STORM2K

Jacko charged with lewd, lascivious conduct with child!

UPDATE: Michael Jackson charged with seven counts of child molestation and two other counts of administering an intoxicating agent to a minor to commit a felony.

Bout time :grab:

Seven counts of L&L behavior and two counts of giving intoxicants to a minor.

I heard it was nine counts! Unbelievable. I want to see some evidence and how they dispute that letter by the Dept. of Human Services "unfounded" report.

Dang you two are fast!! LOL!

Well, obviously, they have some proof or they wouldn't have charged him. Why else would he be slipping children "intoxicants"?

They say that the DHS visit was early in the year, but that the molestation happened after that. Plus, this is apparently the same kid who appeared with Jackson in the BBC interview (I was confused about all that for a while because I thought it was Jackson's son sitting beside him).

He could get up to 24 years if convicted.

FINALLY!!!!

stormraiser wrote:Well, obviously, they have some proof or they wouldn't have charged him. Why else would he be slipping children "intoxicants"?

Maybe, maybe not. Will be interesting to see if they can prove this case beyond a shadow of doubt. Just because someone is charged does not prove guilt.

See http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=21496 for comment

True, Linda, but it seems like they must have evidence of the "intoxicants", no?

Lindaloo wrote:

stormraiser wrote:Well, obviously, they have some proof or they wouldn't have charged him. Why else would he be slipping children "intoxicants"?

Maybe, maybe not. Will be interesting to see if they can prove this case beyond a shadow of doubt. Just because someone is charged does not prove guilt.

Hmmmm...well, the complaint states that the offenses happened on or between February 7, 2003 and March 10, 2003 ( http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/121803_jacko.pdf ).

The DCFS memo states their investigation was on February 14, 2003 to February 27, 2003 ( http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/dcfsmemo2.html ). So I take back what I said I heard about the DCFS investigation being before the incidents even happened. Looks like the defense has a little bit of help with that memo.

Was there ever any doubts? This is not a surprise - this time he doesn't have the millions to pay them off like he did last time.

stormraiser wrote:True, Linda, but it seems like they must have evidence of the "intoxicants", no

It would be hard to imagine that they could still find soda cans with wine in them after 10 months. They may be relying on the boys testimondy, since California law now states that the victim must testify against an alleged sexual assault perpetrator.

However, humans are creatures of habit, so maybe Jackson serves wine that in soda cans a lot. And he allegedly showed the boy heterosexual pornographic movies on his computer, which could be traced. If the boy can describe certain details of movies that investigators find on his computer, that could provide proof for the prosecution.

I'm still shaking my head. He such a strange man.

But then again, I'm still giggling with giddiness everytime I see a picture of Saddam. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! We got him!

Did they give him back his passport as was expected? I wonder if he'll go the London as planned this weekend and if he ever plans on coming back?

Fastest darn grand jury indictment I have ever seen.

What happened to "innocent until proven guilty?"

sunnyday wrote:What happened to "innocent until proven guilty?"

Still around in a courtroom. But, public opinion is always this way. I have learned to see through things. I never let the media tell me how to think. I want to see some evidence.

I want to see the evidence, also. If he is not guilty, this must be devastating for him. If he is, then he has to be locked away so that he can't hurt any more children.

He's been charged!!!

Good now OFF WITH HIS.. uh.. well.. Just Off with it

I want to see the evidence, also. If he is not guilty, this must be devastating for him. If he is, then he has to be locked away so that he can't hurt any more children.

Im more concerned about how devastating it must be for the kids and there parents... Not to concerned about Mr jackson that was willing to pay millions of dollars to the last family to keep them quite... Not an act of an innocent man in my eyes.. On a side not, I think the parents of that last family that got paid off needs to have there butts behind bars as well..