Do yall believe Michael Jackson molested those kids?
I dont.

entertainmetn, or debate even. not the lounge

probably debate.

meh, i don't even care much about the michael jackson case; i'm sorry.
haven't kept up with it... someone update me.

i don't really care anymore.. he made some good songs that i enjoy very much but he ain't gonna release nothing new so.. eh for him.

he's as dead as Rick James now to me..

i think he did. but i dont really care, i dont think people should care. its his personal life if he likes younger men...ahem. yeah. but i still dont think he should go to jail.

NO and I'm not just saying that because I'm a fan, I'm saying that because of the facts. I love Michael but I think he really needs some mental help...but no I don't think he did it. The prosecution has done a really crappy job and hasn't presented anything that's incriminating evidence. *shrug*

innocent until proven guilty is what i say

I'll illegal, yaknow.

He could probably find someone to have sex w/ him b/c he's rich. Why would he want to molest kids? But imo i don't care about this trial

That's the best one I've had all day. I agree with you.

these are children we are talking about. i am not saying he did it but if he did molest a child then everyone should care

thats true too

i believe he did. he had child porn in his house for god's sake!

no actually he didn't. Sorry to disappoint you. It was porn with women that had just turned 18, that's as low as he went, 18 year old FEMALES.

No. If u look at him u can tell he rlly is a kid inside. Hes had a bad life. His fatherr abused him to get on stage wen he was 5 and hasnt had a normal childhood since! I watched an interview where he was being interviewed and the reported brought up a rumor about him and his reply was "Its not very nice!" Thats a littl kid! I feel so bad for him. Ppl aere just out to get his money.

what are you talkin about. there's no poll. put i personally think mj is innocent... its only the media that makes it seem like he did something horrible

i killed the poll. there are no polls allowed in debate.

I have mixed feelings on the topic. Granted he has some psychological issues that really haven't been addressed, would you feel comfortable with letting your 11 year old son stay a weekend at this grown man's house? I sure as hell wouldn't. Whether or not he had any sexual interaction with these children is beyond me but it just doesn't seem right.

Michael Jackson pre-1987 is the Michael Jackson that should be remembered and revered for generations to come. But Michael Jackson post-1992 is the Michael Jackson that will forever be mocked and ridiculed.

Off The Wall was the greatest pop album to ever hit the shelves, btw.

michael jackson is a sick bastard. of course he molested those little kids, they even said in all of those documentaries that he always had a fascination with little boys, dont you think all those sleepovers at his house had some sexual relation in it? i think michael jackson needs to be thrown in jail, and not dismiss the case just because he is a celebrity with an assload of money

okay, disregarding pryor documentaries, why do you think he molested these kids based on information provided for the cases. Based on the evidence, based on the witnesses. please tell me. I'm trying to understand...

I'm not siding with Michael Jackson in believing he's innocent, however, you do have to admit that in all those documentaries, there is a noticeable strangeness in his manner. He acts like a child so he requires children as his friends. This goes well beyond the fact that he's a celebrity (one of the richest musicians on the planet [owns the rights and royalties to all the Beatles' music, he'll be rich until my grandkids die]) because everytime there is 'groundbreaking' evidence or probable cause, it turns out to be inconclusive. Not to mention the media warping this story into what it is.

What about all the sick bastards that hang out at amusement parks waiting for the opportunity to kidnapp and molest a child?

why would a f**kin 50 something year old man let hundreds of kids come sleepover at his house? they shouldnt blame it on childhood, unless he is autistic, because he has absolutely nothing wrong with him to back up any excuses to bring children to a middle aged mans house. correct me if im wrong, i understand that he didnt have a normal childhood, but to allow a child to sleep in a grown man's bed is just disgusting.

but that doesn't make him guilty. its odd, but its not necessarily sexual. you're willing to throw someone in jail because you find it disgusting that children sleep in his bed. no one held a gun to their head and said you little bastard you better sleep in the bed with me. that boy has a brain. he could have said 'no i don't want to'. I understand he was merely 12 at the time, but who's to say he doesn't have any common sense? i know i would have been like "No" and ran out of the room at 12, so its a possiblity he was like that too.

What does autism have to do with this? And how do you know he's not mentally inept to decipher such a situation? You're responses have been rather ill-mannered, kid. Show some respect to those in the forum instead of responding with such rushed ignorance. I get where you're going with this, and, for the most part, I do agree with you, however, back up your replies.

THANK you lol

can someone get this out of debate?

it's not a debate... there is no setup, or any sort of thing that qualifies it for debate, sans controversy.

i didnt know he did that...yup pretty low if they had JUST turned 18
but i think he DID.

i sure dont.
People are just eating up lies and media influence like Pizza. dont belive everythign u hear

If your black your guilty until proven innocent unless your OJ.

QUOTE(perplexism @ Mar 25 2005, 9:57 AM)

meh, i don't even care much about the michael jackson case; i'm sorry.
haven't kept up with it... someone update me.

Yeah, me too.

But from what I've heard, I'm skeptical.

But I believe that he is innocent until proven guilty also.

Thats the way it seems isn't it.

I dont believe it. I think that they are just trying to get some money. Heres my thought

OJ - Innocent
Kobe - Guilty
R.Kelly - Guilty
Micheal Jackson - Innocent

can someone move this to entertainment?

oh please, that is not true.

Can you relate? Are you black? Have you ever had to deal with the legal system as an innocent party and still was treated as guilty? It is true. Wake up.

and you wonder why there are racists in the world...

So pointing out a societal injustice makes it ok for people to be racist?

you are stereotyping can you honestly say that the only black man to get a fair trial was OJ simpson? its no mystery that people of color dont get the same treatment as whites but thats stereotyping

and im chinese

Actually, I'm not. I'm not talking about OJ, because, as far as I'm concerned, he's guilty. What I am saying is that "people of the ebony hue" tend not to get treated as fairly in court as others. History has proven this time and again. For example, Rubin Carter, the great heavyweight (The Hurricane) and his imprisonment for murder.

I'm not sure how things are where you live and I'm not trying to make this an issue of race. Michael Jackson hasn't been a black man since Beat It (I keed, I keed). But seriously, down here in Texas, thats very much the case and the color line is as thick as the great wall, Basick (that was a playful pun since you said you were Chinese... nevermind).

Acid, I just wanted to know where you going with that comment.

TouchMyMonkey, I just wanted to let you know that it is true and, unfortunately, it is like that.

OJ- Guilty
Kobe- Innocent
R. Kelly- Guilty
Michael Jackson- Yes he's messed up in the head but any inappropiate activity with a child makes him guilty.

i think this is more debate-ish.

oh crap. im watching the news and they say they have evidence... an accuser (a young boy) knows what mj's penis looks like. they say the description fits mj's penis

ok whatever

yo you said your cousin was Edmund Saunders, the uconn star.. well i heard he was signed by some NBDL team is he still inthe NBDL?

Last I checked he was going to Howard for law.

I think he's innocent.
If the kids were molested.. like 5 or 10 years ago.. how come they didn't bring it to court till now? I bet they're just in it for the money.

Statistics also proves that crimes are more often committed by"people of the ebony hue".

I don't think it's "a societal injustice". If you can prove that Blacks are treated like they are guilty before proven innocent in a court house, in other words, the Black man was discriminated because of his color, then I can do no more than agree with you. But until then, what you say doesn't make sense. Keep in mind that I prefer an examples post civil rights movement era. I do not doubt that they exist, but I'm interested in how many cases you can come up with that can justify what you say. This will be a learning experience for me.

well, it's more a controversial topic, not a debate.

right now we seem to be debating wheter blacks get fair treatment or not.
not about michael jackson.

the topic in itself sets itself up as a poll, not a debate..

anyways: i guesswhile it's here, i'll debate a bit about blacks and fair treatment.


Blacks have historically gotten worse treatment because of thier color. Even the "impartial" courts were biased.

take from the pre-civil war, in the north. if a judge ruled a black was an escaped slave, his payment for the case was 10 dollars. if the judge ruled a black was not an escaped slave, his payment for the case was 5 dollars.

racism was also prevalent. Frederick Douglass tells of how white ship's caulkers would refuse to work beside him because he was black. and this was in the north.

however, this started to change as black people got better treatment. (better than before).
they were gradually given rights, etc.

fast forwards to the 90s.

now, in the 90s, it has gone too far. Compensation to the fact that a person is black is being used.

being black is basically defined as a handicap, and black people are generally treated better when dealing with large coorporations. this is becasue a black person can sue a company for being racist, but when does a white man get to sue a company for racism?

so black people will get much better treatment in job selection, promotions, etc. in order to avoid getting a lawsuit.

however; when it comes to individuals, individuals in america believe they can say what they want because of the first ammendment. Therefore, individuals are more likely to be biased against blacks.

However: this is just a more likely. The jury has a stastistical chance of being biased against a black. however, this does not mean that if a black is brought to court, the jury will be biased against them.

just because more people drown in water when watermellons are ripe doesn't mean watermellons are the cause of drownings. It is because when watermellons are ripe, people are in the water more, because it's summer.

similarly, just because more blacks get a guilty sentence doesn't nessisarily mean there is a bias against blacks in the justice system.

it is more likey that blacks are more likely to be poor, and thus have to have a public defender instead of thier own lawyer. A public defender is more likely to do worse on a case.

Acid, you explained in a short reply what I had to write for an entrance exam in 1000 words. Props. That also opens up the job placement, standardized test and application argument but thats a whole new thread entirely.

Back to Michael Jackson...

On paper, no color issue, the Smooth Criminal is just that.

thanks.

alright, about michael jackson... is there really a debate right now? there aren't really that many facts avalible to us (the public) right now...

well then, if you agree with what he said, it's not true, and i was right so...keep your opinion the same..