Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Michael Jackson

  1. Jun 13, 2005 #1
    I did a search for "Michael" and "Jackson" and "Michael Jackson" but I didn't see a thread but if this is redundant please give me a link because I suck at finding things. It was a tossup between social sciences and politics and world affairs so I put it here.

    But I need to vent. I haven't posted here since forever but maybe I'll get feedback..

    After the verdict was read almost everyone I heard a comment from was upset, because that "sick" guy got to walk and he should be deported, etc. because he's so guilty, this is like O.J., and only in America etc. etc. but really what do they know? They did not see the evidence, or hear the testimony first hand. They have only their perceptions founded on something outside the courtroom, most likely skewed media. Watching lame reenactments on E!, viewing drawings, reading transcripts etc. are not true forms of viewing a case, especially as unbiased. To say an incorrect verdict was rendered not only accuses Michael Jackson of all counts, but also accuses the jury of purjury. I say to these people, maybe YOU should have been prosecutor. The jurors made their statements.

    I never said whether or not Jackson was guilty (until today) but when asked what I thought, "If I had to guess, I'd say not guilty cuz I grew up with his music and dude's got some moves," but never acted like i knew for sure like others did. So this is not meant as "I told you so" at all, just that my faith in the justice system of USA is not lost due to THIS trial.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 13, 2005 #2

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I think the trial was true justice. If you look at the jury and theri backgrounds and who the guy was, you felt like he was going to be found guilty before the trial started. The evidence must have been so insanely weak or he must have plain and simple been innocent because there were like 8 months or something, a cop, and someone who was molested on the jury and if THEY found him not-guilty... i cant even understand how you could question it.

    People right now are going "ohhhh he bought his freedom!" but im sure if he was found guilty, thered be other people going "ohhh its because (haha) he was black" or that the DA just wanted to make an example out of him to make a career.
     
  4. Jun 13, 2005 #3

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I have to agree that it bothers me that people who have not seen or heard the evidence or testimony are just assuming he's guilty even though he was determined not guilty on all counts. So much for innocent until proven guilty, huh?

    As for whether he really did it vs what the prosecution was able to prove, well, I didn't see the testimony and evidence either, so I don't know. The little I've seen in the media suggested it could go either way, so I hadn't made up my mind in advance. It could have been that he molested the kid, or it could be that the parents used that kid to extort money from Jackson. Either way, the only thing I do know for certain is that someone victimized that kid.

    I don't understand why you, or others, assumed he was not guilty (or guilty) just because they grew up with his music either. To me, there's no relationship between the two. I can enjoy his music and still think he's a weirdo I wouldn't trust with a kid...just the whole dangling his kid off a balcony incident was enough to convince me of that part. I could think he's a talented artist and still have criminal potential, likewise, I could understand how someone who stands out as bizarre could be an easy target for extortion.
     
  5. Jun 13, 2005 #4
    Just to clarify I meant growing up to his music would be the "best" evidence I could use for his guilt/innocence I could have just as easily used because leprechauns are orange it's just to illustrate I had no good basis for an opinion on his guilt (unlike the jury).
     
  6. Jun 13, 2005 #5

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Ah, gotcha! :wink: I missed that point on my first reading of your post.
     
  7. Jun 13, 2005 #6

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    what about those freaks out there cheering for him? I mean what the hells with these weirdos. You kinda wonder if the biggest freak in that town was inside the court house or outside
     
  8. Jun 13, 2005 #7
    The radio talk show I listen to on the way to work followed the whole trial day by day. From what I have heard of the evidence, which is plenty I assure you, I would say the he is most likely guilty. I think that it just came down to reasonable doubt. There was no evidence that could prove it definitively and there were reasons to be suspicious of the validity of the evidence that was available.
     
  9. Jun 13, 2005 #8

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    At first I assumed that he was guilty. With so much publicity ten years ago followed by a buy out, it didn't look very good. But as the trial progressed I could certainly see how he would be an easy target. And according to the news reports and interviews, his accusers lacked any credibility whatsoever. What surprises me is that Jackson wasn't even convicted on the charge of serving alcohol to minors. Early on its was stated that this point wasn't even disputed by Jackson. He is a hard one to figure...and I understand that his plastic surgeon agrees. :uhh:
     
  10. Jun 13, 2005 #9

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Well, there were freaks for both sides out there. I don't understand how anyone has time to stand around protesting anything day in and day out like those people did. Don't they have jobs they need to be at or something?
     
  11. Jun 13, 2005 #10

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Well, this case doesn't mean he's not a child molester (we have no way to know for certain one way or the other), it means he probably wasn't a molester of this one particular child. Seeing the sort of publicity this trial got, it would be hard to imagine someone who was really molested being willing to step forward and say something; not many could withstand such grilling in the public spotlight.
     
  12. Jun 13, 2005 #11
    This case reminds me of how much observers really know in this Age of Information, yet how the best of us are willing to admit honestly to a reasonable doubt.
     
  13. Jun 13, 2005 #12

    SOS2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Note that he was found not guilty on ALL counts--even giving alcohol to minors.

    There isn't any law against being weird, or laws about avoiding the "appearance of evil" and proper behavior for grown men in regard to sleeping, showering, etc. with other people's children. The guy should get it through his head that socially unacceptable behavior is bound to bring criticism, as well as people who may use this in pursuit of his money--he could just stop it.

    As for parents who allow their children to be exposed to such situations/activities, they should be prosecuted.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2005
  14. Jun 13, 2005 #13

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That's what gets me. If these jurors really thought that Jackson was a child molester, I think they would have convicted him on something.
     
  15. Jun 13, 2005 #14

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That's what I was thinking as well, that they'd have convicted him on one of the lesser charges if the evidence wasn't strong enough to convict on child molestation, but they still thought he was guilty. I was expecting them to find him guilty at least on the charges of providing alcohol to a minor, and there was also one of attempted lewd act on a child, which they could have found him guilty on if they thought he might have tried something but the accusations were exaggerated.
     
  16. Jun 13, 2005 #15
    Perhaps they decided that it would be conflicting to assume part of the testimonies were true but the other parts weren't considering that lack of credibility is about all that saved his case.
     
  17. Jun 13, 2005 #16

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Ive seen differently. People convicted of one thing adn not the other and they were connected in such a way that one was impossible without the other happening. I think the example im thinken of is the scott peterson case where they like, got him on murder but not .... ok no thats not the right case... but yah, whatever im thinken :D
     
  18. Jun 14, 2005 #17
    I haven't really followed this trial but, am just wondering what would have happened if he was found guilty. I mean, were they planning on building a separate jail cell for him ? I think implementing Michael with other prisoners would certainly not have been a 'healthy thing'

    Or do they have some kind of special jail just for convicted celebrities ?

    regards
    marlon
     
  19. Jun 14, 2005 #18

    vanesch

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    They would have delivered him to the masses to be stoned :devil:
     
  20. Jun 14, 2005 #19

    dextercioby

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I don't think artists have a problem with being stoned,wouldn't you say...?:tongue2:

    Maybe feeding him to the lions would be more spectacular.:devil:

    Danievil.
     
  21. Jun 14, 2005 #20
    Most of the talk seemed to be headed towards sharing the same prison as Charles Manson. Jackson would have to be given "preferential" treatment for two reasons....his celebrity status, and the fact that he would be going to jail as a child molester. Hate on criminals all you want, but they at least have their own ethical code, and molestation certainly doesn't rank favourably with them.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?