how it works. That's pretty effing sad to just roll over like that... The justice system sucks, a lot, sometimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 08:06 PM) They, based on their gut feelings.. allowed a pedophile to walk free. I hope they are proud of themselves. No, they followed the law. Nothing more, nothing less. You can't convict the guy on the evidence presented. He's guilty as hell, but the law is the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted June 15, 2005 Author Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 03:34 PM) No, they followed the law. Nothing more, nothing less. You can't convict the guy on the evidence presented. He's guilty as hell, but the law is the law. For the second time Kap... they, in their own words, feel that he's guilty.. based on the information presented... that they were not allowed to use.. feel he has molested. Their words.. not mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 08:37 PM) For the second time Kap... they, in their own words, feel that he's guilty.. based on the information presented... that they were not allowed to use.. feel he has molested. Their words.. not mine. For the second time, ... Seriously, I think we're saying the same thing. Based on the evidence that they presented in this case, they couldn't convict. That's the bottom line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted June 15, 2005 Author Share Posted June 15, 2005 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 15, 2005 -> 04:12 PM) For the second time, ... Seriously, I think we're saying the same thing. Based on the evidence that they presented in this case, they couldn't convict. That's the bottom line. Right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 Back to the topic at hand.... I wanna rock with you, all night.... Does anyone remember this video? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 Overheard, somewhere in the grocery aisle... Boz, put that back. Put that back, NOW! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Thank this guy for getting Jackson off... or we could put this in the old "Worst Human's" thread http://celebrityjustice.warnerbros.com/news/0506/15a.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 PARTY TIME! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8256134/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.