Granny said something to the effect that ?that woman (Janet) snapped her fingers at me and who do you think you are snapping your fingers at me lady?? Another female juror said "she (Janet) kept staring at me" and yet another female juror said ?he (Jackson) looked perfectly normal to me you could go up to him on the street and say Hi? And then there was one male juror, who stated; "We actually challenged one another in the deliberation room," said Juror No. 1, a 62-year-old man from Santa Maria, later identified as Raymond Hultman. "We challenged the issues, and we came to the decision that pointed to reasonable doubt." Later, in an interview on "Larry King Live," Hultman said he believes Jackson "probably has molested boys." Jackson wasn?t acquitted; Janet was convicted. I think the jury lost track of why they were there. They decided the case on their malice toward Janet. If that jury for the most part think they are now celebrities they are really delusional. They will have to live with the backlash of their decision for a very long time. As one of the news reporters said Jackson will go back to his world but the jurors will have to continue living in theirs and face whatever comes from this verdict. So congratulations jurors you have let a child molester go free. It may have been a victory for the defense but it was a hollow victory.

Who the hell is Janet?

Who the hell is Janet? ++++++++++ I'm assuming the mother of the accuser.

"We actually challenged one another in the deliberation room," said Juror No. 1, a 62-year-old man from Santa Maria, later identified as Raymond Hultman. "We challenged the issues, and we came to the decision that pointed to reasonable doubt." Later, in an interview on "Larry King Live," Hultman said he believes Jackson "probably has molested boys." ++++++++++++++++++ You can believe that he probably is guilty, but if the evidence isn't there, and there is reasonable doubt, then you must acquit! To paraphrase Johnny Cochran (RIP).

This is a sad thing to say but I am going to say it.....Michael Jackson will not quit molesting boys. In my gut I feel that he is a child molester and the fact that this jury acquited him does not mean he is innocent. His behavior is compulsive and simply deciding to quit the behavior is not possible. If it was....this trial would have never happened. He would have stopped his behavior years ago. It is a sad fact that Michael's victims are not from well-grounded, healthy families and because of this...he faces no consequences other than monetary settlements. I just hope the next mother of a little boy thinks twice before allowing her child to become a victim, regardless of the awe of celebrity.

Janet is Gavin Arviso?s mother. She has been referred to on this board as Janut because the woman is a mental case, sorry for the confusion. b.t.w. Her being a nut case and the jury?s dislike of her doesn?t mean Jackson didn?t molest Gavin.

And Jackson's admission to sharing his bedroom with the boys doesn't mean he molested them. I don't know Michael Jackson. I don't know what's in his heart. What I do know is what he portrays. And what those closest to him have to say about him. And knowing the profile of the typical pedophile I would have to agree that Michael Jackson fits that description. BUT...that could be a misconception on my part. He could be just a caring individual who allows boys ( rather than girls because that could be misconstrued ) to enjoy his private domain, and be so innocent in doing so that he would never foresee any harm in announcing it. You see...in our society we have certain expectations. We expect our men to be men. We expect them to be masculine and strong and wise. We have very little tolerance for men who are effeminate. The issue that has not come out much at all in this trial is that issue. We focused on whether or not we believed Michael Jackson to be a pedophile. What hasn't been discussed (mysteriously) is that he was being accused of molesting BOYS. Thus indicating homosexuality. In a very homophobic society we just cannot accept that a grown man could share a bed with boys without it being sexual and perverse and disgusting. Let's just say ( for example )Julia Roberts was a humanitarian and had a special place in her heart for unfortunate children. Let's say she gave away millions of dollars to make children's lives a little better. And let's say she invited children to her home and allowed the girls to sleep in her room and at times right in her bed. Would we be sitting in our homes right now wondering if she were performing lewd acts on those girls? I don't think so. Now let's take the same scenario but replace Julia with any woman that is also kind, caring, butch and gay. Add children ( girls ) to her bed. 13 year old girls. Do you see lewd acts being performed now? Maybe. But still not likely. Why? Because we have more tolerance for lesbians than we do gay men. Is Michael Jackson gay? I certainly do not know. What is obvious is that he is soft, and caring, and childlike. I doubt very much that if Clint Eastwood would have said...Hey... I have had children who have stayed at my house...and I have a huge mattress in my room where we often watch my big screen television...and sometimes the boys fall alseep watching movies on that mattress...and I sleep there as well. Would we have blinked an eye? Nahh

Jackson wasn?t acquitted; Janet was convicted. I think the jury lost track of why they were there. They decided the case on their malice toward Janet. ****************************************************** Sorry Red, Although the jurors stated they didn't believe the mother(Janut), they also stated, the didn't believe the accuser. He sounded rehearsed, therefore he must be lying AGAIN. One of the jurors stated, he could not believe Jackson could sleep 365 nights with a boy and all that happened was TV and popcorn....But the boy stated, nothing happened between Michael and him. Either way...I enjoyed your post and though we disagreed, I would much rather argue with a sane person, then the nut jobs that invaded the message boards yesterday afternoon!

Yet each one of them with kids said they would not their child stay at Neverland. Gee what do you think? Still think not guilty?

mkm1983 thanks for the kind words and yes they were all out in force yesterday. I had a meeting with one of my old professors and missed most of it but I found it very interesting that there were extra police at the courthouse because law enforcement was afraid that if the verdict had been guilty some of them would try to commit suicide.

OK, now that I know we weren't talking Janet JACKSON. The mother of this boy ought to have her kids removed from her custody. I also hope they investigate her for welfare fraud and if possible, revisit every lawsuit she's ever filed. She's obviously a con artist who'll live off the system and the generosity of others as long as naive people allow it. She's a poor excuse for a human being never mind a parent.

Yet each one of them with kids said they would not their child stay at Neverland. Gee what do you think? Still think not guilty? ************************************************ Yes, Not Guilty!!!! I would let my children go to Neverland, but only with my supervision at all times, because they are MY responsibility!!!!!

Granny said something to the effect that ?that woman (Janet) snapped her fingers at me and who do you think you are snapping your fingers at me lady?? Another female juror said "she (Janet) kept staring at me" and yet another female juror said ?he (Jackson) looked perfectly normal to me you could go up to him on the street and say Hi? And then there was one male juror, who stated; "We actually challenged one another in the deliberation room," said Juror No. 1, a 62-year-old man from Santa Maria, later identified as Raymond Hultman. "We challenged the issues, and we came to the decision that pointed to reasonable doubt." Later, in an interview on "Larry King Live," Hultman said he believes Jackson "probably has molested boys." ========= Ah, the power of editing. =========== If that jury for the most part think they are now celebrities they are really delusional. They will have to live with the backlash of their decision for a very long time. =========== They didn't want to be interviewed by the media. The judge talked them into it for the most part. I know I wouldn't want my statements editorialized and edited either. ======= As one of the news reporters said Jackson will go back to his world but the jurors will have to continue living in theirs and face whatever comes from this verdict. ======== What will come from this verdict is a continuing trial by and in the media. The jurors will have to pay a negative price for exercising their civic duty. ======= So congratulations jurors you have let a child molester go free. It may have been a victory for the defense but it was a hollow victory ========= I didn't know the public was invited to the trial. So what was it like in there? How did you get off from work?

Subject of my message- The juror?s statements AFTER the trial were a joke ------------------------------------------------------ All this onfo is available on the net and the news shows, why would I have had to be at the trial to have garnered this information?