official May 10 2005 thread

BillieJeanLover

New member
I agree with you HotMJ. And we know the media bashing is alive, well and kicking, and has been for a long time.

This jury is not sequential, so they are free to watch the TV. Are they not? That is why it is paramount that we pray that some of them will be able to see through all of the nonsense and sea of biased haze that is being put out there by some in the media. Hopefully, some of them, and preferably all of them, will see the evidence presented in the prosecution case for what it was, is and was not. It stinks, and it is not believable, which translates to one being doubtful of it, and especially when they witnessed how Mez tore apart near bout every prosecution witness' testimony.

Those in the jury are just like we are, for the most part. They've heard what we've heard, and then some. I can't believe that they don't already know how they feel about what the prosecution conveyed or tried to convey to them. What would be the point of them listening to the DA if they weren't going to try to understand in their own minds if they believed what was presented to them?

Half of their battle is over. They now have to hear the defense side, and then add, deduct, credit or discredit what they've heard or will hear.

Some in the media are trying to infuence them, because they know the jury is not sequentialed. Again, hopefully, they will be able to weed out all of the BS and reach a fair decision, and especially after they hear the defense evidence. But no one can convince me that they haven't already surmised what they've heard from the DA, and that has to do with whether they believe none, some, most or all of the DA evidence.

Remember, if we can see through all the mess the prosecution tried to spew, why can't they? After all, they are in the living room of the court where the real evidence is being presented.

Hello Carla. Thanks for that.
 

Frenchy

New member
Originally posted by BillieJeanLover
This jury is not sequential, so they are free to watch the TV. Are they not?

I don't think that the jury has the right to read or watch anything about the case, whether on TV or in newspapers. I might be mistaken but I would be VERY surprised and angry if they were allowed to do that. Because in this case, it is OBVIOUS that Michael cannot get a fair trial with all the crap you hear on TV about Michael.

So all that BS about a member of the jury that could be kicked out because their sister works with someone involved in the case... then they could watch Nancy Grace and read Robert Friedman, but they can't be remotely connected to someone involved in the case?... Doesn't make sense. I really think that they can only get information from the courtroom, period. Anybody knows for sure?
 

got2makeitright

New member
Originally posted by BillieJeanLover
I can't believe that you are intentionally missing the points.

Point one: The procecution did not prove their case.
Point two: The defense doesn't have to prove Michael is innocent, they just have to prove a reasonable doubt.
Point three: Michael is innocent.

And so how are you going to help Michael not get convicted, and although he is innocent? You must be of the mind that up until now, the procecution has proven their case, so the defense has an uphill battle to prove theirs. I disagree. The prosecution did not prove their case, so the defense has that fact and others to prove a reasonable doubt.

Lastly, most of us do see the above, so we have faith that Micahel will be proven not guilty. This is based on the fact that the prosecution did not prove theirs. Talk about going on home.

And in my opinion, God is in charge.


I dont seem to understand why many fans would think that Michael team has better stuff to prove? All that Michael has is reasonable doubt right? :thumbsup
 

HotMJ!

New member
Originally posted by Frenchy


Oh my God, sorry but I so disagree. Who do you think it going to say Michael is innocent or guilty? For God's sake, that's up to 12 people. Mike's fate is in their hands. Even the judge doesn't have a say in this. I understand and I agree with you that public opinion is paramount to Michael. BUT that's exactly why Michael needs to be found innocent in a court of law: so that, WHEN he's found innocent, people who still think he's guilty can have their dirty mouth shut up by the verdict...

I never said the jury wasn't important. Your words, not mine.

My point is that it's the media which is fighting the truth of the matter, NOT the jury.


:bustbubbl


.
 
Top