Do you really think Michael & O.J. did it, and why?
With OJ, I think he is guilty largely due to the amount of evidence.
With Michael Jackson...yes there is part of me that has a "feeling" or suspicion that he is guilty, but I'll be upfront and say that I think the case should go through the courts and due process should be served.
However, I will reserve the right to say that I do not like Michael Jackson at all, and have had a "feeling" that he had indecent desires towards children long before his out-of-court settlement in the 90s. I have no issue with saying that I don't think I've ever liked him. However, that is my opinion...nothing more, nothing less.
With Michael Jackson...yes there is part of me that has a "feeling" or suspicion that he is guilty, but I'll be upfront and say that I think the case should go through the courts and due process should be served.
However, I will reserve the right to say that I do not like Michael Jackson at all, and have had a "feeling" that he had indecent desires towards children long before his out-of-court settlement in the 90s. I have no issue with saying that I don't think I've ever liked him. However, that is my opinion...nothing more, nothing less.
OJ - Duh - Clearly it was proven he did it but that's not quite enough in this country if you've got the right (not that I like them) legal team and an idiot judge and jury, not to mention incompetent prosecution.
Jackson - there is way too much smoke for there to be no fire in that house. No doubt he's whacko. But honestly I dont give a
Jackson - there is way too much smoke for there to be no fire in that house. No doubt he's whacko. But honestly I dont give a
There is not enough information out there to form an opinion of Jackson... other than he has some odd beliefs.
OJ on the other hand, is a different story. You have motive, DNA Evidence, circumstantial evidence. If he had been poor, or a middle class white-guy, he would have been found guilty. Mark Fuhrman was a bigot. But, there are too many assumtions one would have to make (which violates one of the basic tenats of logic: the answer with the least amount of assumptions is true) to believe that there was a conspiracy. Face it, his pretty wife was getting hammered by some young buck and OJ lost it. The jury let him go as one big "F.U. Cracka Charlie" to the system.
OJ on the other hand, is a different story. You have motive, DNA Evidence, circumstantial evidence. If he had been poor, or a middle class white-guy, he would have been found guilty. Mark Fuhrman was a bigot. But, there are too many assumtions one would have to make (which violates one of the basic tenats of logic: the answer with the least amount of assumptions is true) to believe that there was a conspiracy. Face it, his pretty wife was getting hammered by some young buck and OJ lost it. The jury let him go as one big "F.U. Cracka Charlie" to the system.
I don't think so, but too early to tell. There is a lot of evidence that the rape sheild laws and the prosecution are trying to surpress i.e. semen stains, other than bryant's, recent sexual history, mental history. In addition, there is a lot about her character that calls her crediability into question.
Plain and simple, the Kobe Bryant saga is not about Black and White. ANY man that is accused of RAPE is guilty until proven inocent.
Plain and simple, the Kobe Bryant saga is not about Black and White. ANY man that is accused of RAPE is guilty until proven inocent.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post




