As RTE Online, an Irish new service, reported:
The pop star Michael Jackson is to stand trial in the United States on child abuse charges.
A federal grand jury in California has decided that there is enough evidence to proceed with the prosecution.
The 45-year-old singer is expected to appear in court tomorrow week when he will be able to enter a plea.
Mr Jackson has always denied allegations that he abused a 13-year-old boy.

Charles Riggs
My email address: chriggs/at/eircom/dot/net
 2 3 4 5 6 7 » 26
As RTE Online, an Irish new service, reported: The pop star Michael Jackson is to stand trial in the United ... he will be able to enter a plea. Mr Jackson has always denied allegations that he abused a 13-year-old boy.

OK, I give up. Where do the phobias come into it?

John Dean
Oxford
As RTE Online, an Irish new service, reported: The pop ... has always denied allegations that he abused a 13-year-old boy.

OK, I give up. Where do the phobias come into it?

I don't know how it is in your area, but most people here are assuming the man is guilty before he has even been tried. Because of paedophiliac phobia and homophobia, both rampant in this country, these people are not considering the case rationally, I'm claiming.

Paedophiles create a real problem, of course, but I think it is wrong to assume they are under every bed cover. With all the publicity given the problem of late, we've reached the sad stage where some people will look at you askew if you so much as talk with a youngster unrelated to you. That wasn't the case when I was growing up, and I think society is worse off it is now.

Charles Riggs
My email address: chriggs/at/eircom/dot/net
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
OK, I give up. Where do the phobias come into it?

I don't know how it is in your area, but most people here are assuming the man is guilty before he has even been tried

The reason they used a grand jury is that a grand jury will indict a stone for murder if the DA asks them. To a lawyer, using a grand jury, which is rare in California, indicates a weak case.
Usually there is a public preliminary hearing where a judge decides if there is enough evidence to force someone to have to stand trial. The case against Michael Jackson has serious problems. First Gavan has told two completely different stories. Second, with big bucks involved there's reason to believe his testimony has been coached.
His mother was arrested for shoplifting and then accused the store employees who detained her of sexually assaulting her. It was the store that ended up paying her.
After that British TV special I'm sure all her sleazy friends told her, "All you have to do is accuse him of molesting Gavan. Everyone will believe you and you can get a big payoff."
No matter how good a witness Gavan turns out to be, I would think of the things above and have a reasonable doubt.
Charles Riggs wrote on 23 Apr 2004:
OK, I give up. Where do the phobias come into it?

I don't know how it is in your area, but most people here are assuming the man is guilty before ... of paedophiliac phobia and homophobia, both rampant in this country, these people are not considering the case rationally, I'm claiming.

Michael Jackson creates the impression of a paedophile whether he is one or not. I'm certainly not going to claim that he's guilty or innocent of the charges leveled against him this time, because I have no proof either way. But when a 45-year-old man owns a ranch and invites little kids to sleep with him in his bed at night, I don't think too many people will have any trouble making an automatic judgment about his intentions. He'd have to have videotapes of every minute of every such night to convince most people that he wasn't guilty. I'm happy that I'm not on the jury, because I don't have to and will not come to any conclusion about his innocence or guilt.
Paedophiles create a real problem, of course, but I think it is wrong to assume they are under every bed ... you. That wasn't the case when I was growing up, and I think society is worse off it is now.

I hate to have to agree with that, but it's true. Good ideas and good intentions seem to enjoy being taken to extremes by nosy parkers everywhere. It's as if they (the good ideas and good intentions) all come with the same subtext: "Abuse me if you can".

Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor.
For email, ehziuh htiw rehpycrebyc ecalper.
The reason they used a grand jury is that a grand jury will indict a stone for murder if the DA asks them.

What happened to the ham sandwich?
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
I think we are all Jackson fans, no? Even Donald Trump believes in him, did you see him on Saturday Night Live?
Now tell me all, how bad is Michael Jackson? Is he really, really bad?

He's a bad cat, isn't he? Thank GOD for Tom Sneddon ! ! !

Check it out !
http://www.geocities.com/botenth/michael.htm
(snip description of all sorts of background to the Michael Jackson case)
No matter how good a witness Gavan turns out to be, I would think of the things above and have a reasonable doubt.

But you should never make it to the jury, knowing what you know, and if you somehow did you'd be told to disregard anything you had learned outside the confines of the trial. You know that, of course, because you're a lawyer.
What I found interesting is that Charles initially posted an absolutely deadpan news story about the indictment, with no hint of the reporter's views on the subject, and followed that with his accusations of assorted phobias.
And even a grand jury will sometimes balk at indicting a ham sandwich. As I recall, the grand jury in the Tawana Brawley case refused to return an indictment.

Bob Lieblich
Agnostic on this whole Michael Jackson mess
The reason they used a grand jury is that a grand jury will indict a stone for murder if the DA asks them.

What happened to the ham sandwich?

It was premade, and Areff made off with it.

Liebs
Could he have meant Mick Jagger? Keith Richard?
Try out our live chat room.
Show more