hahah damn that Triumph shit is fun-neh.....His writer is quick on his feet.
OK...so he squeaked by on a technicality..( the nutso mother).
Which is sad for two reasons..1. These pricks PICK kids with nutso mothers so that they can get them alone with minimal family objection, and TWO they know they will be destroyed on the stand in the case of a trial. Irrefutable profiling theory in practice here...
Personally, Im a fan of the "where theres smoke, theres fire' thing..
Here we go..follow me here....
if some kid accused you of doing something you DID NOT do...would you give him a sum approximately equal to A THOUSAND of your lifetime salaries NOT to have a chance to prove your innocence?
Yeah, I don't think so...If i was innocent, i would have fought tooth and nail to retain my good name and spent 30 million dollars on the best defense the world has seen since OJ....I certainly would have not given that little shit the 30 million dollars.
And if after having to pay a thousand of your salaries for being accused of said wrongdoing, would you continue to place yourself at risk of future accusations? Again..Im hoping not...But Mj did. What unbelievable arrogance.
Also, i didnt get the memo explaining why the accusers drawings and notations on the EXACT appearance (noting blotches and locations of moles) of mjs dick were NOT allowed in court? Anyone have a good explanation for that one? Dont say privacy because sneddon got LOTS of photos of said genitals...if the drawings he had didnt match EXACTLy the photos, why would he chance it by having them compared in open court? These exclusions made me sick.
Or how bout tossing the testimony of the two security guards who were asked to bring a sweaty and aroused jackson a jar of vaseline to the bedrom while a confused and puzzled boy sat on the bed, also half naked?
Ok, now Ill backtrack and agree they had some fucked witnesses, and if the boys testimony changed, i Do see how that jury was forced to say that the case did not meet the criterion of conviction. And i see how they were forced to find him not guilty. Given that, I guess i agree with a not guilty.
Im hoping that there is general agreement that while this case didnt meet guilty standards, Mj is STILL a child molester (no, not just ecentric...a fucking CHILD MOLESTER)..plain and simple...it just wasnt proven by this case.
Who the fuck licks a childs head while he sleeps? Try that in public some time and see how much time you get, and low long it takes to get convicted.
That said, we have a case where a finding of Not Guilty obscuring the glaringly obvious fact that he is NOT INNOCENT..
Too bad they couldnt make a better case.
Maybe next time...cuz ya know...THIRD time's a charm.
