Michael Jackson acquitted on all counts of child molestation. As the AP reports, “vindicating the pop star who insisted he was the victim of mother-and-son con artists and a prosecutor with a vendetta”.

Because its completely normal to have little boys admittedly sleep in your bed.

Does it really seem appropriate to cheer a man or whatever who admits to sleeping with boys?

A number of Jackson’s family members accompanied him to the courthouse to hear the verdict and flanked him as he exited the courthouse as fans cheered.

Kevin at Wizbang, I was with you on the alcohol charge and even that was not guilty?

Another Rovian Conspiracy I could not have said it better myself I just could do it. You are correct on every count. A must read.

Michelle Malkin has the “releasing of the doves” and a prayer that LA will not burn. One would almost think it was sarcastic. I think it is.

Posted June 13, 2005 by
Bizarre, Crime, Media | 9 comments

If you liked this post, you may also like these:

  • GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY: Sex Offender John Couey Found Guilty in Jessica Lunsford Murder
  • Casey Anthony found NOT GUILTY of 1st Degree Murder
  • Sex Offender Alfonso Rodriguez Jr. found guilty of kidnapping resulting in Dru Sjodin’s death
  • Sandra Cantu Murder: Huckaby Pleads Guilty To Serve Life
  • John Allen Muhammad was found guilty on all 6 counts of first degree murder in Montgomery County, MD

  • Comments

    9 Responses to “NOT GUILTY?”

    1. Mark in Mexico on June 13th, 2005 8:03 pm

      California can’t convict anybody

      What’s with California prosecutors? They can’t seem to get a conviction no matter what the defendant did nor how high is the mountain of evidence against him/her/it. If, in fact, the defendants in these high profile cases are innocent, why on earth w…

    2. mordred on June 13th, 2005 8:52 pm

      Thomas Jefferson wrote, “I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.”

      John Adams said, “It is not only [the juror's] right, but his duty . . . to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.”

      The Supreme Court itself has noted that the role of trial by jury is to prevent “oppression..” To perform that role, jurors must act independently and conscientiously, and they must be prepared to “just say no” if they believe that a conviction would be unjust.

      Anyone who believes in the ‘Bill of Rights’ cannot but accept that MJ is NOT GUILTY on all counts!

    3. Red on June 13th, 2005 9:54 pm


      So I guess you approve of a grown man sleeping with little boys? That’s special. There may have have been reasonable doubt with this case but MJ is a sick freak.

    4. mordred on June 13th, 2005 10:58 pm

      RED: The answer is yes!
      Fortunately – I am not afflicted by the North American neurosis with sex, I can sleep in the same bed with any person of any age, gender, relationship, etc. Physical proximity does not equal sex! I wish we would all stop obsessing about sex!!!

    5. lynette on June 13th, 2005 11:09 pm

      Why can’t Michael Jackson hold his own umbrella?

    6. mordred on June 13th, 2005 11:17 pm

      I know…I wish I didn’t have to hold my own umbrella (pout) Life is soo unfair!

    7. Slice on June 14th, 2005 2:21 am

      Umbrellas kick @$$.

    8. Red on June 14th, 2005 8:41 am

      I did not know that Mary K Latourno commented on this site?

      As one of our commenter’s has so interestingly and at the same time scarily said …
      “I am not afflicted by the North American neurosis with sex, I can sleep in the same bed with any person of any age, gender, relationship, etc. ”

      LAST TIME I CHECKED JACKSON WAS AMERICAN, I BELIEVE FROM INDIANA. One would say he was “afflicted by the North American neurosis”.

      The fact that one of the jurors said they figured that he had molested in the past, just not this time pretty much sums up everything. Because we all know there is no such thing as a one time child molester.

      Just another case of a prosecution doing a terrible job, well paid and very good defense team and a rich person walks. Do not think for one second that if this was John Q. Public the same outcome would have occurred.

      Oh and let us not forget, a jury that was some how more offended by a mother waiving her finger at them than they were the actual idea of MJ sleeping with little boys (admit tingly). Way to look at the evidence and not play off your own emotion jury.

      Cause OJ was innocent too.

    9. McGehee on June 14th, 2005 11:29 am

      Yeah — they claim they treated him like any other defendant. I might believe that if the odds weren’t so slim any one of them had ever served on a jury trying some shlub who sells shoes for a living.

    Leave a Reply

    Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

    • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
    • Red (comments)
    • Dugga (technical issues)
    • Dana (radio show comments)
    • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
    E-mail It