Michael Jackson......

[Pitcher9]

Michael Jackson was found.............
Not Guilty

MOVED BY SABRA: from UK news & Rumors.

[Smiddy]

This is in no-way related to UK news and Rumours on HABBO :)

It'll probs be moved tho ;)

[IDante]

conspiricy..

[Revis]

conspiricy..
Yeah, MJ is really the Alien they captured at Roswell, He lived in Area 51 and tested the U2 spy plane for the CIA untill he was called up as part of the Jackson 5 to boost soldier moral during the cold war. It's all to do with politics these days....

[kasi]

I personally think he's guilty on all accounts. :)

[Mentor]

I personally think he's guilty on all accounts. :)
Agree i do.
Athogh id accepted it if most of them were found untrue, but the fact they all were even some of the lesser counts that there was absoulte proof of, i think the whole thing was fixed

[Revis]

I agree with Mentor and FrozenIllusion and I was thought that they would of found him guilty, although his defence had made a strong case. (Correct Grammar?)

[GommeInc]

I don't really care, they're normal people like us, why should we get excited over a normal person going to court for something he did or didn't do?

[Angster]

I believe this is a fair judgment.

People say he's guilty, but what REAL PROOF do you have? It's just kids and parents throwing accusations at Michael with no actual proof that he molested anyone. You can't give someone the title of "guilty" until you have any proof that they have done anything. There is no proof whatsoever. It's always going to be "Innocent until proven guilty", and he wasn't proven guilty. Therefore, he is innocent. Completely fair.

[SSC7]

I don't really care, they're normal people like us, why should we get excited over a normal person going to court for something he did or didn't do?
I wouldn't exactly say he's normal. After watching some of his interviews over the last year or so he is really creeping me out. Especially his comments about how parents should be comfortable with having their children sleeping in the same bad with a grown adult, and how he'd be fine with his kid(s) sleeping with one. Also most normal people don't show up to court in their pajamas and dance on top of cars.

They had a great line from Saturday Night Live's Weekend update saying, "Earlier in the week Chris Tucker and (The kid from Home Alone) testified that Michael never molested them in their visit to his house. Maybe now I should go and testify in the OJ simpson case. He never killed me, he never killed me once."

[ttranquility.]

omgg he should be guilty hes so ARG i hate him so much and i hate the verdict for saying that he is NOT GUILTY!

[Angster]

omgg he should be guilty hes so ARG i hate him so much and i hate the verdict for saying that he is NOT GUILTY!
So because you hate him, he's guilty? You don't even know the guy enough to hate him. You just know from what you've heard on TV. This isn't a game. They aren't going to put someone who they feel is innocent in jail. That's not how it works. And before you decide to reply to this and make an even bigger fool of yourself, I suggest you read this: http://www.habboxforum.com/showpost.php?p=420446&postcount=9

And for the rest of the people with similar views: Because someone isn't normal, or because someone doesn't look normal, or act normal, that doesn't make them guilty of something as serious as child molestation. If that's how the system works, then our world would be even more messed up than it already is. Your personal opinion of someone doesn't reflect on whether they are guilty or innocent. As I said before, it all comes down to proof - which there was none at all.

[Grabbed]

yeah i did find it a bit suspicious that he was aquitted on even the lesser counts surely they would have found him guilty on one thing

[Steph]

I think he's guilty...and thats just me saying that coz I hate him lol. he's scary. and i know the saying don't judge a book by its cover blah blah blah, but he looks like he's a perv and he talks scary..

[Mentor]

So because you hate him, he's guilty? You don't even know the guy enough to hate him. You just know from what you've heard on TV. This isn't a game. They aren't going to put someone who they feel is innocent in jail. That's not how it works. And before you decide to reply to this and make an even bigger fool of yourself, I suggest you read this: http://www.habboxforum.com/showpost.php?p=420446&postcount=9

And for the rest of the people with similar views: Because someone isn't normal, or because someone doesn't look normal, or act normal, that doesn't make them guilty of something as serious as child molestation. If that's how the system works, then our world would be even more messed up than it already is. Your personal opinion of someone doesn't reflect on whether they are guilty or innocent. As I said before, it all comes down to proof - which there was none at all.

Yea but when that not acting normal includes inviting childern in to his bed to sleep with them, i tend to get the opion there guilty

[Kyle.tk]

Ive never really known. There have been times when ive thought 'he's guilty' and others when ive thought he's not. I dont think he has molestered a child, but i think he has, played with himself with minors. As the child (cant remember name) described michaels thingy miboby (gotta be careful on the forum) and got alot of details right. That he is guilty of. Also, in his neverland ranch (recently been sold due to michaels debts) when police raided it, they found serveral teen ****ography magazines. That he is guilty of. I dont believe he molestered a child, but i believe the above what i said.
You shouldnt judge him because he looks scary or because you hate him for some crazy reason. He has been one of the best entertainers of all time, can any of you doubt that. He has created some of the best songs ever such as Billy Jean, Thriller and Smooth Criminal. He may have a strong relationship with younger boys, but that does not make him a paedophille.

[Angster]

Yea but when that not acting normal includes inviting childern in to his bed to sleep with them, i tend to get the opion there guilty
Yeah, but do you actually know that went on? That's the thing: no one knows but Michael and the children. Obviously, they thought Michael had a stronger case. And basically, the trial is pointless without proof. I'm not saying these things did not take place, there's just no proof that they actually did.

No, I'm not some Michael Jackson lover. And no, he may not be innocent. But without proof, they can't do anything to the guy.

I guess it is sort of weird that he was found innocent on all counts... Money can get you somewhere these days, even out of jail. But if you actually knew Michael's history, you may feel more sympathy for the guy. If you knew even a little bit about Michael, you'd know that his dad was a truly terrible person, to Michael and his family. I'm not saying "Put all the blame on the out-of-control father!", but it's obviously one of the main reasons Michael has a few things loose up there.

[Mentor]

Yeah, but do you actually know that went on? That's the thing: no one knows but Michael and the children. Obviously, they thought Michael had a stronger case. And basically, the trial is pointless without proof. I'm not saying these things did not take place, there's just no proof that they actually did.

well actaly, there a documnety where he said he did, to the camra, wich was braodcast on tv, not so long ago.




No, I'm not some Michael Jackson lover. And no, he may not be innocent. But without proof, they can't do anything to the guy.

I guess it is sort of weird that he was found innocent on all counts... Money can get you somewhere these days, even out of jail. But if you actually knew Michael's history, you may feel more sympathy for the guy. If you knew even a little bit about Michael, you'd know that his dad was a truly terrible person, to Michael and his family. I'm not saying "Put all the blame on the out-of-control father!", but it's obviously one of the main reasons Michael has a few things loose up there.
If hes deemed insain, so be it, keep him in a home, but hes legal sain, and therefor fully responcible for his actaions "/

[Pulchritudinous]

On sky they do a reconstruction of the court case, and the home alone boy said he'd slept in a bed with Michael on many occasions, although he thought Michael was innocent, so there you go I got my proof...:P. Michael Jackson did invite boys to sleep in the same bed as him.

Michael Jackson has kids, and wouldn't you find it very strange if your dad slept with other kids, because I know I would!

I heard him say on an interview that kids are his faviroute people, which is understandable, children are innocent cute etc, and easy to love, Michael Jackson says he never had a childhood and is making up for it, okie dokie, fine with that, I just don't think sleeping in the same bed as kids is giving him 'the childhood he never had'.

[Angster]

well actaly, there a documnety where he said he did, to the camra, wich was braodcast on tv, not so long ago.

If hes deemed insain, so be it, keep him in a home, but hes legal sain, and therefor fully responcible for his actaions "/
Right, so on TV, he's going to tell the whole nation he's guilty, then the final verdict says he's innocent? That doesn't make sense. And just because he may be perverted, that doesn't make him "insane". Note, I didn't say he was insane, he just has a lot of things messed up with his life. Yes, he is responsible for his actions, but again, what actions took place? He's obviously innocent for a reason. Drop it.


On sky they do a reconstruction of the court case, and the home alone boy said he'd slept in a bed with Michael on many occasions, although he thought Michael was innocent, so there you go I got my proof...:P. Michael Jackson did invite boys to sleep in the same bed as him.

Michael Jackson has kids, and wouldn't you find it very strange if your dad slept with other kids, because I know I would!

I heard him say on an interview that kids are his faviroute people, which is understandable, children are innocent cute etc, and easy to love, Michael Jackson says he never had a childhood and is making up for it, okie dokie, fine with that, I just don't think sleeping in the same bed as kids is giving him 'the childhood he never had'.
Just because kids were in his bed, that doesn't mean anything actually took place. Sure, it sounds a bit sketchy, but if you have been totally ignoring my posts... THERE WAS NO GOD DAMN PROOF THAT ANYTHING ILLEGAL TOOK PLACE. Without proof, they can't send him to jail. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that. Yes, he's a freak, he's weird looking, he's messed up in the head. That doesn't stand as any freaking proof, and that doesn't mean he's guilty.

[?-Doc-?]

Theresno evidence saying hes NOT GUILTY. I mean the victims, the raid, the nude pictures and stuff they found.
-
I reackon somethings going on. Conspiricy. Lol the jury..
I reackon he paid em'. They are making a book, of why the found him not guilty. Pfft. I sorta like him musicwise .. but he shouldnt get away with no warnings.

[Pulchritudinous]

Right, so on TV, he's going to tell the whole nation he's guilty, then the final verdict says he's innocent? That doesn't make sense. And just because he may be perverted, that doesn't make him "insane". Note, I didn't say he was insane, he just has a lot of things messed up with his life. Yes, he is responsible for his actions, but again, what actions took place? He's obviously innocent for a reason. Drop it.


Just because kids were in his bed, that doesn't mean anything actually took place. Sure, it sounds a bit sketchy, but if you have been totally ignoring my posts... THERE WAS NO GOD DAMN PROOF THAT ANYTHING ILLEGAL TOOK PLACE. Without proof, they can't send him to jail. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that. Yes, he's a freak, he's weird looking, he's messed up in the head. That doesn't stand as any freaking proof, and that doesn't mean he's guilty.

God, I said inviting kids to sleep with him was strange, I never said it was illegal nor did I say he was guilty, I don't even know why your accusing me of that.
Think about it, if some guy down your road slept with kids, it would be the same, I don't care if he's Michael Jackson, grown men shouldn't sleep in the same bed as a kid.

Plus I never said 'my proof is...he looks weird!' did I, instead of telling me I'm ignoring your posts, read mine properly!

[tbh imo no m8]

good on him i dont think he did it :)

[Krypsis]

*cough* guilty *cough cough*

[Mentor]

Right, so on TV, he's going to tell the whole nation he's guilty, then the final verdict says he's innocent? That doesn't make sense. And just because he may be perverted, that doesn't make him "insane". Note, I didn't say he was insane, he just has a lot of things messed up with his life. Yes, he is responsible for his actions, but again, what actions took place? He's obviously innocent for a reason. Drop it.

Not going to, he did, its the wyole reason the case started up, after teh documnetry where he said he slept in the same bed as children, wjhile sitteing there holding hands with another 10 or 211 year old boy.

This was seen by millions of people? what actions took place, well sleeping with childern, mickle jackosn even said he did in a so called "non sexual way" *cough*

PLus gieving alchol to miners, to wich an entire cabin crew, everone on the plane at the time, testifed tp, and mickle jackson has also admited to doing before clameing there was nothing wrong with it.

[Mr.Kylee]

He's just really weird. He acts like a kid becuse he never had his childhood but still..sleeping with kids in same bed is sick for me but if he didn't touched them then he didn't broke any law. I don't know about whole alcohol thingy.

[Angster]

Theresno evidence saying hes NOT GUILTY. I mean the victims, the raid, the nude pictures and stuff they found.
-
I reackon somethings going on. Conspiricy. Lol the jury..
I reackon he paid em'. They are making a book, of why the found him not guilty. Pfft. I sorta like him musicwise .. but he shouldnt get away with no warnings.
Obviously the court thinks he's not guilty. And as I have said countless times - I'm not saying these things didn't take place, but the court obviously didn't call him on it. How does it affect you anyways? Planning any visits to the Neverland ranch soon? No? That's what I thought. And I doubt any kids will be visiting it anytime soon after the case, either.



God, I said inviting kids to sleep with him was strange, I never said it was illegal nor did I say he was guilty, I don't even know why your accusing me of that.
Think about it, if some guy down your road slept with kids, it would be the same, I don't care if he's Michael Jackson, grown men shouldn't sleep in the same bed as a kid.

Plus I never said 'my proof is...he looks weird!' did I, instead of telling me I'm ignoring your posts, read mine properly!
Well you talked about kids going into his bed, then you said "There's my proof", implying "There's the proof that makes him guilty". Excuse me for reading between the lines. And that last line wasn't directed at you anyways. And I can read, thanks. Maybe you're the one who should look more deeply into posts, dear.


Not going to, he did, its the wyole reason the case started up, after teh documnetry where he said he slept in the same bed as children, wjhile sitteing there holding hands with another 10 or 211 year old boy.

This was seen by millions of people? what actions took place, well sleeping with childern, mickle jackosn even said he did in a so called "non sexual way" *cough*

PLus gieving alchol to miners, to wich an entire cabin crew, everone on the plane at the time, testifed tp, and mickle jackson has also admited to doing before clameing there was nothing wrong with it.
I'm aware that he did, I was using reference to explain why your post was just utterly moronic and made no sense at all. And JESUS CHRIST! Holding hands?! I can't believe he did that! I smell a death penalty! And a "211-year-old boy", didn't know those existed. And remember, this is coming from TV. Not personal experience, which really doesn't stand as anything. TV can be edited, things can be said that aren't true, lies can be made to make Michael look like the bad guy. Does it mean it's true? No. Does it mean he's guilty? No.

[Mentor]

I'm aware that he did, I was using reference to explain why your post was just utterly moronic and made no sense at all. And JESUS CHRIST! Holding hands?! I can't believe he did that! I smell a death penalty! And a "211-year-old boy", didn't know those existed. And remember, this is coming from TV. Not personal experience, which really doesn't stand as anything. TV can be edited, things can be said that aren't true, lies can be made to make Michael look like the bad guy. Does it mean it's true? No. Does it mean he's guilty? No.
Well maybe its normal for you to see a 40 year old man hugging and holding hands with a 12 year old, but the rest of us kind of think it starnge, Plus notice Ive said he slept in the same bed a childeren, not that he molested them, eventhogh i think he probably did.
What ive said is true, you can check for yourself if you want, the footage wasnt edited, and not even mickle jackson clames its not real, so it looks liek your the only one who thinks is made up.

[Angster]

Well maybe its normal for you to see a 40 year old man hugging and holding hands with a 12 year old, but the rest of us kind of think it starnge, Plus notice Ive said he slept in the same bed a childeren, not that he molested them, eventhogh i think he probably did.
What ive said is true, you can check for yourself if you want, the footage wasnt edited, and not even mickle jackson clames its not real, so it looks liek your the only one who thinks is made up.
40-year-old parents, relatives, and close friends hug and hold hands with 12-year-old kids. How is it strange? How do you know Michael didn't know these kids?

I didn't say the footage was edited, either. Maybe someone testifying said something that wasn't true.

It's final - Michael is innocent, it's not going to change unless some kids/parents can come up with some damn good proof. Until then, I'll continue to believe what I think is true.

[Pulchritudinous]

Well you talked about kids going into his bed, then you said "There's my proof", implying "There's the proof that makes him guilty". Excuse me for reading between the lines. And that last line wasn't directed at you anyways. And I can read, thanks. Maybe you're the one who should look more deeply into posts, dear.


What?! I never 'implied that he was guilty.


so there you go I got my proof...:P. Michael Jackson did invite boys to sleep in the same bed as him.

I followed on to say...he did invite boys to sleep in the same bed as him.
I just don't understand how that show's I think he's guilty, the court said he's innocent, so he must be.
I was simply saying, it is strange for a grown man to sleep in the same bed as a young boy.

P.S. I'm not 5 years old, you don't need to call me dear.

[Angster]

What?! I never 'implied that he was guilty.



I followed on to say...he did invite boys to sleep in the same bed as him.
I just don't understand how that show's I think he's guilty, the court said he's innocent, so he must be.
I was simply saying, it is strange for a grown man to sleep in the same bed as a young boy.

P.S. I'm not 5 years old, you don't need to call me dear.
I never said he didn't invite boys into his bed, so the fact that you had to label that as "proof" is how you implied that he was guilty. Besides, think about it - what's your proof going towards? THE FACT THAT HE'S GUILTY. That's what "implying" means..

Use common sense the next time you try to contradict me..

[ttranquility.]

So because you hate him, he's guilty? You don't even know the guy enough to hate him. You just know from what you've heard on TV. This isn't a game. They aren't going to put someone who they feel is innocent in jail. That's not how it works. And before you decide to reply to this and make an even bigger fool of yourself, I suggest you read this: http://www.habboxforum.com/showpost.php?p=420446&postcount=9

And for the rest of the people with similar views: Because someone isn't normal, or because someone doesn't look normal, or act normal, that doesn't make them guilty of something as serious as child molestation. If that's how the system works, then our world would be even more messed up than it already is. Your personal opinion of someone doesn't reflect on whether they are guilty or innocent. As I said before, it all comes down to proof - which there was none at all.

I know it comes down to proof but i didnt say "he should be guilty because i hate him." No i think he should be guilty because there is PROOF. But not alot to put him behind bars. Im not stupid like you said to me in my rep ( which you are being very immature when you dont just say it in the post. ) And i wasnt saying that because he is "abnormal" i hate him :S I was saying that many people KNOW he is guilty and that alot of people were MAD at the fact that he SHOULD be guilty. So YOU should think about what you are saying BEFORE you say it. PLUS why are you trusting a FORUM to tell you the EXACT truth. Look on the news.

[Angster]

I know it comes down to proof but i didnt say "he should be guilty because i hate him." No i think he should be guilty because there is PROOF. But not alot to put him behind bars. Im not stupid like you said to me in my rep ( which you are being very immature when you dont just say it in the post. ) And i wasnt saying that because he is "abnormal" i hate him :S I was saying that many people KNOW he is guilty and that alot of people were MAD at the fact that he SHOULD be guilty. So YOU should think about what you are saying BEFORE you say it. PLUS why are you trusting a FORUM to tell you the EXACT truth. Look on the news.
Okay, before I get into this, I'd like to say that I did not send you a rep. If I did, I would have left my name like I always do - Good or bad. So until you know for sure it was me, then don't accuse me of such things.

Now, your post isn't making much sense.. There's proof that he's guilty, but not enough to put him behind bars? Surely, there was even proof that he's guilty, he wouldn't have been innocent on ALL counts. He would have at least served a little bit of time.

Let's take a look-see at your post:


omgg he should be guilty hes so ARG i hate him so much and i hate the verdict for saying that he is NOT GUILTY!
Basically, you're saying that you hate him, how he should be guilty, etc. So what you're telling me right now is that you hate the verdict - not him. Which is reasonable. You shouldn't hate him. You know nothing about him other than the stuff you hear on TV, which may not even be true.

So, I'm still not sure I understand. First you say you hate him, now you say you hate the verdict. Maybe you should make up your mind?

And I do look at the news. Maybe you should be watching it a little more, enough to all tell you HE'S INNOCENT. And whatever you think, say, or do is not going to change that. Sorry.

[Mentor]

I hate him, becuse he got away with what he did.

There was alot of evidnace, and some thats complety irefutable for some of the lesser charges, and as he was found inccent of them all, even the ones he was deffitly guilty off, i think that means the rest of the verdists were also fake.

[ttranquility.]

I hate him, becuse he got away with what he did.

There was alot of evidnace, and some thats complety irefutable for some of the lesser charges, and as he was found inccent of them all, even the ones he was deffitly guilty off, i think that means the rest of the verdists were also fake.

Thats what i was trying to say.

[ttranquility.]

Okay, before I get into this, I'd like to say that I did not send you a rep. If I did, I would have left my name like I always do - Good or bad. So until you know for sure it was me, then don't accuse me of such things.

Now, your post isn't making much sense.. There's proof that he's guilty, but not enough to put him behind bars? Surely, there was even proof that he's guilty, he wouldn't have been innocent on ALL counts. He would have at least served a little bit of time.

Let's take a look-see at your post:


Basically, you're saying that you hate him, how he should be guilty, etc. So what you're telling me right now is that you hate the verdict - not him. Which is reasonable. You shouldn't hate him. You know nothing about him other than the stuff you hear on TV, which may not even be true.

So, I'm still not sure I understand. First you say you hate him, now you say you hate the verdict. Maybe you should make up your mind?

And I do look at the news. Maybe you should be watching it a little more, enough to all tell you HE'S INNOCENT. And whatever you think, say, or do is not going to change that. Sorry.

:\ I wasnt saying that YOU gave me the rep. I was saying it to you yes, because who ever DID send me the rep I was telling them so i didnt have to double post.

[ttranquility.]

I never said he didn't invite boys into his bed, so the fact that you had to label that as "proof" is how you implied that he was guilty. Besides, think about it - what's your proof going towards? THE FACT THAT HE'S GUILTY. That's what "implying" means..

Use common sense the next time you try to contradict me..

Why do you think your so much "superiour" Then everyone else.. Obivously your not, you keep on going on and on. I think people get the point now.

[=Sean...]

Well, I always thought he was innocent, but sleeping in the same bed with a child is wrong.

[Angster]

Why do you think your so much "superiour" Then everyone else.. Obivously your not, you keep on going on and on. I think people get the point now.
I don't. Besides, you're picking out irrelevant points. What does me thinking I'm superior to everyone else have to do with Michael Jackson? Nothing. You triple post, and STILL don't make a point. He did get away with what he did. Good for him. As I said before, are you planning any visits to Neverland Ranch anytime soon? Doubt it, and I bet no one else is anymore because of this trial. And the reason I'm going on and on is because I try to make a point, and idiots like you keep making stupid comments in return. Maybe if you didn't reply with moronic comments, I wouldn't keep replying.

And nice cover up, but I have a good impression that you were talking to me about the reputation point. You quoted me and added this bit to your post;


Im not stupid like you said to me in my rep ( which you are being very immature when you dont just say it in the post.)

Doesn't really look like you are directing that comment to the entire thread, more so towards me - which I know you were.

Maybe you're right - I should stop posting here. Why am I bothering to explain that he's innocent over and over again when idiots like you can't comprehend that. So, for the next person who comes along with a stupid reply;

He's innocent.
He's innocent.
He's innocent.
He's innocent.

Goodbye, lovelies.

[Roboevil]

He's bound to have been guilty, Did you not know how each of the Jury were payed like $10,000,000 for that? That's rediculous! I suppose Micheal would have payed a substantial contribution ;). Why would anyone want to lock him away anyway, apart from he's a paedopile, that guy from "Home alone," said that "As far as he knows, I was not molested by Micheal at any time." As far as he knows? Not something that passes you by mate! He's probably hiding something.

[Moose]

I knew he was innocent all along :)

[ttranquility.]

I don't. Besides, you're picking out irrelevant points. What does me thinking I'm superior to everyone else have to do with Michael Jackson? Nothing. You triple post, and STILL don't make a point. He did get away with what he did. Good for him. As I said before, are you planning any visits to Neverland Ranch anytime soon? Doubt it, and I bet no one else is anymore because of this trial. And the reason I'm going on and on is because I try to make a point, and idiots like you keep making stupid comments in return. Maybe if you didn't reply with moronic comments, I wouldn't keep replying.

And nice cover up, but I have a good impression that you were talking to me about the reputation point. You quoted me and added this bit to your post;


Doesn't really look like you are directing that comment to the entire thread, more so towards me - which I know you were.

Maybe you're right - I should stop posting here. Why am I bothering to explain that he's innocent over and over again when idiots like you can't comprehend that. So, for the next person who comes along with a stupid reply;

He's innocent.
He's innocent.
He's innocent.
He's innocent.

Goodbye, lovelies.

Now your calling everyone stupid? And anyways, i was "DIRECTING" it to you because you were the most person to have posted somthing like that because you think all of my posts are stupid. So are yours if you havent noticed.