koprulestheworld
New member
THIS HAS TO BE FUNNY!! http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7762005/
Rage at the prosecutor
Readers weigh in on whether
Jackson case has been proven Most readers felt Sneddon was unable to effective make his case against Jackson.
MSNBC
Updated: 5:27 p.m. ET May 6, 2005As prosecutors in the the Michael Jackson case wound up their case, we wondered whether they had really done enough to prove the molestation and conspiracy charges against the King of Pop.
Most of you felt, emphatically, that they hadn't. And many of you specifically blamed District Attorney Thomas Sneddon, who has long attempted to bring charges against Jackson for his behavior toward young boys.
Did Sneddon manage to make an effective case to jurors? Some of your thoughts:
Jackson will walk
"No. The allegations of the accusers were seriously compromised by the bizarre actions and uneven testimony of the alleged victim's mother. In fact, the whole family appears sadly dysfunctional and in need of help. Michael Jackson's confirmed fixation with young boys is sickening, but the prosecution's case against him is flimsy and full of inconsistencies." -John, Lafayette, La.
"Hell no! It's obvious that they just want to bring another big-time black man down. Modern day lynching is alive and well in America." -Reggie, Delray Beach, Fla.
"No, although I think Jackson should seek some serious, serious counseling. I have to think Sneddon should join Jackson for counseling as well." -Tom, San Diego, Calif.
"The prosecution has done all but prove the DEFENSE'S case at this point. Their witnesses all lacked the credibility needed to prosecute such a case, and all their creepy stories combined can't touch the fact that the defense is going to seal this deal with their witnesses." -Marsha, Cleveland, Ohio
"The prosecution looks like amateurs in need of the lesson they are about to receive. That's how to lose a case from blindsided witnesses and not doing their homework." -Sam, Washington, Utah
"It's like an episode of the Simpsons with Homer as the lead prosecutor." -Gina, Tenn.
"No. Why do we keep going on an on about this? I'm not a fan of Michael, but there has been nothing to suggest to me that he has done anything other than be a little crazy. I don't have enough hands to count the number of stars that have gone crazy, drugs, etc. Let the man go home to his ranch and let him be crazy by himself." -Eugene, Louisville, Ky.
"No, all they have proven is what we already knew, Jackson is one of the strangest human beings on the planet, but they have not proven that he is a pedophile." -Judith, Frisco, Texas
Sneddon's shortfalls
"The prosecutors' job is not only to determine if a crime has been committed, but also weigh the evidence to determine if a conviction is possible. ... Is Sneddon so incompetent that he did not foresee the numerous holes in his case? Or did Sneddon use the alleged victims as a pretext to pursue his own private war?" -Eric, Milwaukee, Wis.
"Tom Sneddon is a fool full of revenge. If it wasn't personal, he would have let someone else lead the prosecution." -Mark, Anna, Texas
"Jackson's prosecutors have not only NOT proven their case, they have made a mockery of the entire process. Tom Sneddon appears like a backwoods hillbilly trying to go after Jackson, apparently because of an old grudge that really amounts to his own prejudice for someone who is different than him." -Gregg, Sausalito, Calif.
Having doubts
"I'm not sure that they have proven a case against MJ but I know that if you are a predator you know which victims to prey on and which ones you need to just leave alone." -Gil, Pico Rivera, Calif.
"While the prosecution witnesses may have had a 'tendency to self-destruct,' perhaps we need to see (though I doubt it) if the defense witnesses will follow the same pattern." -Larry, Springfield, Mo.
But did prosecutors prove it?
"Yes, of course. If it looks like a duck, quacks like one, walks like one and smells like one, it has always been a duck, even a really weird one." -Dante, San Francisco, Calif.
"I am a huge fan of Michael Jackson's but I truly believe that he is guilty of the allegations set forth against him. I believe that the prosecution has done a great job proving their case." -Deanna, Erie, Pa.
"Yes, they have. You see, Michael Jackson makes sure that he involves himself with people who have 'character flaws.' Do you think for one minute Jackson would try to sleep with son of a Harvard graduate? Give me a break." -Karen, Dedham, Mass.
"Is common sense lost? You don't give $2.4 million to someone for nothing. You don't give $20 million to someone for nothing. You don't beg for children to sleep with you. Unless, of course, you are a pedophile." -Melissa, Vilonia, Ark.
"In my mind, yes. It is obvious that the defense witnesses are not going to testify against him as his past history shows large cash payouts. One would expect his former wife to testify in his favor considering the fact she now has a nice home in Beverly Hills and is reported to receive $1 million per year." -Jim, Woodland Hills, Calif.
Blame California
"Yes, but what difference does it make? Michael Jackson will walk, you can count on it. This is California!" -Bruce, Nashville, Tenn.
"Not only have they NOT proved their case, they should be brought up on charges themselves. It seems that California hires the worst justice system possible. They are more interested in seeing themselves on TV or as a superstar than in getting to the truth." -Betty, Louisville, Colo.
Some comments edited for length and clarity.
Rage at the prosecutor
Readers weigh in on whether
Jackson case has been proven Most readers felt Sneddon was unable to effective make his case against Jackson.
MSNBC
Updated: 5:27 p.m. ET May 6, 2005As prosecutors in the the Michael Jackson case wound up their case, we wondered whether they had really done enough to prove the molestation and conspiracy charges against the King of Pop.
Most of you felt, emphatically, that they hadn't. And many of you specifically blamed District Attorney Thomas Sneddon, who has long attempted to bring charges against Jackson for his behavior toward young boys.
Did Sneddon manage to make an effective case to jurors? Some of your thoughts:
Jackson will walk
"No. The allegations of the accusers were seriously compromised by the bizarre actions and uneven testimony of the alleged victim's mother. In fact, the whole family appears sadly dysfunctional and in need of help. Michael Jackson's confirmed fixation with young boys is sickening, but the prosecution's case against him is flimsy and full of inconsistencies." -John, Lafayette, La.
"Hell no! It's obvious that they just want to bring another big-time black man down. Modern day lynching is alive and well in America." -Reggie, Delray Beach, Fla.
"No, although I think Jackson should seek some serious, serious counseling. I have to think Sneddon should join Jackson for counseling as well." -Tom, San Diego, Calif.
"The prosecution has done all but prove the DEFENSE'S case at this point. Their witnesses all lacked the credibility needed to prosecute such a case, and all their creepy stories combined can't touch the fact that the defense is going to seal this deal with their witnesses." -Marsha, Cleveland, Ohio
"The prosecution looks like amateurs in need of the lesson they are about to receive. That's how to lose a case from blindsided witnesses and not doing their homework." -Sam, Washington, Utah
"It's like an episode of the Simpsons with Homer as the lead prosecutor." -Gina, Tenn.
"No. Why do we keep going on an on about this? I'm not a fan of Michael, but there has been nothing to suggest to me that he has done anything other than be a little crazy. I don't have enough hands to count the number of stars that have gone crazy, drugs, etc. Let the man go home to his ranch and let him be crazy by himself." -Eugene, Louisville, Ky.
"No, all they have proven is what we already knew, Jackson is one of the strangest human beings on the planet, but they have not proven that he is a pedophile." -Judith, Frisco, Texas
Sneddon's shortfalls
"The prosecutors' job is not only to determine if a crime has been committed, but also weigh the evidence to determine if a conviction is possible. ... Is Sneddon so incompetent that he did not foresee the numerous holes in his case? Or did Sneddon use the alleged victims as a pretext to pursue his own private war?" -Eric, Milwaukee, Wis.
"Tom Sneddon is a fool full of revenge. If it wasn't personal, he would have let someone else lead the prosecution." -Mark, Anna, Texas
"Jackson's prosecutors have not only NOT proven their case, they have made a mockery of the entire process. Tom Sneddon appears like a backwoods hillbilly trying to go after Jackson, apparently because of an old grudge that really amounts to his own prejudice for someone who is different than him." -Gregg, Sausalito, Calif.
Having doubts
"I'm not sure that they have proven a case against MJ but I know that if you are a predator you know which victims to prey on and which ones you need to just leave alone." -Gil, Pico Rivera, Calif.
"While the prosecution witnesses may have had a 'tendency to self-destruct,' perhaps we need to see (though I doubt it) if the defense witnesses will follow the same pattern." -Larry, Springfield, Mo.
But did prosecutors prove it?
"Yes, of course. If it looks like a duck, quacks like one, walks like one and smells like one, it has always been a duck, even a really weird one." -Dante, San Francisco, Calif.
"I am a huge fan of Michael Jackson's but I truly believe that he is guilty of the allegations set forth against him. I believe that the prosecution has done a great job proving their case." -Deanna, Erie, Pa.
"Yes, they have. You see, Michael Jackson makes sure that he involves himself with people who have 'character flaws.' Do you think for one minute Jackson would try to sleep with son of a Harvard graduate? Give me a break." -Karen, Dedham, Mass.
"Is common sense lost? You don't give $2.4 million to someone for nothing. You don't give $20 million to someone for nothing. You don't beg for children to sleep with you. Unless, of course, you are a pedophile." -Melissa, Vilonia, Ark.
"In my mind, yes. It is obvious that the defense witnesses are not going to testify against him as his past history shows large cash payouts. One would expect his former wife to testify in his favor considering the fact she now has a nice home in Beverly Hills and is reported to receive $1 million per year." -Jim, Woodland Hills, Calif.
Blame California
"Yes, but what difference does it make? Michael Jackson will walk, you can count on it. This is California!" -Bruce, Nashville, Tenn.
"Not only have they NOT proved their case, they should be brought up on charges themselves. It seems that California hires the worst justice system possible. They are more interested in seeing themselves on TV or as a superstar than in getting to the truth." -Betty, Louisville, Colo.
Some comments edited for length and clarity.
