The World Awaits...

[Skinny Shooter]

:rolleyes:

[Skinny Shooter]

NOT GUILTY

He may really be not guilty but there's something so wrong with that picture of "sleeping" with little boys.


:rolleyes:

[gregarat]

And, there is something wrong with dangling a baby off a balcony.
Frankly, there is just alot wrong with this guy.

I guess "wrong" doesnt mean illigal:rolleyes:

[Rocky Raab]

Let's face it. We've made gods of our celebrities.

They cannot be convicted of anything, because they're "famous."

OJ, Blake and now His Weirdness.

It's as if the emperor has no clothes and we can't see his nakedness. When will this adulation of celebrities end? How depraved, moronic and immoral can they get before we wake up? Look at Paris Hilton: brainless, clueless and morals-free, yet the public loves her and gapes at her every move.

Are we nuts? (That's rhetorical. We sure are.)

[Rocky Raab]

Here is irrefutable proof:




June 13, 2005— An enterprising celebrity spotter is offering fans the chance to buy a jar of fresh air allegedly breathed by stars Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, for a mere $15,000.

"Be the first to own this jar of Celebrity air, which may contain air molecules that came in direct contact with Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt!!," read the seller's announcement on online auctioneer eBay.

Rocky Note: there were 53 bids so far, upping the initial offer of $9.99 to $15,099.

Honest.

[Dan Morris]

Thus speaks granolaland!
Dan

[TreeDoc]

The Prosecution should be proud. The taxpayers have been "OJ'd" again.

[BILLY D.]

WERE ANY OF YOU TRULY SURPRISED? I TOTALLY EXPECTED IT.

ONCE AGAIN THE CESSPOOL OF THE WORLD COMES THROUGH.

THOSE PEOPLE HAVE NO SOUL, NO HEART, NO CONSCIENCE AND NO SHAME.

[Steverino]

I admittedly tried not to follow along on this trial and only heard blurbs while awaiting my morning/evening news reports on traffic & weather while commuting in my truck.

After the verdict, I heard one of the male jurors say on CBS radio that they knew that Jackson was most likely a molester but that the evidence in this particular case simply did not support the prosecutions case.:mad:

From what I gathered, the mother of the accused victim was more bizzare (I personally almost cannot believe this!:rolleyes: )than even " Pastey White Twinkle-Toes"

[earschplitinloudenboomer]

...bet Marthas thinkin' ...dammit!

[fabsroman]

I just read the Forbes top 10 celebs from last year and thought to myself that we are utterly crazy as a nation.

While I like Mel Gibson, he was ranked number 1 in 2004 on Forbes list and he made $210 million that year. Please tell me how people can make $210 million in a year for being a celebrity. Hopefully, most of that money comes from overseas movie viewers and that is part of our imported product. Oh yeah, Oprah was number 3 and she also made $210 million. I would be done working for the rest of my life, that is for sure. How can a person spend $210 million? If you get a 10% return on your investments, you will have $21 million a year to spend without eating into any of the prinicpal.

Here are a couple of notables:

Steven Spielberg - $75 million
Michael Jordan - $35 million
Johnny Depp - $22 million
Jennifer Lopez - $17 million
Tom Cruise - $54 million I believe, or $75 million, I cannot remember now but does it really matter.

All within a year.

Then I was talking to some friends about how terrible athletes attitudes are nowadays. Probably because people like Lebron James get a 100 million dollar contract from Nike at age 18, exactly when they are considered an adult by the law and able to enter into contracts on their own behalf. How can an 18 year old have the ability to deal with 100 million? Hell, I doubt I could deal with 100 million, but I would do my best to invest it wisely and spend a modest amount, that is for sure.


As far as whether Michael Jackson or OJ was guilty, they probably were, but I tend not to express an opinion on those things since I was present for the entire trial. We selectively believe things that we hear on the news just because we want to. However, we also know that everything reported isn't always right. So, while Michael Jackson definitely has some issues, nobody on here actually knows whether or not he is guilty and I am willing to bet that nobody on here was present during the entire trial.

[Steverino]

Personally Fabs,

LOL
I'm not sure that if I was actually paid 100 million, I'd sit for the entirety as a juror on that Jackson trial. I think I'd be spending it all on psychiatric treatment and counseling to get my head screwed back on straight from all the bizaare testimony and witnesses.;)

[PJgunner]

You probably all know that the jurors all had to fill out a questoinaire prior to selection. Fox new uesterday brought out some interesting data from those questionaires.
1. Six of the jurors stated they were fans of MJ. :eek:
2. Another juror said that while her was not a fan, he considerd MJ to be, "a great artist." :eek: :rolleyes:
3. Another juror, and eldrly grandmother said either her son or grandson was. "a convicted sex offender." :eek: :mad:
And so seven of the jury should have been excused from the get go in my not very humble opinion.
It appears, the with a bumbling prosecutor, a tainted (IN MY OPINION) jury, MJ had a walk. A very scarey walk, but a walk nonetheless. :eek:

FWIW, I've been called for jury duty only three times in my life. All three were criminal cases, two state (burglaries) and one federal (Capitol murder of a federal agent.) I have been excused for the simple reason that my ex-son-in-law is in law enforcement. :confused: :(
Yet six fans and a relative of a convicted offender are part of the jury? Where's the outrage?
Paul B.

[fabsroman]

That does sound somewhat ridiculous. I guess the state really didn't want a conviction. Could you imagine Michael Jackson in jail?

Well, at least Martha Stewart got conviceted of white collar crime and had to do some time in a country club. Not all the stars get off, it just seems as though the stars get off of the violent crimes. I was about to say that white collar/non-violent crime is better than violent crime, but then I thought better of it because there are some people out there defrauding people out of their entire life savings.

[rubicon]

News said Wacko says he is going to stop sleeping with little boys.
Yea- Right- When pigs fly.

[VinVega]

Originally posted by rubicon
News said Wacko says he is going to stop sleeping with little boys.
Yea- Right- When pigs fly.


You know, that whole statement really bothers me. A 45 or whatever year old man should never say "Alright, NOW I'll stop sleeping with boys." I know there aren't any laws, but something needs to be done about someone being that screwy.

[Valigator]

Yea my boss was so mad yesterday he said he didnt want any of the news shows on while we worked.....but fabs would be an expert on how a jury is instructed and the perimiters of what they can do and not do...as lay people we all knew if it walked like a duck well you know...but I can almost visualize it now...parents who are star struck getting involved with this freak again....we all know celebs have a financial target on their back...Kobe comes to mind ....but the real trajedy is Jacko is a pedophile...and he wont stop...might slow down and stick with a few vulnerable targets ...but he wont stop.....so the state will be very hard pressed to charge him again...especially by Snedden...so ...even with all this money and time and effort thrown at Jackson...he will continue his nasty little habit...and the world will throw their hands up in disgust.....

[Nulle]

I will not even speak on this topic or there could very well be a rage set in that I can't control !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[fabsroman]

Val,

A jury is usually instructed pretty well by the judge. However, that does not mean that a jury will follow the judges instructions and sometimes personal bias plays a role. If anybody could figure out why a jury goes one way or another, they would be very rich. In fact, there are jury selection experts that some of the larger firms use for big trials.

In civil trials, and probably criminal trials (i.e., I don't do jury criminal trials), the judge has the ability to overrule the jury's verdict, but only if the evidence is overwhelmingly against the jury's verdict.

Our justice system isn't perfect and continues to be revamped, but it is a lot better than most legal systems.

Regarding Kobe, what makes you think that he was innocent and that this girl was just framing him for money. I would love to put a poll up about Kobe, Michael Jackson, Robert Blake, and OJ to see how many people think they are innocent, guilty, or just plain do not have an opinion. I believe the majority on this board would fry these guys.

[PJgunner]

One of the things that has bothered me is "jury nullification". According to what I understand, it is a Constitutional right. If that is the case, how in hell can a judge have the right to instruct a jury that they cannot use the jury nullification right, if they feel the law does not apply in a particular case? That judge has "Nullified" my Constitutional right to jury nullification.
I just hope I posed that question correctly. The only reason I bring this up is when I was in the selection process, one of the first questions the judge asked was if anyone believed in JN, and if so, please raise your hand. IIRC, there were probably 100 people in the prospective jurors panel, and only two were willing to admit they knew what it was. I just kept my big mouth shut. I got excused because of having an ex-son-in-law in law enforcement. :mad: :(
Paul B.

[Aim to maim]

Originally posted by PJgunner
One of the things that has bothered me is "jury nullification". According to what I understand, it is a Constitutional right. If that is the case, how in hell can a judge have the right to instruct a jury that they cannot use the jury nullification right, if they feel the law does not apply in a particular case? That judge has "Nullified" my Constitutional right to jury nullification.
IPaul B.

I'm not a Constitutional law scholar, but I'm not aware of any part of the Consitution that addresses jury nullification or makes it a right. Any lawyers out there that can elaborate on this matter?

[fabsroman]

http://www.greenmac.com/eagle/ISSUES/ISSUE23-9/07JuryNullification.html


This is a link to an article about jury nullification. I read the first half and it seems to be pretty good, but I have mixed feelings about jury nullification. Granted, I am sure it happens plenty of times without the judges or attorneys even knowing it happens.

[Aim to maim]

Thanks for posting the article Fabs. I read it twice and still failed to find anything that specified exactly which article or amendment addresses jury nullification or makes it a Constitutional right. The article reminded me of some of those written by folks who claim that that the federal income tax is unconstitutional. (I detest paying income taxes in light of what some of my taxes are spent on, but arguing that income taxes are unconstitutional is futile).
Legal babble as used by attorneys and lawmakers can sometimes be disingenuous, but quasi-legal fuzzy logic is even worse and is potentially dangerous.

I don't have terribly strong feelings one way or another about jury nullification, but I can find no evidence that it is a Constitutional right.

[fabsroman]

To be honest with you, I had never heard of it before this thread, but I do find it quite intriguing.

As far as attorneys are concerned, we try to take the grey areas in the law and make them even greyer if it benefits our client. Our job is to argue the law, and there are several areas of the law that aren't defined (i.e., no case law or statute covering the exact subject matter).