| Fugitive Recovery Network (FRN) https://fugitiverecovery.com/forum/ | |
| MICHAEL JACKSON https://fugitiverecovery.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=843 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | L.A.W. [ Tue 14 Jun 2005 16:35 ] |
| Post subject: | MICHAEL JACKSON |
What is your opinion? Guilty or Not Guilty? I say "GUILTY". |
|
| Author: | -X- [ Tue 14 Jun 2005 17:45 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think he's guilty of being an abused child. I dont think he was guilty of this crime but I do believe he asked for all of it. There is obviously something wrong with the man though. Thats just my opinion though. When you sleep with little boys, come on man you just dont do that!! In my eyes if you do, you deserve what you get. |
|
| Author: | ChuckJ [ Tue 14 Jun 2005 19:37 ] |
| Post subject: | Guilty |
I was a case manager at a crisis shelter for kids for 5 years, I was trained on how to identify abused children and abusers, Michael Jackson is a text book pedophile, it sickens me that his high priced lawyers got over on the jury. |
|
| Author: | -X- [ Tue 14 Jun 2005 19:50 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just for my own curiosity, how do you identify an abused child and an abuser? I may need this later in life. |
|
| Author: | ChuckJ [ Tue 14 Jun 2005 21:20 ] |
| Post subject: | Abuse |
Tim Rather than give a lengthly reply I will provide a link to the organization that provided the training I took while working as a case manager. Their web site contains a wealth of information and their contact info is also there. A few key warning signs are adults that focus on things that are of interest mostly to children while trying to exclude other adults from the activities they participate in with children. Children that become withdrawn, secretive and spend an unusual amount of time with an adult that meets the above description. There are many more warning signs, I recommend that anyone with children visit the below link. http://virtus.org/virtus/ Everyone should know what to look for, I was working a case one time where I learned that the 32 year old skip I caught was involved with a 13 year old, when I contacted a detective at the local PD in that city I was told "it's no surprise and he would look into it if he got a chance" I replied that if he did not do something he would be explaining his inaction to an investigative reporter, end result the skip was charged with sexual assault and ended up with more time than he was facing on his original charges. |
|
| Author: | rex [ Wed 15 Jun 2005 14:14 ] |
| Post subject: | Fair To The Argument |
First of all, based on what little I caught of the Jackson trial, I strongly suspect that Mr. Jackson did commit something; however, right from the beginning, I thought he would get off as the People's case looked weak. While some may argue that this is travesty of justice, I prefer to see it, right, wrong or otherwise, as a positive test outcome that the system is not in total ruin. Also bear in mind that there have been cases where children have been 'counseled' to recall things that were later considered unfounded by and through positive suggestion of the therapists. It would be a shame for anyone to get sent up for a long sentence for something that was planted. This isn't to say that all abuse charges are without merit, but I will say that all evidence should be weighed with the People having the burden of proof to the extent that if the burden cannot be met then a guilty party may go free and so will an innocent party as it should be. Rex |
|
| Author: | ChuckJ [ Wed 15 Jun 2005 14:57 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Unfortunately the ability to prove reasonable doubt often depends on how much money the defendant can pay his attorney to make the effort, thus allowing wealthy defendants to be aquitted much more often than poor ones. |
|
| Author: | rex [ Wed 15 Jun 2005 16:08 ] |
| Post subject: | Isn't it true |
Chuck, I concur with your position on retaining counsel. The more one has to pay then the more one has to fight with provided that the accused didn't create anything to 'relive the moment' and the records found there way into evidence and then in front of a jury. It's pretty silly to fight a case if a high-priced lawyer could not get the, uh, video tape, photographs or hardrive excluded as being too prejudicial or fruit of the poisonous tree-like. In that case, cut a deal and get prepared for that long stretch with people who would like to get their hands on you. Rex |
|
| Author: | ravenspyk [ Thu 16 Jun 2005 11:27 ] |
| Post subject: | |
There is a big difference between "not guilty and innocent" right? |
|
| Author: | -X- [ Thu 16 Jun 2005 14:43 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Exactly!! |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ | |