I hate when people misspell it as "fecetious."
Snood, that comment to Dys was in regard to a conversation we've had about people not always understanding some of his posts. I had been trying to think of a word to describe them, and picked 'facetious' as an adjective...
so I wasn't being facetious in using facetious, at least that time.
Zane, you're right...
The judge's verdict is death for Scott Peterson.
Scott Peterson Sentenced to Death for Killing Pregnant Wife
By MARIA NEWMAN
Published: March 16, 2005
judge in California today sentenced Scott Peterson to death by lethal injection for murdering his wife and their unborn child two years ago.
I read a news report. Laci's family members were extremely volatile and the judge had to rein them in several times. Their grief and rage is totally understandable. Laci's brother even admitted to getting a gun to kill Scott . . . .
Robert Blake is found not guilty.
My god, this MJ thing is getting freakier and freakier...now his health is flagging...I believe that this is going to be the world's first case of a person literally dying of embarrassment.
And now Jackson's attorney has been wheeled by stretcher from the court room and a main witness for the prosecutor has been arrested!
squinney wrote:And now Jackson's attorney has been wheeled by stretcher from the court room and a main witness for the prosecutor has been arrested!
His attorney? The report I saw was that it was a fan.
Another interesting fact that came out about those x-rated web sites on Jackson's computer the kid said he was shown while he was at Jackson's home. The memory on Jackson's computer shows dates much later after the kid and his family left the property. Another possibility that came out was the fact that other people was in Jackson's home during that period, and they may have accessed those x-rated web sites.
A fan was taken away earlier, but Jackson's attorney was seen leaving by stretcher as I was eating dinner (6 ish eastcoast time) as reported and shown by MSNBC.
Judge Allows Past Jackson Allegations
Mar 28, 2:07 PM (ET)
SANTA MARIA, Calif. (AP) - The judge in Michael Jackson's child molestation trial ruled Monday that the prosecution may present testimony about past allegations against the pop star involving five boys, including two who reached multimillion-dollar civil settlements with the singer.
Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville ruled after hearing arguments by District Attorney Tom Sneddon and vigorous opposition by defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr.
The judge said he would allow testimony about alleged sexual offenses and an alleged pattern of "grooming," or preparing the boys for molestation.
The prosecution had sought to introduce testimony about seven boys, but the judge declined to allow evidence about two.
The judge said he would allow testimony by a 1990 accuser who received a $2.4 million settlement from Jackson and testimony by that boy's mother.
A boy who reached a multimillion-dollar settlement from Jackson in 1993 will not testify. Other testimony will be allowed from people who allegedly have knowledge of the case.
The judge said the jury can be told that Jackson reached settlements with the 1990 and 1993 accusers but may not be told the amounts, unless the defense brings them up.
It was unclear exactly what Jackson was accused of doing with each of the five boys, although the 1993 accuser did claim repeated molestation, and Sneddon said in court Monday that the boy in the 1990 case was touched twice over his clothes and once under his clothes.
Jackson's lawyer fought the admission of evidence about so-called past similar acts, saying it was based on third parties, many of whom were after Jackson's money.
"How can you just allow a parade of third-party characters to come in without any victims?" Mesereau asked during arguments.
Sneddon, seeking to use past allegations to buttress the credibility of Jackson's current accuser, said the testimony of other witnesses will show that Jackson has a consistent pattern of abuse.
The prosecutor told the judge that Jackson was observed inappropriately touching four children. The alleged touching included kissing, hugging and inserting his hand into children's pants, he said.
"All of these children are basically within the ages of 10 and 13" at the time of the alleged offenses, Sneddon said.
The district attorney also said that testimony would include Jackson being seen in bed with four children while the underwear of the children and Jackson was at the side of the bed.
In his arguments, Sneddon noted that in the defense opening statement Mesereau listed gifts Jackson purchased for the current accuser's mother. Sneddon said Jackson has a pattern of buying gifts for the mothers of boys to keep them preoccupied.
Mesereau told the judge that the defense would put on a "mini trial" on each allegation that was allowed in. He had urged the judge to consider the evidence that has been presented so far on the current charges against Jackson.
"You have to consider what the case looks like," he said. "It looks real bad and it's going to get worse. You can't stop the defense from putting on a full-blown defense and I mean just that."
Mesereau said that among the alleged victims that the prosecutoin would bring in by reference would be Macaulay Culkin, who he said has always denied that anything improper happened to him while with Jackson.
"There's Macaulay Culkin who has repeatedly said he was never molested," Mesereau said.
He referred to some of Sneddon's third-party witnesses as "the gang." The reference was to former Jackson employees who sued the singer in the past and lost, and were then ordered to pay the singer $1 million in damages.
Mesereau also said it would be unfair to have others testify about the 1993 case without putting that accuser on the stand. Mesereau asserted that the 1993 accuser's father and stepfather filed numerous lawsuits against Jackson to get money from him.
In his current trial, Jackson, 46, is accused of a then-13-year-old boy at Neverland in February or March 2003, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold the boy's family captive to get them to make a video rebutting a documentary in which Jackson said he let children sleep in his bed. The singer said it was non-sexual.
The ruling came a day after Jackson declared his innocence in an interview with the Rev. Jesse Jackson and said he considers himself the latest of several "black luminaries" to be unjustly accused, citing former South African President Nelson Mandela and former boxing champions Muhammad Ali and Jack Johnson as others.
In the interview broadcast on radio stations and the Internet, Jackson also asked fans to pray for him, said he was currently in "the lowest point emotionally" of his life.
It's my understanding that they found fingerprints of Jackson and the young boy on an x-rated magazine. It doesn't look good for Jackson, but what it doesn't say is that they were looking at the magazine at the same time.
He's looking sicker than usual. I predict he'll be having fainting spells in the court room before long.
Is Michael Jackson Guilty??
You can discuss this till the cows come home. Conspiracy theories and plots - my uneducated british backside.
My personal view is Guilty - based on what I have see on Sky News special shows based on transcripts of the case, various things read and documentary's shown.
Come on people. Dont let fame and fortune cloud judgement. Just because they are famous does not make them innocent!! A grown man who beleives he is Peter Pan? I thought when I was 7 I could fly like Superman. What CHILD doesnt regarding their CHILDHOOD idol. Doesnt mean I am or indeed ever could. He has some serious issues and Bashir did a fantastic job of opening the worlds eyes to this pervert.
A group of ten of us are going to the court - will stand outside and shout guilty, perv you name it! Cause just as people think and beleive in their hearts that he is innocent, we do not and think that voice should be heard. Not bothered about being thrown in jail. If it happens, it happens.
What attitude is this. Mine. Im sick of all the press about this fruit cake. So he sold millions etc. So why the pay out(s) if he is innocent. If he is then he should not have paid and should have been taken to court for his peers to decide in a court of native law. I, as we all, are his peers.
If he is innocent - I AM Peter Pan.
*Disclaimer - The views stated above are mine.
On the same token, famous doesn't equate to guilty. Having said that, the trial is still in process, and we'll have to wait until the jury decides the verdict; they're the ones with the full information. All the rest of us are guessing. I'll admit it doesn't look good for Jackson, but maybe the jury knows more than what the media shares with us.
From the BBC:
"Guard 'saw Jackson assault boy'
Jackson denies any wrongdoing
A former security guard at Michael Jackson's Neverland ranch has said he saw the star performing oral sex on a boy in the early 1990s.
Ralph Chacon told Mr Jackson's child molestation trial in California that he saw the alleged incident while looking through a bathroom window.
The boy involved in the alleged assault later won an out-of-court settlement from the pop star worth more than $20m.
Mr Jackson, 46, denies a total 10 charges including child abuse.
His defence team says Mr Chacon left the star's employment on bad terms in 1994 and lost a lawsuit for wrongful dismissal.
In what correspondents describe as damaging testimony, the former guard said he first saw Jackson and the boy - who was then 13 - in a jacuzzi.
The two then headed to the shower together, Mr Chacon said.
He added that he decided to peek through an open window to see what was happening.
"I was thinking: 'What's going on in there? Grown man in the shower with a boy... it wasn't right," he told the court in the town of Santa Maria. "I saw Mr Jackson caressing the boy's hair, he was kissing him."
Mr Jackson then performed oral sex on the boy, Mr Chacon said.
On Tuesday a former maid at the ranch testified that she once found the singer showering with an eight-year-old boy."
My comment: I know it's not admissible in court, but I'd like to see a lie-detector test done on Mr Chacon.
Make that three.
If there is enough evidence against Jackson and in
favor for the prosecution, the jury will deside accordingly.
To declare him guilty before hearing all the evidence,
and all the witnesses is not part of our judical system,
where innocent until proven guilty still rules.
