Turn on thread page Beta

Leave Michael Jackson alone media hounds! watch

Announcements
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eleenia)
    i don't get your point.
    The pattern is becoming repetitive, family accuse, family scew money out of hm, allegations dropped...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bono)
    phew you're not mad at me, i just can't help correcting people's spellings - i blame my English teacher!
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hotchick200)
    r u!! he he he just jokein !!

    but there is no evidance 2 say that u r!!
    Exactly, and there is no evidence to say that he is either, other than a family accusing him because they want money.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bono)
    There cannot be statistics on this, how would one know whether the given verdict is justified?
    quite right, so how can you make such sweeping statements about it then?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by waiting2smile)
    phew you're not mad at me, i just can't help correcting people's spellings - i blame my English teacher!
    But it is such an odd spelling though, it is pronounced "gullable" rather than "gullible".

    Ahh well....this is why Physics kicks ass!
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eleenia)
    quite right, so how can you make such sweeping statements about it then?
    I'm not, you are the one making sweeping statements making out that the legal system is always reliable.

    My view is that unless "proven guilty", then one is unjust to condemn someone as being a rapist.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bono)
    The pattern is becoming repetitive, family accuse, family scew money out of hm, allegations dropped...
    yes and i said that each accusation has to be regarded as an individual account. For example, what if michael jackson had been wrongly accused of rape a thousand times and then someone new accuses him - are you saying that that new accusation should be treated with more suspicion because of what has happened before. Can you not see the legal implications of that??? What is that person was telling the truth!
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eleenia)
    yes and i said that each accusation has to be regarded as an individual account. For example, what if michael jackson had been wrongly accused of rape a thousand times and then someone new accuses him - are you saying that that new accusation should be treated with more suspicion because of what has happened before. Can you not see the legal implications of that??? What is that person was telling the truth!
    Exactly, and the word "if" is very important here.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bono)
    I'm not, you are the one making sweeping statements making out that the legal system is always reliable.

    My view is that unless "proven guilty", then one is unjust to condemn someone as being a rapist.
    i'm sorry can you cut and paste that bit where i said the legal system is always reliable, as i don't recall it. I think i said it has limitations but it is the best thing we have. I don't think i have made any sweeping statements. I think you'll find that most people's view is innocent until proven guilty but you implicitly seem to be saying that
    1) a person cannot be guilty if they produce music you like.
    2) because you like that person you would not rely on a court conviction.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eleenia)
    i'm sorry can you cut and paste that bit where i said the legal system is always reliable, as i don't recall it. I think i said it has limitations but it is the best thing we have. I don't think i have made any sweeping statements. I think you'll find that most people's view is innocent until proven guilty but you implicitly seem to be saying that
    1) a person cannot be guilty if they produce music you like.
    2) because you like that person you would not rely on a court conviction.
    No, I said that unless he is proven guilty, then I shall refuse to accept these allegations as true.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    i am going to partialy agree with the views of the thread starter, not because Jackson is innocent (i highly doubt he is) but because i am sick of hearing about him and his disgusting ways
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bono)
    No, I said that unless he is proven guilty, then I shall refuse to accept these allegations as true.
    yes but not unconditionally though - you've said you'd only believe it if you thought the verdict was 'justified' which to me means that if the verdict was 'guilty' you would only believe it if you thought it was the right verdict, which from all you've said i doubt you would.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eleenia)
    yes but not unconditionally though - you've said you'd only believe it if you thought the verdict was 'justified' which to me means that if the verdict was 'guilty' you would only believe it if you thought it was the right verdict, which from all you've said i doubt you would.
    Biological proof is required for me to be convinced.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bono)
    Biological proof is required for me to be convinced.
    and not the verdict of a jury?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Micheal jackson is cool. Leave him alone, all he does is sing songs which we all like and people put him through trails. All he wants to do is entertain us. It isn't wrong to let children sleep in his bed while he sleeps on the sofa. Its upto him if he wants to have plastic on his face thats no ones business but his. LEAVE MICHEAL ALONE!!!!!!

    i like michael jackson, why? because he's different and has made some good songs to listen to, good songs to listen to is good for the human body/mind and helps motivate us maybe?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maskall Man)
    Leave Michael Jackson alone! He is a genius and shouldn't have to go through all these trials and tabloid frenzy whether he is guilty or not!

    Even if Michael did do something to the children, then so what? Maybe we should be more open minded. Michael was probably just showing his love to the children and that is the only he knows how. Should we deny Michael the right to love? His love to a child?

    Even if Michael did do something to the children he shouldn't have to go through all this! He is a legend and a genius, leave him alone.
    Glad to know someone supports paedophilia. :rolleyes:
 
 
 
Poll
Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.