Thread: Michael Jackson

who the fuck is Michael Jefferson?

Okay i changed it back.. i just assumed everybody saw that south park episode where they said "michael jefferson" instead of jackson... i was hoping i would get in less trouble but wtf nvm i dont care its just a name

LOL I was really confused for a second there...

Beat it!

Are we talking about the Michael Jackson that lives in Motown?

Originally posted by Yume
Are we talking about the Michael Jackson that lives in Motown?

Well, yes and no, if you want to split hairs. And if you don't, no, we aren't.

May I once again draw everyone's attention to this. I said, or at least inferred, that Michael Jackson was innocent, because Kijika was innocent, and one innocent and one guilty don't make guilty -- only two guiltys do. It's tenth grade math logic:

Innocent/Not Guilty = F
Guilty = T

T + T = T
F + F = F
T + F = F

Anyway, I guess I am glad. Putting Sakima in jail would have been putting Kijika in jail too, and jailing an innocent man is...well, it's not something we do here in the USA.

Such a strange bizarre man or whatever he/she/it is.

There must have been children on the jury.

What can I say? Justice prevailed.

Kijika, crying for Sakima...

What the fuck?

Originally posted by Wasup
What the fuck?

Check the link five posts up.

I really disliked it when on the news they were interviewing the jury.... I mean come on, that is so slack! The jury are meant to keep their decisions to themselves, and not be sprouting it all on international televison, like some form of intertainment. If that happened here there would be an uproar, I thought the US prided itself on it's jsutice system, seems to be a pretty dodgy one...

Also I didn't like it when one of the jury said "I made my decision when the lady started snapping her fingers at the jury... I thought 'nobody snaps her fingers at me and gets away with it' " (something along those lines). What kind of jury is that? I mean MJ might well have been innocent, and I have nothing aginst the guy, but that doesnt excuse that kind of conduct in a criminal case... I think America thrives on entertainment so much that the court case wasn't so much a criminal case, as one long entertainment show.

Eh, i'm not trying to have a dig at you guys, most of it was the media... but thats' what I think anyways.

Originally posted by Roller
I really disliked it when on the news they were interviewing the jury.... I mean come on, that is so slack! The jury are meant to keep their decisions to themselves, and not be sprouting it all on international televison, like some form of intertainment. If that happened here there would be an uproar, I thought the US prided itself on it's jsutice system, seems to be a pretty dodgy one...

Also I didn't like it when one of the jury said \"I made my decision when the lady started snapping her fingers at the jury... I thought 'nobody snaps her fingers at me and gets away with it' \" (something along those lines). What kind of jury is that? I mean MJ might well have been innocent, and I have nothing aginst the guy, but that doesnt excuse that kind of conduct in a criminal case... I think America thrives on entertainment so much that the court case wasn't so much a criminal case, as one long entertainment show.

Eh, i'm not trying to have a dig at you guys, most of it was the media... but thats' what I think anyways.

I agree with you...

This is also why the pair keep themselves on the QT. Imagine the kind of three-ring circus that might come to town if it was discovered that there really are two Michael Jacksons!