BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)

Subject: BS: I'm Innocent
From: Donuel
Date: 19 Nov 03 - 08:39 PM

http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/mj.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent
From: kendall
Date: 19 Nov 03 - 08:56 PM

Poor sick bastard

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent
From: MarkS
Date: 19 Nov 03 - 09:12 PM

Although I agree with Kendall above, I gotta figure that photo is a digital fake.

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent
From: wysiwyg
Date: 19 Nov 03 - 09:39 PM

Hi, Mark-- Donuel's specialty.... if you have not seen his work before, just click on his name up in his post up there and you will see more.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Nov 03 - 10:04 PM

More than anybody wants, actually.

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 06:31 PM

Can't help but wonder, no smoke without fire.....

But also, having settled some ridiculous sum out of court on the first case, could this be someone else looking to get rich quick at Jacksons' expense?

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 06:58 PM

"No smoke without fire" - people always say that, but so far as real smoke and real fire goes, that just isn't true, is it?

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 07:09 PM

LTS, the other one was a civil suit, for money, which they got.

This one is a criminal action, based on the same facts. The "plaintiff" here is the State. It's (nominally, at least) not after money, but after the pleasure of his company in a State-supported hotel. Although I suppose there could be a very hefty fine imposed either instead of or in addition to imprisonment.

Having written that last paragraph, I will say that I was somewhat bemused to see that there was a THREE MILLION DOLLAR bail bond put on him. Awwww, come on, guys! Where is such a well-known and recognizable individual as Jackson going to skip to? And the purpose of a bail bond is supposed to be only to assure that the defendant sticks around.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 07:19 PM

"This one is a criminal action, based on the same facts."

But surely it involves different alleged events and different people?

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent
From: Mickey191
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 07:23 PM

Isn't it true that if he went to certain countries where is no extradition treaty--he wouldn't have to hide? Einhorn & Polanski are examples.

Explain how the first young boy was able to describe in detail, the creep's body markings. A reporter yesterday, described the statements that were in the first boy's affidavitt. A full description of what went on between the two. It was a crime in any state. I'm not aware of how she got this info.

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jack
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 08:20 PM

The world has too many photoshoppers who THINK they're funny....

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 08:33 PM

I agree Clinton ,its an easy way to make a cheap point

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 08:34 PM

And WAY too many telemarketers...eh, Clinton?

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jack
From: Blackcatter
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 10:41 PM

He had to surrender his passport, so he'd have to sneak out of the country - Pretty hard to do with a face like that. . .

Also - the bail is primarily based on general standards. A wealthy defendant gets that regardless of who he is. And a poor defendant gets less, but usually can't pony it up, so he sits in jail. And remember $3 million is not "bailbond" it means he has to either pay $3 million "bail" to the county or a $300,000 "bond" to a bondsman who then makes damn sure Jackson's in court. Jackson can hand over the deed to Neverland to handle that (or probably the money he makes on Beatles royalties in a year).

It was nice to see him brought in in handcuffs. I hate it when cops ignore protocol and safety issues just because it's someone important.

Also Californian changed the law (primarily because of Jackson) to enable the state to prosecute in situations like this where the kid doesn't want to testify and there's almost no other evidence. That's what happened the first time - the kid refused to talk on the stand and the state had no case (in non-violent sexual abuse: no physical evidence and no eye-witnesses = no case).

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jack
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 Nov 03 - 09:05 AM

I'll wait and see. If he's guilty -- something a court should decide -- then he should be punished as provided by law, and frankly I'd not like to be him in prison. If he's not guilty, then he should walk. But this business of trying celebraties in the press, on the Internet, and in the streets doesn't serve the ends of justice.

I feel sorry for his kids. He's an adult and should realize the consequences of his actions, his kids, on the other hand....

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)
From: TheBigPinkLad
Date: 21 Nov 03 - 01:16 PM

Of course he's guilty ... just read this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)
From: Amergin
Date: 21 Nov 03 - 04:35 PM

what i find ominous is the secret room behind the closet with the unmarked videotapes...and the photos...

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Nov 03 - 06:14 PM

This American love of parading accused people in handcuffs and chains, regardless of whether in a particular case there's any actual need for these, always strikes me as pretty kinky.

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jack
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 Nov 03 - 09:37 PM

What secret room, etc., Amergin? Can you provide a link? I'd like to know, really, as I haven't seen anything on such a thing.

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Nov 03 - 01:19 PM

Also Californian changed the law (primarily because of Jackson) to enable the state to prosecute in situations like this where the kid doesn't want to testify and there's almost no other evidence

Huh!!!

So no-one testifys and there is no evidence but they can still prosecute? How the hell does that work?

'Oh, he looks strange. Let's prosecute him.'

'He's black. He must be guilty of something.'

'She has a wart. Let's burn her as a witch...'

Sorry. I just don't believe it is true. Even in California!

Cheers

Dave the Gnome
(Who believes everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Even Michael Jackson ;-) )

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)
From: wysiwyg
Date: 22 Nov 03 - 02:41 PM

No, the change in the law was that even if the victim settles the civil case (i.e. take bucks), s/he can still be subpoena'ed to testify, so that large cash settlements can no longer be used to procure victims' silence. AFAIK the law was enacted precisely because the earlier victim refused to testfy after the settlement... the criminal charges could not be pursued because the victim could not be compelled to testify. The law removed the incentive for perpetrators to cover their offenses with cash outlays. The closure of that loophole, theoretically, strenghthened the "deterrent" effect of criminal penalties.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jack
From: Blackcatter
Date: 22 Nov 03 - 08:14 PM

You're correct WYSIWYG. I didn't explain it correctly. It's actually quite a good law.

As for: "This American love of parading accused people in handcuffs and chains, regardless of whether in a particular case there's any actual need for these, always strikes me as pretty kinky"

A few years ago, a man was arrested on federal charges by the local police in Tampa. They did handcuff him - but agreed to put his handcuffs on in the front, per his request. He always wore a handcuff key around his new and was able to get out of is cuffs, hijack a police car and killed 1 or 2 police officers before caught. For that reason, and others that have happened like it, nearly ever police force in the US has an absolute protocol to handcuff people in the back regardless of the crime and most other circumstances. Part of it is safety for the police, innocent bystanders and the person arrested, themselves. It also helps with insurance liability issues. It make look like something power-based, but it really is important.

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)
From: Allan Dennehy
Date: 22 Nov 03 - 08:42 PM

Who was the comedian that said if Jackson was a truck driver and admitted the he had kids sleeping over with him all the time, he'd have been in jail years ago? I dont know if he did it or not but any parents that let their kids sleep over with J are lunatics and should have their kids taken off them. If he gets convicted in a FAIR trial I hope he dies in jail.

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jack
From: Blackcatter
Date: 23 Nov 03 - 12:25 AM

They're little different than the parents who are profiting from their pretty teen daughters websites where the girls show of in photos wearing skimpy clothes in sexy poses and charge subscriptions.

It's nothing less than the West's way of child prostitution. And the parents are their pimps.

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Dec 03 - 05:51 PM

This one's a hit Don. A friend in Canada just sent it to me in California.

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Dec 03 - 11:17 PM

Ha ha from DC to CA via Canada, probably since I posted that one on Fark.com.

I heard some of my Bush cartoons got passed around by the troops in Afghanistan. On the bright side I did a work of hundreds of people kissing on a fictional canal street Via del Bacio in Venice and sent it to an artist friend in Rome. Later she helped inspire the actual event in Italy based on the painting. It was carried as a fluff piece on NBC last summer. http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/venician4.jpg



On the dark side I did a 16 sq ft canvass that was started 12 years ago and finished six years ago. It was the WTC in flames complete with a toy plastic airplane embedded in gesso. Disembodied hands streched from the ground to the sky. A gruesome face on the left screamed in agony. A world wide tidal wave and voracious tornado were also depicted. Three years after a couple in Austin TX bought it, 9-11 occured. They e-mailed their shock that it had been hanging in thier house all that time. http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/bell4.JPG



Sometimes I just do an image for beauty's sake.
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/ornaments.jpg




I have annoyed more people than ever thought I was a genius (including the CIA and Naval Intel) but if I have any sporadic genius, then genius is highly over rated since I know how dumb I am.
I've never been able to play Irish fiddle nusic.




PS For those that think digital art/"photoshopping" is so easy, try it sometime.

Subject: RE: BS: I'm Innocent(Donuel's view of Michael Jackson)
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 06 Aug 04 - 12:04 AM

Qoute="I gotta figure, that photo is a fake"

No Shit!