Only in California

[FullerH]

"You don't tug on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask from the old Lone Ranger
And you don't mess around with Jim."

Look, I don't for a minute excuse the feds for what happened at Waco, but Koresh bears more than a little responsibility in the scenario. It just makes no sense to go around picking unnecessary fights with the authorities.

Oh, and another mistake that you can add to the list of screw-ups that the feds made in Waco is that they were utterly unaware of the implications of Koresh's Doomsday, Apocalyptic Theology and its implications to the situation at hand.

 

[Geraldo]

His outlook on religion wasnt any wierder than say.. a Mormon , or a Catholic , I mean come on let all sorts of faiths in America , what was so wrong with his ?

Maybe in California, but where I come from, a religion that allows the self-proclaimed messiah to have sex with all females in his religion, regardless of age, crosses the legal line. And that religion is nowhere near Morman or Catholicism, or any other that I know of.

When a person or their minions fire on law enforcement who have come to serve a legal warrant, that crosses the line as well.

 

[fixer27]

...one thing you missed in adding to the long line of....Doomsday Theology...

I submit they didn't care, in the words of KC agent on hand

Honed, honed to a fine edge, honed to kill.

We're the Govt, we're here to help you.

All of this has very little to do with CA and MJ however so better to leave it
alone. CA is a very sick puppy IMO and if there ever is a housing bubble that
breaks the rich will be the first ones leaving and the whole house of cards
could fall. Meanwhile at least they got the Menendez and Peterson verdicts
correct IMO.

 

[not2sharp]

"A rich freak like Jackson , gets off scot free , twice now."

I am OK with it and I'll tell you why. Jackson has already gone through two very visible trials on this issue. There has been plenty of time and opportunity for any of his victims to step forward and demand justice. Up until last week all you would have to do is to walk up to the court house and your claim would have been instantly published across thousands of media venues. Not even the Catholic church scandal received this much press. That it didn't happen, that we didn't witness an endless litany of victims, is evidence that whatever MJ was doing was probably not as prevalent as some would believe.

n2s

 

[Gollnick]

"A rich freak like Jackson , gets off scot free , twice now."

I am OK with it and I'll tell you why. Jackson has already gone through two very visible trials on this issue. There has been plenty of time and opportunity for any of his victims to step forward and demand justice. Up until last week all you would have to do is to walk up to the court house and your claim would have been instantly published across thousands of media venues. Not even the Catholic church scandal received this much press. That it didn't happen, that we didn't witness an endless litany of victims, is evidence that whatever MJ was doing was probably not as prevalent as some would believe.

n2s

Exactly.

My guess is that the only reason the prosecutor went with this obviously lame case with this obviously zero-credibility "victim" was to try and draw out some other, better victims. This is why they made a huge show of the search. And don't tell me that they didn't tip the media off to that search. Satellite uplink trucks don't appear on zero-minutes notice. This is why they've searched every nook and cranny of every person who ever had any contact with Jackson, looking desparately for a name. This is why the delayed and delayed and delayed, hoping that someone would step forward and say, "me too." Nobody did, and they were stuck with the shister-woman.

If Jackson's this habitual child abuser, where's the line of victims?... Brazil, I guess.

 

[jsmatos]

I think that the system worked in this case. The onus is on the prosecution to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. They failed miserably. That's not to say that I'm happy about the verdict either. On the heels of the jury's decision, the best we can say is that we still don't know whether or not MJ is a pedophile. I found Not2sharp's comments to be insightful (I tried giving him credit, but it won't let me. ), but even that perspective doesn't necessarily prove that he hasn't molested. There's a lot of embarrassment in cases involving molestation especially where the molester is famous for being, well, a freak. Molestation cases are incredibly difficult to prove. Why come forward unless you have a good case...for the humiliation of it all? Nevertheless, he is a free man because there was certainly reasonable doubt in this matter. It is imperative that every member of our society receive a fair trial where the prosecutor is put through his/her paces to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. You wanna take someone's liberty away, you better damn well prove your case.

I must add that I was deeply disturbed by the sentiments expressed by some of the jurors about the mother because it reflects that "personalities" played a big, very emotional, role in the decision. Of course, that is always the case. But I'm still naive enough to hope that in a molestation case personalities would take a back seat.

BTW, if the kid isn't making eye contact with the defendant, it doesn't mean that he's lying. It might just mean that he's loath to look into the eyes of the man who molested him. (The eye contact statement came from one of the jurors too. )

 

[rebeltf]

I guess I got this thread almost off topic by mentioning Koresh and his people but it was the first thing that came to mind.
As far as Gerlado's comments "maybe in California".. Dont know where you come from but this was in Texas and I dont promote anything that comes out of my lefty state. My point was , to some folks Catholicism is quite odd , myself included but hey whatever floats your boat , right ? I have a good friend that hates Mormons for his own reasons , I dont mind em , hell I dont mind Hindus or kumquat worshippers for that matter.
By the way the part about

have sex with all females in his religion, regardless of age, crosses the legal line.

was alleged and disproven in interviews with survivors of the Federal massacre.

Anywas , Jackson is a freak.

 

[FullerH]

Thanks, JS. As usual, an insightful commentary on legal matters of high emotion.

 

[steellover]

Dear folks:

You do not convict people in our system if they MAY have done a crime. You must prove it.

A lot of people on this board claim to be patriotic Americans, but they really have more in common with Uncle Adolf and Uncle Joe.

 

[digdeep]

A famous underground author (Ragnar Benson) said Be careful, otherwise
the feds might show up, burn your church to the ground and then bulldoze
the place and put a fence around it and act like nothing had happened.

How very true.

Oh how people love to quote "separation of church and state" but have no problem with government intruding into religion - it's the saying of a prayer by a student at commencement ceremonies that they have a problem with or a lunch prayer said by a little girl before eating at school (Saratoga Springs, NY.)

I know where the concept of separation came from but it is definitley not in the constitution, bill of rights or any other legal document pertaining to our national origins.

The judicial branch of government has been systematically usurping the legislative branch to the point where the Courts now make the laws.

 

[fixer27]

Oh how people love to quote "separation of church and state" but have no problem with government intruding into religion - it's the saying of a prayer by a student at commencement ceremonies that they have a problem with or a lunch prayer said by a little girl before eating at school (Saratoga Springs, NY.)

I know where the concept of separation came from but it is definitley not in the constitution, bill of rights or any other legal document pertaining to our national origins.

The judicial branch of government has been systematically usurping the legislative branch to the point where the Courts now make the laws.


Post deleted delete delete

 

[Bronco]

Maybe in California, but where I come from, a religion that allows the self-proclaimed messiah to have sex with all females in his religion, regardless of age, crosses the legal line. And that religion is nowhere near Morman or Catholicism, or any other that I know of.

Geraldo, have you ever been to Hildale, Utah or Colorado City, Arizona?

 

[Bronco]

BTW, if the kid isn't making eye contact with the defendant, it doesn't mean that he's lying. It might just mean that he's loath to look into the eyes of the man who molested him. (The eye contact statement came from one of the jurors too. )

Excellent point. I too feel that the Dr. Phils and Dr. Lauras of the world represent the gravest of threats to our legal system (well, okay, they're number three after lawyers and judges, but still ).

Thanks to these two morons, every soccer mom in America with too much time on her hands now feels qualified to make psychiatric diagnoses on each person they come in contact with in the course of their daily lives. Wasn't just plain old gossiping bad enough? We had to know that this pop-psychology crap would eventually ooze its way into our jury deliberation rooms.

 

[Bronco]

... unless he used an early Dark Ops knife with the controlled blood splatter features.

Coffee in the keyboard time.

 

[Clint Simpson]

but even that perspective doesn't necessarily prove that he hasn't molested.

That sounds a little bit like "guilty until proven innocent" to me. In theory, we all COULD had done some ghastly crime in the past, but chances are none of us did.

Overall though, I agree with your post.

That it didn't happen, that we didn't witness an endless litany of victims, is evidence that whatever MJ was doing was probably not as prevalent as some would believe.

I would go so far as to say it is not happening at all. Before the flames rise let me explain: I don't think Jackson is trying to have sex with 10 year olds. I believe Jackson is trying TO BE a 10 year old.

Most of us know of someone who live through his/her children. Dad never made the team so the son "has to be" the quarterback.

Take that to AN EXTREME and you find a middle-aged man trying to reclaim a childhood he never had. By being around kids CONSTANTLY he is (trying to) be a kid himself.

 

[gajinoz]

I would go so far as to say it is not happening at all. Before the flames rise let me explain: I don't think Jackson is trying to have sex with 10 year olds. I believe Jackson is trying TO BE a 10 year old.

Most of us know of someone who live through his/her children. Dad never made the team so the son "has to be" the quarterback.

Take that to AN EXTREME and you find a middle-aged man trying to reclaim a childhood he never had. By being around kids CONSTANTLY he is (trying to) be a kid himself.

I also agree with this analysis. I'm sure he was sleeping with kids in his bed but I really think that's all he was doing, sleeping. You only need to look at his home to see the guy is living in a childish fantasy world. The guy is weird, sure. I probably wouldn't want my kids hanging around with him but I don't think there was any sexual component to his activities.

 

[jsmatos]

That sounds a little bit like "guilty until proven innocent" to me. In theory, we all COULD had done some ghastly crime in the past, but chances are none of us did.

Overall though, I agree with your post.

In theory, we don't all go on prime time television holding hands with strange, young boys and announcing that we sleep with them in our beds. In theory, we don't all have multiple accusations of molestation against us. In theory, we don't all live at Neverland ranch. In theory, we don't all behave like freaks. Most of us behave in a manner that conforms with basic societal mores. To the extent that we do not so conform, we shouldn't expect others to ignore it especially where the possible victimization of young boys is concerned.

I believe that I demonstrated an understanding of the prosecutor's burden of proof. We don't live in the courtroom, we live in the real world. In the court of public opinion we still don't know whether or not MJ is a child molester. He has given us plenty of reason to wonder. I refuse to shove my head in the sand and show my posterior.

 

[FullerH]

In a criminal trial, IIRC the instructions that I received as a juror, the prosecution must show beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the crimes with which he or she is charged. From what I read, I do not believe that this standard was met in the Michael Jackson trial. That does not mean that he did none of the things with which he was charged, only that the prosecution could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did them.

I wonder how it would work out in a civil suit, should the parents of that boy bring one. I believe that the level of proof is much lower in such cases.

 

[jsmatos]

In a criminal trial, IIRC the instructions that I received as a juror, the prosecution must show beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the crimes with which he or she is charged. From what I read, I do not believe that this standard was met in the Michael Jackson trial. That does not mean that he did none of the things with which he was charged, only that the prosecution could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did them.

I wonder how it would work out in a civil suit, should the parents of that boy bring one. I believe that the level of proof is much lower in such cases.

We're in agreement Hugh.

The burden in a civil trial is much lower. It usually requires only a preponderance of the evidence. Sometimes the standard is a bit higher, ie, clear and convincing. Both are, obviously, much easier to prove than beyond a reasonable doubt.