For those of you who "don't care" about the Michael Jackson case

[hollywood926]

First of all, you DO care or you wouldn't open the thread. When I see a thread that doesn't interest me, I do not open it. If that thread interests no one, it will fall to the bottom.

What you are actually doing is making a point to make people think such stories are "beneath" you because "there is a war going on" and Bush is destroying Social Security."

And yet...here you are...in the lounge....

:eyes:

[Texasgal]

1. Ofcourse I care.

I hope he finally gets what he deserves, JAIL TIME.

[nickinSTL]

3. I'm glad to see you believe in innocent until PROVEN guilty

Isn't that the basis on which our legal system is founded?

I don't know whether he's guilty or not. And neither do you.

That's why there's a trial.

[Texasgal]

4. Duh!

Ofcourse I know there's a trial, and that he is innocent until proven guilty..... Sheesh!

I personally believe the man is GUILTY and I hope he gets jail time.

[CatWoman]

11. yikes!!!

we have our very own Nancy Grace.

[Texasgal]

14. Oh c'mon....

I personally have an OPINION about Jackson, I think he's guilty... I also thought Peterson was guilty, as well as Dahmer.... so shoot me! I have an opinion....... why am I being crucified?

Hell, for all I know he may be found INNOCENT, but honestly... I will think that he has gotten away with this crime another time, I will however except that because he did go through the judicial system. Is that okay????

[nickinSTL]

21. it's fine that you have an opinion

but you make it clear that you think he should be convicted.

My question is...based on what?

The evidence? As far as I know, the public has been able to see very little of that.

So, is it the freak factor? The fact that he looks and acts weird, so he must be guilty?

Or is it just that he was accused previously? That doesn't prove anything. He is known to share his bed with children, which is totally inappropriate, but it also would provide an easy target, if he were not guilty and someone wanted to accuse him of something.

[Texasgal]

32. Of course I am not basing my opinion

on what he looks like.... Give me more credit than that!

Weeks ago, the smoking gun put out the transcripts from the victim, in those transcripts he gives a very detailed account of some sort of molestation. Given the fact that Jackson has already paid off another family, I am tending to kinda go with what this young boy says. It's unbelievable to me that a child would be coached to lie about molestation in such an articulate manner.

Think about it this way, why would this boy and his family REALLY wanna go to court? With this type of backlash from Jackson supporters I would be afraid to go! This part of the case has nothing to do with money, this is a CRIMINAL case. The family will have to SUE him if they want money,. which I am sure they will doI don't necessarily agree with that aspect, but right now, I have an opinion about the CRIMINAL case.

[Bluebear]

15. LOL I can hear Nancy's voice saying the words of the post!

:toast:

[AlCzervik]

16. but does she have Nancy's flaming nostrils of justice?

[ronnykmarshall]

37. Come on photo shoppers!

That's the assignment for today!

[AlCzervik]

40. i don't even need to photoshop her

you could drive a truck up them blow holes.

[ronnykmarshall]

42. DAY-UM!!!

THAR SHE BLOWS!

[AngryAmish]

24. This is a common fallacy

"Innocent until proven guilty" is the standard to which only the judge and jurors have to hold themselves. Everyone else is entitled to their opinion in a free society.

Do the police and the prosecutors have to think everyone is innocent until proven guilty? Hell no. Imagine the mischief if the state sincerely does not believe one did a crime before they brought a case. The prosecutor would put people on trial only if they think they can win a case, not if someone committed a crime.

[Zuni]

31. Thank you

we are allowed our own opinions.

A jury is the one that has to remain objective

[CO Liberal]

2. But If You Remain Silent....

...crap goes on all around you.

Sure, there are more important things going on in teh world. But that doesn't mean that we should ignore the small stuff. We ignored the small stuff in the early '90s, and the GOP took over everything.

[Bluebear]

5. False arrest and trial by media should concern everyone

I have no idea if he is guilty or not. Yes, he is a strange, strange man.... but where it may be trendy to scoff at the trial and show 'no interest', I don't think it's a small matter.

This DA or Sheriff (Sneddon?) has had it in for Jackson for a long time. Who knows HIS motivation for pursuing this? And a lot of weird parents with dollar signs in their eyes seem to be part of the circus.

[hollywood926]

7. I wasn't talking about those of you who are actually interested...

I was referring to people who inevitably jump into the MJ threads and criticize us for even talking about it when "there are so many more important things going on."

They did the same thing during the Scott Peterson trial.

[Zuni]

12. I like reading about court cases

and I am very interested in the MJ trial.
Are we supposed to worry about Iraq and SS 24/7?

[Texasgal]

8. You know what?

I thought Scott Peterson was guilty too, I also thought that Dahmer was guilty...I think Jackson is guilty, that's my opinion.

[Dogmudgeon]

13. You know what they say

"If suspects weren't guilty, they wouldn't be on trial."

Mind you, Ed Meese (Reagan's AG) said this.

--p!

[Seabiscuit]

28. I also strongly suspected Dahmer, Westerfield, Peterson were guilty.

And I also strongly suspect Jackson's a friggin' pervert and should be kept away from children (including his own). The legal standard has nothing to do with my suspicions. They're just my suspicions based on what I've learned to date.

So far my gut instinct has been batting a thousand.

[CO Liberal]

19. DAs and Sherriffs Usualy DO Have It In For Criminals

And I believe that Michael jackson's behavior around young boys has been nothing but criminal for years.

[Bluebear]

20. Perhaps so, but why do people critcize people who are interested?

I am not in any way glued to the trial, but some people are. Why make a point that it is beneath one or one could give a damn to try to shame the posters who are? (not you, just a generic comment)

[CO Liberal]

26. I'm Not Dissing People Who Are Interested In This Trial

But I AM dissing those who have their heads in the sand and are convinced of jackson's innocence in the light of overwhelming evidence of his actions.

[Bluebear]

27. Truly, I have seen no evidence

I mean this in with the most respect possible. I have seen what the media has told us. He is an odd odd odd man. I had heard no EVIDENCE of molestation until the other day (the kid's brother)...and then learned that he lied on the stand. So what evidence have I missed? I have no stake in this either way, I just want a fair trial.

[CO Liberal]

33. Watch the BBC Documentary

You'll see more than enough evidence that this cretin has a well-established pattern of abusion young boys.

[Zuni]

41. read "All that Glitters"

it is by a guy named Chandler. His nephew, Jordan, was the boy in the 1993 molestation case

It is a very detailed and believable account of MJ's predatory nature

[medeak]

6. It's like watching a train wreck

will never forget OJ chase.. was hosting huge party and everyone was gathered at tv.

surreal.

[progmom]

9. "And yet...here you are...in the lounge...."

I'm not sure what the point of that was, except maybe to make me feel like an asshole for posting in the Lounge.

[hollywood926]

17. No, no, no...

I didn't mean that at all. I love the lounge. But my point was, the lounge is the appropriate place to have silly (or not-so-silly) conversations about the MJ situation. If you're one of those who seems to think the MJ discussion is beneath you, then why are you in the lounge opening threads about MJ?

That was what I meant.

[progmom]

43. ok. that's cool.

I don't think the Jackson case is beneath me, btw. I loved MJ as a kid, and this whole thing freaks me out. So I have been trying to avoid it. That's my story! :hi:

[Zuni]

10. excellent. Court cases interest me

and I feel that jackson is open to discussion. I cannot think of Bush 24/7

[Dookus]

18. right on

there's way too many people here who just LOVE to condemn other people for what they read, watch, eat, etc.

I don't understand it - if you don't care, don't click. There's a thousand threads here about bands I don't care for, but I don't attack the people who like them.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

22. there are degrees of caring

i care enough that i will open a teaser about the case but not even that i would have read this if it were more than a paragraph. also really dont care about the outcome.

however i read pages upon pages about the war and social security and do care about the outcome

[Bouncy Ball]

23. Sometimes I open things out of curiosity

or to see if there's a flamefest, not necessarily because I "care" about the topic at hand.

I don't watch the news and I haven't kept up with the Michael Jackson story at all.

So what's your beef?

[Bluebear]

25. I think the OP's beef is....

having opened the thread out of curiosity, you (BB) would never say "Oh I could care less about this, why are you wasting time posting about this?"

[redqueen]

30. Oh well if that's the point...

then yeah, that's a good point.

Nothing like someone wasting their precious, precious time to bitch about something they supposedly care nothing about.

[Bouncy Ball]

35. LOL, how much time and energy does it take to make one mouse

click and how does the OP know people didn't just click right the heck back out of the thread once they saw it was a gotcha thread?

[redqueen]

29. Geezaloo what is with the holier than thou posts about the Lounge lately?

:eyes: right back at ya, buddy.

[Redstone]

34. Damn, I'm disappointed.

I thought you were going to say "For those of you who don't care about the Michael Jackson case, I'm going to spare you having to endure another post about it."

Redstone

PS: Hollywood, how you doing with your situation that you asked for advice about a couple of days ago? Doing well, I hope.

[hollywood926]

36. If I was doing well, I wouldn't care about the MJ threads, either...

;-)

But I only see her on weekends, so that's why. I will keep you posted!

[skygazer]

38. I DON'T care about the Michael Jackson case

I just open these threads because I enjoy the flame wars they create.

Oh, and it's not that I think it's "beneath" me - I just plain don't care. It's like Laci Peterson - of course it's tragic when a woman is killed by her husband or a child is abused but it happens every single day, multiple times a day. Focusing on one instance, just because it's a pop star or an attractive white woman from a nice neighborhood does a disservice to all the other victims of these crimes whose cases are forgotten or never heard about in the first place. The only reason it's on TV is because the media knows it will bring in viewers.

If anyone ever did any real reporting about the actual statistics behind these crimes, the prevalence, the percentages of perpetrators who are never brought to justice, the fact that it can happen to those of all racial, economic and educational backgrounds, that would be actual news.

Now I'm going to make some popcorn and get back to enjoying the flamefests.

[Beware the Beast Man]

39. I do care, however, about intentional flame-baiting.

Which by the tone of your last sentence (with the :eyes: for emphasis), you seem to be doing.