Donate SIGN UP

Michael Jackson

Avatar Image
Englishbird | 14:47 Thu 24th Mar 2005 | News
20 Answers
Is anyone else relieved to find out that Jacko has 'regular' porn in his house?
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 20rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Englishbird. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Not really, he can still have the other crap as well but its a good sign cus if they found that because if he has it they will find the other stuff
Jacko and a million others! but what does it prove?
Question Author
It doesn't 'prove' anything, but possibly suggests that he has 'normal' sexual drives.  It wasn't child porn, that'd be all over the news by now if they'd found that.
isn't anyone else getting tired of this Jacko case?  I just want it to hurry up and finish now....feels like its been going on forever.  He obviously thinks he is going to get off...well that's my impression anyway.
-- answer removed --

"Isn't anyone else getting tired of this Jacko case? "

Ain't that the truth, sick and tired of it, the antics of jacko all that back stuff reminds me of a schoolboy trying to pull a sickie to get off school, he's such a pampered *****... that said my take on it still, is that the weirdo is innocent of child abuse, as for the porn i agree it don't prove anything but you would expect them to find at least some child porn thats how they caught gary glitter, by inspecting the hard drive of his computer.. 

 


 

Not really English bird.  Anyone sick enough to do what paedophiles do is clever enough to plant a decoy such as this.
Certainly lays the 'Jacko's asexual, he's just an innocent child in a man's body' defence to rest though, doesn't it?
"Regular porn" sounds like an oxymoron to me.
 mj had plenty of time to get rid of this porn and rich enough to buy a new computer - doesn't this show that maybe he wanted it to be found inasmuch as being guilty of a lesser crime "proves" he didn't do the big crime?
'Relieved'? No, not at all. What a strange attitude to a serious criminal charge.
Id have to agree with the general drift of the arguement. Whats all this "innocent child trapped in a mans body" rubbish that he likes to keep everyone thinking? Not now they found "Jugs" and "Barely Legal" mags under his bed!
-- answer removed --
I totally agree with In A Pickle! - well said
latest allegation in court seems to be that his fingerprints, and those of the boy accusing him, were found on porn mags; so the prosecution argument is that he used it to excite the kids, not himself.
-- answer removed --
I don't really care either way. I think it's sick the amount of attention the whole case is getting and Michael Jackson's ego is probably feeding off it.
Englishbird, how on earth can you ask if people are "Relieved" by any aspect of this case?

Sorry answerbank if i had to cause you to edit my post, i promise to be more careful in future.

Hows that for a** licking.

My edit btw. 

Question Author

Good answers all the way down - i would argue that i can be 'relieved' if he is shown not to be a paedophile.  I would be relieved if anyone who has had that amount of access to children and then was accused of paedophillia were found not to have hurt those children.  It is almost a seperate argument as to whether this trial will ever out the truth tho.

1 to 20 of 20rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Michael Jackson

Answer Question >>