official May 9 2005 thread

[maintenant]

Originally posted by Cristine87
Why would it hurt his career? That's just stupid! Friedman needs to stop talking out of his ass. This crap about his career being over because of the case, Michael Jackson is not one of these little teeny bopper pop stars. He's not just some guy who came about 5 or 6 years ago. He's not Justin Timberlake or britney spears or Beyonce or Usher. He is Michael Jackson, the undisputed king of pop & he has been in this business making hit records for over 40 years, he revolutionized the industry, he's broken records, he's the biggest selling artist alive today & he made the best selling album of all time! I don't care if Michael doesn't sell another record for the rest of his damn life, the man is a LEGEND! His career is legendary & has yet to be topped by anyone else so people need to stop talking shit!

You are so right, Cristine. And the guy has lots of other ideas and innovations up his sleeve--just because these lame-brains can't see farther than the end of their noses! And still, no one has yet explained how Mac's testifying on Michael's behalf could hurt his career. Is it suddenly BAD to be a friend of Michael's? Is the "winning side" to be those throwimg rotten tomatoes at him? Hardly. Anyway, one thing that always HELPS celebrities is visibility, and they pay publicists big bucks to keep them in the public eye. Here, Mac's getting tons of free publicity, plus he's clearing his name from all the dirt others have been throwing at it. Michael Jackson is not a man swirling down into a whirlpool, and diving in with him does not equal a drowning.

 

[maintenant]

Originally posted by MJISHOT
that is SUCH a gorgeous picture!! I just want to run my fingers through his hair, it looks so soft!

The skin of his neck looks so kissable! God, but I hate it that he has go through all this.

 

[MJ_FAN_FOR_LIFE733]

The defense is doing a great job! :thumbsup :sneddoncrybaby Sneddumb knows that he's losing the battle because he has no so-called "evidence" and no " witnesses" to help convict Michael of these so-called "charges"

Gem,

The reason that some of us are scared about Michael taking the stand is because we know the sneddumb will to anything & everything to get the jury to covict Michael of these charges.

Ex: If Michael say No, I didn't molest those two boys, Then sneddumb will bring in witnesses that he didn't get to bring in the first time to go against what Michael says-that's the part that's got me really really nevreous. Does that help?? :idontknow

 

[HotMJ!]

Originally posted by maintenant


I completely disagree--it will not hurt his career and if anything it will help it. Just exactly HOW could it hurt it?

YES!! :thumbsup

Most people respect forthrightness and strength of character. Culkin has been denying these insinuations for years. If he does well on the stand (and he probably will) it well help his public profile - and his career.


:crystalball:

 

[HotMJ!]

Originally posted by motown lady


.... Just because this is an MJ board doesn't mean that I'm going to sit around and pretend everything is a breeze because, quite frankly, I think the defense has its work cut out for them on the molestation charges.

I disagree. IMO, the defense has ALREADY shown that these are clearly bogus charges that have come out of the mouths of liars. This case is already way beyond reasonable doubt. I believe this jury already thinks Mr. Jackson is not only innocent, but has been much abused by the Arvizo family and others.

In other words, from what I can tell, the jury concluded this entire case was a sham from the start.* I have read the transcripts, and I agree with them.

The defense is now trying to impact public opinion and the media. Good luck on that one! Yes, their work IS "cut out for them" there!

The media has and will propagandize the public to its own biases. Those biases include a decade-old belief in the 1993 case. The media is very loath to give up that belief. And as we now know, the media is also shallow, chasing ratings and sensationalism.

I only hope none of the jurors are threatened after they return the "not guilty" verdict. The media will aid and abet that.



* If you want chapter and verse on this, I can eaborate.

.

 

[HotMJ!]

MEA CULPA, y'all!

Well, I posted this:

Originally posted by HotMJ!+-->QUOTE (HotMJ!)

I agree about Dimond. Grace is a true-believer in Mike's guilt, but more ethical than Dimond.

I like Friedman. Much of the time he's good. I hope he's wrong about Michael's finances.

I worry though. The Catalog's value is increasing exponentially, but Dec. 20 will require cash on the barrel, not pie in the sky.


:goodtalki

[/b]

And Nevaeh Dreamz posted this back:


<!--QuoteBegin-NevaehDreamz


If you believe his garbage...good or bad, then you can't pick and choose what you want to believe.

I wish people would realize that 'broke' in rich terms is not the same a broke in our terms. I can say, oh yeah I'm broke because I only have $230 million left, when I need $300 million, and you'd look at me like...

:extremely


Don't worry about it. You'll never see Michael a homeless man on a streetcorner.


...but again. Friedman is a shithead. But whatever, believe what you want. Just remember that just because someone says something nice one day doesn't mean they are reliable.

[/quote]
So guess what? MEA CULPA (= my bad)!

I have just read Friedman's last 2 Jackson articles and decided that he does indeed have an animus towards Jackson. His mealy-mouthed rendition of the uplifting last 2 days of testimony, and his remark that the Santa Maria jury was "beleaguered, skeptical" (not true)* suddenly made me realize that Roger has an agenda after all! :uh_uh:

*light dawns* :bustbubbl


HotMJ!



* http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,156292,00.html


:bustbubbl