Peter King: Jackson Coverage an "Orgy of Glorification" Comments (Page 2)
16 Comments
Kelsey
July 7th, 2009 4:21 PM
I see what you're saying and perhaps I put more of my personal opinion into my first post. Although from what I have read, the evidence that was brought forward by the boy and his family had little proof to back it up. Even how many times the boy said he was molested changed more then once. They said there were no clocks in neverland and they werent allowed to see the time, when there was a huge clock that could be plainly sighted from helicopter. There are more things I could list but my thoughts are escaping me. I do understand that not guilty is not the same as innocent and I thought about that as I wrote my first post but didn't bother to change it because I do think he was innocent. With all of the scrutiny against Michael, especially at that time, I believe that if there was even a little bit of evidence that could not be proven wrong or seriously doubted, he would have been obviously proven guilty. The fact that he was aquitted of all 10 charges (I think) and even lesser charges
Thomas
July 7th, 2009 3:49 PM
For Kelsey, Michael was not proven innocent. He was declared "not guilty" because the jury could not agree on a decision. There is a difference between "innocent" and "not guilty".
Here is a link that I think is interesting: http://hwlawfirm.blogspot.com/2007/11/not-guilty-vs-innocent.html
Also, there has been no proof that the children who said they were sexually abused were lying. In the last trial circus, the jurors doubted the veracity of the mother of the child. This did not prove innocence. It proved that they could not get to "guilty without any doubt".
I personally feel that Michael had a very unhealthy bond with little children. He revered them and much more wanted to be like them than adults. Corey Haim adored Michael but said recently on TV that once he started growing hair on his face, and his voice deepened, Michael no longer had interest in their friendship. Haim did say Michael did not molest him, same goes for McCauley Caulkin. The comment about w
Zarah
July 7th, 2009 12:00 PM
LEAVE HIM ALONE....MAY HIS SOUL REST IN PEACE...!!!
Zarah
July 7th, 2009 11:58 AM
VERY TRUE!!!! THIS GUY NEEDS TO PISS OFF...HE's GONNA BECOME THE NEW CARRIE PREJEAN WHOSE BASIS OF POPULARITY WAS AN ARGUMENT N THEN STRETCHIN IT TO AN EXTENT OF EXAGGERATION BUT THIS GUY IS EXTREMELY INSENSITVE AS HIS COWARD ASS IS TRYING TO LOOK A DEAD LEGEND BAD TO THE PEOPLE...HE NEEDS SOME GROWING UP TO DO N SO DOES THE MEDIA THAT GIVES SO MUCH ATTENTION TO FAME-STARVED ASSHOLES LIKE THESE!!!!!
Zarah
July 7th, 2009 11:57 AM
VERY TRUE!!!! THIS GUY NEEDS TO PISS OFF...HE GONNA BECOME THE NEW CARRIE PREJEAN WHOSE BASIS OF POPULARITY WAS AN ARGUMENT N THEN STRETCHIN IT TO AN EXTENT OF EXAGGERATION BUT THIS GUY IS EXTREMELY INSENSITVE AS HIS COWARD ASS IS TRYING TO LOOK A DEAD LEGEND BAD TO THE PEOPLE...HE NEEDS SOME GROWING UP TO DO N SO DOES THE MEDIA THAT GIVES SO MUCH ATTENTION TO FAME-STARVED ASSHOLES LIKE THESE!!!!!
kelsey
July 7th, 2009 10:05 AM
He is going too far and there is nothing true about what he is saying! Michael was proven innocent of any wrong doing by a jury and by psychological examination. It was well known that these people were out for his money and in the most recent case, the people were continuous liars and the mother was a scam artist. I think it is disguisting that people would make these comments about someone who was proven not guilty, even after their death. Michael was an outstanding individual and deserves respect for all the good he was and did.
July 7th, 2009 4:21 PM
I see what you're saying and perhaps I put more of my personal opinion into my first post. Although from what I have read, the evidence that was brought forward by the boy and his family had little proof to back it up. Even how many times the boy said he was molested changed more then once. They said there were no clocks in neverland and they werent allowed to see the time, when there was a huge clock that could be plainly sighted from helicopter. There are more things I could list but my thoughts are escaping me. I do understand that not guilty is not the same as innocent and I thought about that as I wrote my first post but didn't bother to change it because I do think he was innocent. With all of the scrutiny against Michael, especially at that time, I believe that if there was even a little bit of evidence that could not be proven wrong or seriously doubted, he would have been obviously proven guilty. The fact that he was aquitted of all 10 charges (I think) and even lesser charges
July 7th, 2009 3:49 PM
For Kelsey, Michael was not proven innocent. He was declared "not guilty" because the jury could not agree on a decision. There is a difference between "innocent" and "not guilty".
Here is a link that I think is interesting: http://hwlawfirm.blogspot.com/2007/11/not-guilty-vs-innocent.html
Also, there has been no proof that the children who said they were sexually abused were lying. In the last trial circus, the jurors doubted the veracity of the mother of the child. This did not prove innocence. It proved that they could not get to "guilty without any doubt".
I personally feel that Michael had a very unhealthy bond with little children. He revered them and much more wanted to be like them than adults. Corey Haim adored Michael but said recently on TV that once he started growing hair on his face, and his voice deepened, Michael no longer had interest in their friendship. Haim did say Michael did not molest him, same goes for McCauley Caulkin. The comment about w
July 7th, 2009 12:00 PM
LEAVE HIM ALONE....MAY HIS SOUL REST IN PEACE...!!!
July 7th, 2009 11:58 AM
VERY TRUE!!!! THIS GUY NEEDS TO PISS OFF...HE's GONNA BECOME THE NEW CARRIE PREJEAN WHOSE BASIS OF POPULARITY WAS AN ARGUMENT N THEN STRETCHIN IT TO AN EXTENT OF EXAGGERATION BUT THIS GUY IS EXTREMELY INSENSITVE AS HIS COWARD ASS IS TRYING TO LOOK A DEAD LEGEND BAD TO THE PEOPLE...HE NEEDS SOME GROWING UP TO DO N SO DOES THE MEDIA THAT GIVES SO MUCH ATTENTION TO FAME-STARVED ASSHOLES LIKE THESE!!!!!
July 7th, 2009 11:57 AM
VERY TRUE!!!! THIS GUY NEEDS TO PISS OFF...HE GONNA BECOME THE NEW CARRIE PREJEAN WHOSE BASIS OF POPULARITY WAS AN ARGUMENT N THEN STRETCHIN IT TO AN EXTENT OF EXAGGERATION BUT THIS GUY IS EXTREMELY INSENSITVE AS HIS COWARD ASS IS TRYING TO LOOK A DEAD LEGEND BAD TO THE PEOPLE...HE NEEDS SOME GROWING UP TO DO N SO DOES THE MEDIA THAT GIVES SO MUCH ATTENTION TO FAME-STARVED ASSHOLES LIKE THESE!!!!!
July 7th, 2009 10:05 AM
He is going too far and there is nothing true about what he is saying! Michael was proven innocent of any wrong doing by a jury and by psychological examination. It was well known that these people were out for his money and in the most recent case, the people were continuous liars and the mother was a scam artist. I think it is disguisting that people would make these comments about someone who was proven not guilty, even after their death. Michael was an outstanding individual and deserves respect for all the good he was and did.