Offical 31st May 2005 Thread: No court today, just discussion about instru.

S

sistahlamb

New member
Whoa whoa!!! Wait a minute!!!

What happened to this???

25658. (a) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision ©, every
person who sells, furnishes, gives, or causes to be sold, furnished,
or given away, any alcoholic beverage to any person under the age of
21 years is guilty of a misdemeanor.

...

(2) Except as provided in paragraph (3), any person who violates
subdivision (a) by furnishing an alcoholic beverage, or causing an
alcoholic beverage to be furnished, to a minor shall be punished by a
fine of one thousand dollars ($1,000), no part of which shall be
suspended, and the person shall be required to perform not less than
24 hours of community service during hours when the person is not
employed and is not attending school.
 
M

MJISHOT

New member
Originally posted by NevaehDreamz
No.

All of them have to agree, otherwise it will be a hung jury and the case can be retried.
Click to expand...

oh dear, thats hard tho... if they all have sense they will all vote not guilty, but maybe one may disagree... :thumbsdow
 
L

LadyJackson

New member
The judge is a word that I can't say because if I say it, I'll get kicked off this board!! :screaming

Now he wants to put this lame ass furnishing charge in there and that is truly a violation of Michael's rights!!! He is charged with USING ALCOHOL FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMMITTING A FELONY, NOT FURNISHING!!!!!!!! I HATE THAT JUDGE SOOOOOOO MUCH!!! :screaming
 
C

Cristine87

New member
I don't see how the hell they can get Michael on the alcohol charge. Did anybody say they saw Michael giving these kids alcohol? Is there any evidence at all that Michael gave these kids alcohol? Maybe I missed something!
 
S

sistahlamb

New member
Exactly Christine. There is no proof and the only thing that has been proven regarding the alcholol charge is G and his brother were getting it themselves and boozing when Michael wasn't anywhere near NL!!!!

How the hell the prosecution will be able to prove that charge, I don't really think they can.
 
C

Cristine87

New member
Yeah, that's just it! They can't prove it! How can a jury of 12 convict Michael on this charge when it's such a weak ass charge? These kids drank alcohol on their own & there's no evidence that Michael had anything to do with it.
 
S

sistahlamb

New member
Whatever happened to the conspirisy charge???

Will that be excluded from closings since it is basically a nonexistant charge at this point???
 
S

SapphireScorpio

New member
procisely. There is no, physical evidence or proof that Michael Jackson gave Gavin and Star Arviso any alchol of any kind. The only evidence, which I must say in opinion, absolutely, posotufely cr*p. The jurors have only got the word of Gavin anf his young brother, Star. And with anyone, your mouth is the only way of escaping truth. You can lie like hell, and you would get away with blue murder. So people, like Gavin are all actors/actresses. They have been rehearsed.

More people have said, from the prosecution and defense that Gavin and Star (sometimes encluding Devilain) being caught drinking alchol. The jurors are likely to say that Michael Jackson is not guilty of that charge, because where is the evidence? Is it right in front of their eyes? no. Is there are bottle of wine, on the evidence table? no. So what are the jurors going to say, to that charge? Not Guilty! Like with the rest of the charges. Where are all the other evidence? Like;

Urine/Blood/Skin samples?
Bottle of "Jesus Juice" Wine?
Condoms?
Sperm?

Nowhere. So just don't allow this to get to you, you guys. We are know that Michael Jackson is a innocent man; yes he will be free, but he will be marked as a man that has had too much against him in his life; people, paparazzi, news reporters...But Michael will and will always be innocent. Don't allow this to get to you.
 
S

senecajackson

New member
Originally posted by Cristine87
Yeah, that's just it! They can't prove it! How can a jury of 12 convict Michael on this charge when it's such a weak ass charge? These kids drank alcohol on their own & there's no evidence that Michael had anything to do with it.
Click to expand...

Good point! :thumbsup
See ya'll this just goes to show how DESPERATE the prosecution is!
I never seen anyone that wanted someone to be childmolester more than Tom Sneddon wants Michael to be!

I hate this! This is so unfair of them to throw that charge in! :nonono:
 
F

frozen rose

New member
Maybe the reason Sneddon wants Michael to be proven a molestator, is because Sneddon is one himself, but just doesn't want to admit it.
 
S

sistahlamb

New member
Looking forward to it.

i've said this once and I'll say it again:

I think in a trial like this, after closing statements, Michael is only going to look guilty or not guilty - not anywhere in between.

And usually when a defendant is so obviously guilty or not guilty, the jury could come back with a virdict within a couple of hours or a few days.

Let's hope that this is the situation after closing statements are finished.
 
T

ThrillerGirl_

New member
I'm so prepared for Mez's closing arguments, I bet he they have put a lot of work into them and I can't wait to hear it! I can't imagine anything smart to come out from Sneddon's mouth during his closing arguments.. I mean what the heck can he prove? All his witnesses were total vrecks! I believe in Michael's team 100% but I'm still kinda nervous for the verdict day. You know, it's all about the jury but I believe that they're smart enough to aqcuit him. I'll be praying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top