Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2023 15:22:36 GMT
Thought: Since everything is being taken at face value, would Gavin Arvizo now be able to sue the Jackson companies the same way Robson/Safechuck are? MJ beat all 7 gazillion charges that were thrown at him in 03, but now it would only be rational that Arvizo should try his hand at taking it to the companies for abuse that never happened? Why should he be left out?
Men. Tal.
|
|
|
Post by SmoothGangsta on Jul 1, 2023 15:57:16 GMT
Really concerning that they seem to be acting like this abuse definitely happened.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2023 16:27:24 GMT
Really concerning that they seem to be acting like this abuse definitely happened. It's maybe just me, but I dont believe it's that the judges think the abuse happened, moreso for the current case it must be take for granted that they did in order to proceed. I don't think the actual validity of the accusations was ever in play here. Based on this I think the language in the documents read as much harsher than they are. I honestly think that the accusers have a massive uphill battle. The validity of their claims and accusations have not been given any legal credibility here. And any "credibility" their case has should be/will be torn asunder given the information at our (the general publics) disposal. All.of this also is BEFORE taking LN into account. LN actively contradicts their cases so that is all down the yellow brick road when/if this proceeds during the requested discovery phases. They're going for a settlement IMO because they will seriously hope that the validity of their claims will not be a topic at this.
|
|
|
Post by aazzaabb on Jul 1, 2023 16:40:58 GMT
Really concerning that they seem to be acting like this abuse definitely happened. It's maybe just me, but I dont believe it's that the judges think the abuse happened, moreso for the current case it must be take for granted that they did in order to proceed. I don't think the actual validity of the accusations was ever in play here. Based on this I think the language in the documents read as much harsher than they are. I honestly think that the accusers have a massive uphill battle. The validity of their claims and accusations have not been given any legal credibility here. And any "credibility" their case has should be/will be torn asunder given the information at our (the general publics) disposal. All.of this also is BEFORE taking LN into account. LN actively contradicts their cases so that is all down the yellow brick road when/if this proceeds during the requested discovery phases. They're going for a settlement IMO because they will seriously hope that the validity of their claims will not be a topic at this. If the estate settle out of court I’m going to bomb their head office!
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jul 1, 2023 17:52:43 GMT
Really concerning that they seem to be acting like this abuse definitely happened. It's maybe just me, but I dont believe it's that the judges think the abuse happened, moreso for the current case it must be take for granted that they did in order to proceed. I don't think the actual validity of the accusations was ever in play here. Based on this I think the language in the documents read as much harsher than they are. I honestly think that the accusers have a massive uphill battle. The validity of their claims and accusations have not been given any legal credibility here. And any "credibility" their case has should be/will be torn asunder given the information at our (the general publics) disposal. All.of this also is BEFORE taking LN into account. LN actively contradicts their cases so that is all down the yellow brick road when/if this proceeds during the requested discovery phases. They're going for a settlement IMO because they will seriously hope that the validity of their claims will not be a topic at this. The court does have to treat their allegations as fact at this stage, but I felt even beyond that requirement the tone was very hostile towards MJ's side. They constantly refer to Wade and James as "victims" (they could have used the more neutral "accuser"). Even in points where they conclude it's up to the jury to decide they give they unnecessary 2 cents and they are always hostile to MJ. As for the accusers facing an uphill battle: I wish I could have your confidence. I feel some fans don't realize how very dangerous a civil trial is to MJ under these circumstances. This won't be a criminal trial where there's a "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement. It's a civil trial with a lesser burden of proof where it's enough for the jury to feel there's a 50.01% chance it happened to come back with a liable verdict. And with all the decades long anti-MJ propaganda, previous allegations, tabloid witnesses like Blanca Francia etc, LN, MJ stating he shared bed with kids - how much do you think it will take a jury to get to that 50.01%? I wouldn't worry if this was a criminal trial but as it is a civil trial I'm extremely worried. Add to this the fact that MJ is not here to defend himself, to assist his defense. They are basically going to try a dead man who's unable to defend himself. Psychologically it's going to be flesh and blood people on one side, with their fake tears and fake trauma and a phantom/cartoon villain/a dead man + an impersonate corporate entity on the other. Who do you think will have an easier time to win the sympathy of a jury? A jury might easily think: "well, MJ is dead, his companies are rich, what harm is there in us throwing some money at these accusers?" It's not 2005. MJ is not here to assist his defense. He's not going to sit there and for the jury to see that he too is a human being. This whole thing is stacked against MJ on every level. Effectively trying a dead man, which in itself is already extremely unfair. Make no mistake, we are the ones fighting the uphill battle from now on.
|
|
|
Post by amaya on Jul 1, 2023 18:14:22 GMT
It's maybe just me, but I dont believe it's that the judges think the abuse happened, moreso for the current case it must be take for granted that they did in order to proceed. I don't think the actual validity of the accusations was ever in play here. Based on this I think the language in the documents read as much harsher than they are. I honestly think that the accusers have a massive uphill battle. The validity of their claims and accusations have not been given any legal credibility here. And any "credibility" their case has should be/will be torn asunder given the information at our (the general publics) disposal. All.of this also is BEFORE taking LN into account. LN actively contradicts their cases so that is all down the yellow brick road when/if this proceeds during the requested discovery phases. They're going for a settlement IMO because they will seriously hope that the validity of their claims will not be a topic at this. The court does have to treat their allegations as fact at this stage, but I felt even beyond that requirement the tone was very hostile towards MJ's side. They constantly refer to Wade and James as "victims" (they could have used the more neutral "accuser"). Even in points where they conclude it's up to the jury to decide they give they unnecessary 2 cents and they are always hostile to MJ. As for the accusers facing an uphill battle: I wish I could have your confidence. I feel some fans don't realize how very dangerous a civil trial is to MJ under these circumstances. This won't be a criminal trial where there's a "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement. It's a civil trial with a lesser burden of proof where it's enough for the jury to feel there's a 50.01% chance it happened to come back with a liable verdict. And with all the decades long anti-MJ propaganda, previous allegations, tabloid witnesses like Blanca Francia etc, LN, MJ stating he shared bed with kids - how much do you think it will take a jury to get to that 50.01%? I wouldn't worry if this was a criminal trial but as it is a civil trial I'm extremely worried. Add to this the fact that MJ is not here to defend himself, to assist his defense. They are basically going to try a dead man who's unable to defend himself. Psychologically it's going to be flesh and blood people on one side, with their fake tears and fake trauma and a phantom/cartoon villain/a dead man + an impersonate corporate entity on the other. Who do you think will have an easier time to win the sympathy of a jury? A jury might easily think: "well, MJ is dead, his companies are rich, what harm is there in us throwing some money at these accusers?" It's not 2005. MJ is not here to assist his defense. He's not going to sit there and for the jury to see that he too is a human being. This whole thing is stacked against MJ on every level. Effectively trying a dead man, which in itself is already extremely unfair. Make no mistake, we are the ones fighting the uphill battle from now on. Is there no hope? What can we do?
|
|
|
Post by aazzaabb on Jul 1, 2023 19:42:13 GMT
It's maybe just me, but I dont believe it's that the judges think the abuse happened, moreso for the current case it must be take for granted that they did in order to proceed. I don't think the actual validity of the accusations was ever in play here. Based on this I think the language in the documents read as much harsher than they are. I honestly think that the accusers have a massive uphill battle. The validity of their claims and accusations have not been given any legal credibility here. And any "credibility" their case has should be/will be torn asunder given the information at our (the general publics) disposal. All.of this also is BEFORE taking LN into account. LN actively contradicts their cases so that is all down the yellow brick road when/if this proceeds during the requested discovery phases. They're going for a settlement IMO because they will seriously hope that the validity of their claims will not be a topic at this. The court does have to treat their allegations as fact at this stage, but I felt even beyond that requirement the tone was very hostile towards MJ's side. They constantly refer to Wade and James as "victims" (they could have used the more neutral "accuser"). Even in points where they conclude it's up to the jury to decide they give they unnecessary 2 cents and they are always hostile to MJ. As for the accusers facing an uphill battle: I wish I could have your confidence. I feel some fans don't realize how very dangerous a civil trial is to MJ under these circumstances. This won't be a criminal trial where there's a "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement. It's a civil trial with a lesser burden of proof where it's enough for the jury to feel there's a 50.01% chance it happened to come back with a liable verdict. And with all the decades long anti-MJ propaganda, previous allegations, tabloid witnesses like Blanca Francia etc, LN, MJ stating he shared bed with kids - how much do you think it will take a jury to get to that 50.01%? I wouldn't worry if this was a criminal trial but as it is a civil trial I'm extremely worried. Add to this the fact that MJ is not here to defend himself, to assist his defense. They are basically going to try a dead man who's unable to defend himself. Psychologically it's going to be flesh and blood people on one side, with their fake tears and fake trauma and a phantom/cartoon villain/a dead man + an impersonate corporate entity on the other. Who do you think will have an easier time to win the sympathy of a jury? A jury might easily think: "well, MJ is dead, his companies are rich, what harm is there in us throwing some money at these accusers?" It's not 2005. MJ is not here to assist his defense. He's not going to sit there and for the jury to see that he too is a human being. This whole thing is stacked against MJ on every level. Effectively trying a dead man, which in itself is already extremely unfair. Make no mistake, we are the ones fighting the uphill battle from now on. Thanks for enlightening me on this. Don’t you think that if MJ’s lawyers can establish that Wade/James have been inconsistent with their stories for years and point out all the holes in LN that there’s a chance that they can be exposed for the liars they are? I’m not arguing against you by the way, I’m just asking? It’s all very disturbing. We need Tom Mesereau on MJ’s team. Gawd it’s all so depressing. You’ed think I’d be used to it by now?! 😔
|
|
|
Post by aazzaabb on Jul 1, 2023 19:55:56 GMT
“I’ve seen lawyers who don’t represent me and spokespeople who do not know me speaking for me. These characters always seem to surface with dreadful allegations just as another project, an album, a video is being released.” Michael Jackson.
Michael they’re still doing it to you brother. A day of reckoning will come. Eventually something has got to give. If there’s any justice in this world at all this will be that day.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2023 20:19:42 GMT
It's maybe just me, but I dont believe it's that the judges think the abuse happened, moreso for the current case it must be take for granted that they did in order to proceed. I don't think the actual validity of the accusations was ever in play here. Based on this I think the language in the documents read as much harsher than they are. I honestly think that the accusers have a massive uphill battle. The validity of their claims and accusations have not been given any legal credibility here. And any "credibility" their case has should be/will be torn asunder given the information at our (the general publics) disposal. All.of this also is BEFORE taking LN into account. LN actively contradicts their cases so that is all down the yellow brick road when/if this proceeds during the requested discovery phases. They're going for a settlement IMO because they will seriously hope that the validity of their claims will not be a topic at this. The court does have to treat their allegations as fact at this stage, but I felt even beyond that requirement the tone was very hostile towards MJ's side. They constantly refer to Wade and James as "victims" (they could have used the more neutral "accuser"). Even in points where they conclude it's up to the jury to decide they give they unnecessary 2 cents and they are always hostile to MJ. As for the accusers facing an uphill battle: I wish I could have your confidence. I feel some fans don't realize how very dangerous a civil trial is to MJ under these circumstances. This won't be a criminal trial where there's a "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement. It's a civil trial with a lesser burden of proof where it's enough for the jury to feel there's a 50.01% chance it happened to come back with a liable verdict. And with all the decades long anti-MJ propaganda, previous allegations, tabloid witnesses like Blanca Francia etc, LN, MJ stating he shared bed with kids - how much do you think it will take a jury to get to that 50.01%? I wouldn't worry if this was a criminal trial but as it is a civil trial I'm extremely worried. Add to this the fact that MJ is not here to defend himself, to assist his defense. They are basically going to try a dead man who's unable to defend himself. Psychologically it's going to be flesh and blood people on one side, with their fake tears and fake trauma and a phantom/cartoon villain/a dead man + an impersonate corporate entity on the other. Who do you think will have an easier time to win the sympathy of a jury? A jury might easily think: "well, MJ is dead, his companies are rich, what harm is there in us throwing some money at these accusers?" It's not 2005. MJ is not here to assist his defense. He's not going to sit there and for the jury to see that he too is a human being. This whole thing is stacked against MJ on every level. Effectively trying a dead man, which in itself is already extremely unfair. Make no mistake, we are the ones fighting the uphill battle from now on. I'm aware, and this is certainly the other side of the coin and it's very possible. I just refuse to be pessimistic about it, because I don't feel pessimistic. Let's see what happens. But I'm not allowing myself to let this bog me down like LN did as I've my own shit in life to deal with, as we all do.
|
|
|
Post by electriceyes on Jul 1, 2023 21:15:21 GMT
It's maybe just me, but I dont believe it's that the judges think the abuse happened, moreso for the current case it must be take for granted that they did in order to proceed. I don't think the actual validity of the accusations was ever in play here. Based on this I think the language in the documents read as much harsher than they are. I honestly think that the accusers have a massive uphill battle. The validity of their claims and accusations have not been given any legal credibility here. And any "credibility" their case has should be/will be torn asunder given the information at our (the general publics) disposal. All.of this also is BEFORE taking LN into account. LN actively contradicts their cases so that is all down the yellow brick road when/if this proceeds during the requested discovery phases. They're going for a settlement IMO because they will seriously hope that the validity of their claims will not be a topic at this. The court does have to treat their allegations as fact at this stage, but I felt even beyond that requirement the tone was very hostile towards MJ's side. They constantly refer to Wade and James as "victims" (they could have used the more neutral "accuser"). Even in points where they conclude it's up to the jury to decide they give they unnecessary 2 cents and they are always hostile to MJ. As for the accusers facing an uphill battle: I wish I could have your confidence. I feel some fans don't realize how very dangerous a civil trial is to MJ under these circumstances. This won't be a criminal trial where there's a "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement. It's a civil trial with a lesser burden of proof where it's enough for the jury to feel there's a 50.01% chance it happened to come back with a liable verdict. And with all the decades long anti-MJ propaganda, previous allegations, tabloid witnesses like Blanca Francia etc, LN, MJ stating he shared bed with kids - how much do you think it will take a jury to get to that 50.01%? I wouldn't worry if this was a criminal trial but as it is a civil trial I'm extremely worried. Add to this the fact that MJ is not here to defend himself, to assist his defense. They are basically going to try a dead man who's unable to defend himself. Psychologically it's going to be flesh and blood people on one side, with their fake tears and fake trauma and a phantom/cartoon villain/a dead man + an impersonate corporate entity on the other. Who do you think will have an easier time to win the sympathy of a jury? A jury might easily think: "well, MJ is dead, his companies are rich, what harm is there in us throwing some money at these accusers?" It's not 2005. MJ is not here to assist his defense. He's not going to sit there and for the jury to see that he too is a human being. This whole thing is stacked against MJ on every level. Effectively trying a dead man, which in itself is already extremely unfair. Make no mistake, we are the ones fighting the uphill battle from now on. At the same time, I think most people have a fairly good bullshit detector, which is why the Arvizo's failed in court and why nobody fell for Amber Heard's crap. Robson and Dumbfuck have had it easy up until now. The only reason so many people fell hook, line and sinker for LN was because it was basically a propaganda piece to further their lawsuit. The minute their lies are challenged in a court of law by a compentant and knowledgable defense attorney, it is bound to unravel for them. LN has made Wade and James cocky. Neither of them ever wanted a trial before, a settlement was always the end goal. The documentary has given them a misguided notion that they will be believed by a jury, because everyone pandered to them back in 2019. But if this actually does go to trial, there's no way the estate is going to go down without a fight, and I have a hard time believing they're going to come out of this looking so squeaky clean.
|
|
|
Post by aazzaabb on Jul 1, 2023 21:49:03 GMT
The court does have to treat their allegations as fact at this stage, but I felt even beyond that requirement the tone was very hostile towards MJ's side. They constantly refer to Wade and James as "victims" (they could have used the more neutral "accuser"). Even in points where they conclude it's up to the jury to decide they give they unnecessary 2 cents and they are always hostile to MJ. As for the accusers facing an uphill battle: I wish I could have your confidence. I feel some fans don't realize how very dangerous a civil trial is to MJ under these circumstances. This won't be a criminal trial where there's a "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement. It's a civil trial with a lesser burden of proof where it's enough for the jury to feel there's a 50.01% chance it happened to come back with a liable verdict. And with all the decades long anti-MJ propaganda, previous allegations, tabloid witnesses like Blanca Francia etc, LN, MJ stating he shared bed with kids - how much do you think it will take a jury to get to that 50.01%? I wouldn't worry if this was a criminal trial but as it is a civil trial I'm extremely worried. Add to this the fact that MJ is not here to defend himself, to assist his defense. They are basically going to try a dead man who's unable to defend himself. Psychologically it's going to be flesh and blood people on one side, with their fake tears and fake trauma and a phantom/cartoon villain/a dead man + an impersonate corporate entity on the other. Who do you think will have an easier time to win the sympathy of a jury? A jury might easily think: "well, MJ is dead, his companies are rich, what harm is there in us throwing some money at these accusers?" It's not 2005. MJ is not here to assist his defense. He's not going to sit there and for the jury to see that he too is a human being. This whole thing is stacked against MJ on every level. Effectively trying a dead man, which in itself is already extremely unfair. Make no mistake, we are the ones fighting the uphill battle from now on. I'm aware, and this is certainly the other side of the coin and it's very possible. I just refuse to be pessimistic about it, because I don't feel pessimistic. Let's see what happens. But I'm not allowing myself to let this bog me down like LN did as I've my own shit in life to deal with, as we all do. Too right man! Too right!! I’m taking this attitude as well. This ain’t going to be my life like past situations. Fuck. That!
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jul 2, 2023 2:45:11 GMT
I don't want to drag down anyone here or make you feel pessimistic, I just think we shouldn't fool ourselves as to where we are now: this ruling is a big blow to MJ's side and we are the one fighting the uphill battle from now on. And BTW, not only it's enough for the jury to think there's a 50.01% chance their claims have merit, but it's enough if only 75 percent of the jury to think so. It's hugely different from a criminal trial where all members of a jury have to agree that the defendant did it beyond a reasonable doubt. I find it unfair to try essentially criminal matters in a civil trial setting, especially sexual abuse allegations, because of the stigma they carry with themselves (of course it's different when there has already been a criminal trial in the same matter before that established the defendant's guilt). And exponentially more unfair in case of a dead man who can't defend himself. The court does have to treat their allegations as fact at this stage, but I felt even beyond that requirement the tone was very hostile towards MJ's side. They constantly refer to Wade and James as "victims" (they could have used the more neutral "accuser"). Even in points where they conclude it's up to the jury to decide they give they unnecessary 2 cents and they are always hostile to MJ. As for the accusers facing an uphill battle: I wish I could have your confidence. I feel some fans don't realize how very dangerous a civil trial is to MJ under these circumstances. This won't be a criminal trial where there's a "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement. It's a civil trial with a lesser burden of proof where it's enough for the jury to feel there's a 50.01% chance it happened to come back with a liable verdict. And with all the decades long anti-MJ propaganda, previous allegations, tabloid witnesses like Blanca Francia etc, LN, MJ stating he shared bed with kids - how much do you think it will take a jury to get to that 50.01%? I wouldn't worry if this was a criminal trial but as it is a civil trial I'm extremely worried. Add to this the fact that MJ is not here to defend himself, to assist his defense. They are basically going to try a dead man who's unable to defend himself. Psychologically it's going to be flesh and blood people on one side, with their fake tears and fake trauma and a phantom/cartoon villain/a dead man + an impersonate corporate entity on the other. Who do you think will have an easier time to win the sympathy of a jury? A jury might easily think: "well, MJ is dead, his companies are rich, what harm is there in us throwing some money at these accusers?" It's not 2005. MJ is not here to assist his defense. He's not going to sit there and for the jury to see that he too is a human being. This whole thing is stacked against MJ on every level. Effectively trying a dead man, which in itself is already extremely unfair. Make no mistake, we are the ones fighting the uphill battle from now on. At the same time, I think most people have a fairly good bullshit detector, which is why the Arvizo's failed in court and why nobody fell for Amber Heard's crap. Robson and Dumbfuck have had it easy up until now. The only reason so many people fell hook, line and sinker for LN was because it was basically a propaganda piece to further their lawsuit. The minute their lies are challenged in a court of law by a compentant and knowledgable defense attorney, it is bound to unravel for them. LN has made Wade and James cocky. Neither of them ever wanted a trial before, a settlement was always the end goal. The documentary has given them a misguided notion that they will be believed by a jury, because everyone pandered to them back in 2019. But if this actually does go to trial, there's no way the estate is going to go down without a fight, and I have a hard time believing they're going to come out of this looking so squeaky clean. It's true that it may be a better setting than LN, at least here they can be cross examined and the Estate lawyers are going to have some recourse, but it's still extremely stacked against MJ for reasons I mentioned above. What I can't even get my head around is that they are effectively trying a dead man that no civilized society should ever do. When I googled "trying a dead man" only examples from the Middle Ages came up or from countries with very bad human rights records (eg. Russia). I know, I know technically they are trying MJ's companies here, but it involves trying MJ. When the jury gets a list of questions to answer at the end, the first question likely will be "Do you think MJ abused Wade/James?" How can you proceed to talk about company responsibly without first deciding on that? And that's trying a dead man. Without him being able to defend himself. Reading the tentative I wonder that maybe a weaker question to answer is going to be enough here, which is "Do you think MJ posed a danger to children?" On the plus side, this is slightly better because it's not declaring MJ definitely guilty,"just" dangerous. On the negative side, it's going to be even easier for a jury to say "yes" to this question. After all a lot of people think sharing a bed with children is in itself dangerous. You don't even have to prove anything else then. Where Wade and James might run into more difficulties is their allegation that the supposed abuse is the company's responsibility. I think on a purely common sense level there's hardly anyone who would feel this is the company's fault and not the parents'. Not even people who think MJ did it. In fact a lot of comments after LN was bashing the parents. Of course, no one told them in LN that you should bash Norma Staikos instead. LOL. Funny, isn't it that while in court they argue for 10 years that their alleged abuse is the fault of MJ's companies that they call "the most sophisticated child sexual procurement organizations the world has known" and they call Norma Staikos and MJ's other secretaries "madames", they somehow don't feel the need to mention this sophisticated child abuse maffia in 4 hours of LN? I think they knew how it look for the average Joe and that it's not a good look for them. If they are trying to blame it on companies while their own parents were so obviously negligent I think that will cause a lot of eye rolls and people will think it's a money grab. So the Estate must absolutely be aggressive in hammering home this point. Now, whether there is some legal magic trickery to still make it the company's fault because they didn't have policies re. this or Blanca kept it to herself, I don't know, but IMO it would feel wrong to people. Most people don't feel you need to tell parents in a company policy to not leave their children to sleep in an adult men's room. Most people won't have sympathy towards this argument that it was somehow the missing company policy that caused it rather than then their own parents who allowed them to sleep in MJ's room. So this is where I have more hope.
|
|
|
Post by LindavG on Jul 2, 2023 4:09:01 GMT
^ I don't know, I feel like it would be very bad for Michael's image if his own Estate starts arguing that parents should know better than to leave their kids alone with Michael. Yes, it might win them the lawsuit but this kind of argument will also solidify him as a dangerous predator to children in the public's mind. I hope the Estate first and foremost makes it very clear that no abuse took place and that Wade and James are NOT victims. That should be the basis of their defense. There is so much evidence in MJ's favour. Even if, god forbid, they lose the case, we can still rely on that evidence to defend Michael and frame it as the miscarriage of justice that it would be.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jul 2, 2023 4:51:51 GMT
^ I don't know, I feel like it would be very bad for Michael's image if his own Estate starts arguing that parents should know better than to leave their kids alone with Michael. Yes, it might win them the lawsuit but this kind of argument will also solidify him as a dangerous predator to children in the public's mind. I hope the Estate first and foremost makes it very clear that no abuse took place and that Wade and James are NOT victims. That should be the basis of their defense. There is so much evidence in MJ's favour. Even if, god forbid, they lose the case, we can still rely on that evidence to defend Michael and frame it as the miscarriage of justice that it would be. Very often it's virtually impossible to prove a negative, ie. that something (in this case abuse) didn't happen. That's why in court the burden of proof is on the accuser that something did happen. However, at a civil trial that burden is a LOT lower than in a criminal trial. Once again: this jury won't have to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. It's enough that 75 percent of them slightly leans to believing Wade and James. And yes, the Estate can and probably show their changing stories, their proven lies and so on. But on the other side there will be 30 years of building up MJ as a child molester in the media; a whole "no smoke without fire" thought process; the whole MeToo pressure of "just believe victims" where you can't bring up accusers' proven lies and inconsistencies as evidence of them lying altogether because that's just excused as a part of their "trauma"; people like Blanca Francia (and yes, she wouldn't be a strong witness in a criminal court considering she's also on the record admitting she didn't see anything, but for a civil trial jury it might be enough that now Wade is endorsing her story to think it's more likely she did see something). Then the whole undisputed issue of MJ sharing bed with kids. When you read general public comments that's the number one thing that people bring up as "evidence" of his guilt. Again, it wouldn't fare in a criminal trial, like it didn't in 2005, as it's a fallacy, but in a civil trial it may easily tip the jury to thinking "it more likely than not happened". There's no "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement here! This is not like the trial 2005! It's much worse. I'm not sure fans realize what this means. This whole situation is extremely stacked against MJ. I don't think MJ's Estate has to argue from a position of MJ being guilty, but they will have to argue from a position of "even if you (the jury) might lean to thinking the abuse happened, the companies still can't be liable...". Since the lawsuit is against the companies, they will have to argue that. That's not them saying "we admit MJ was guilty". It's foolish to construe it like that. And BTW, this is ALREADY a miscarriage of justice in essence. A dead man being tried is not a fair trial. And on top of that at a civil trial with a lot lower burden of proof. It's actually very upsetting. It's not a fair setting. You can already point that out now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2023 5:55:09 GMT
^ I don't know, I feel like it would be very bad for Michael's image if his own Estate starts arguing that parents should know better than to leave their kids alone with Michael. Yes, it might win them the lawsuit but this kind of argument will also solidify him as a dangerous predator to children in the public's mind. I hope the Estate first and foremost makes it very clear that no abuse took place and that Wade and James are NOT victims. That should be the basis of their defense. There is so much evidence in MJ's favour. Even if, god forbid, they lose the case, we can still rely on that evidence to defend Michael and frame it as the miscarriage of justice that it would be. This is not like the trial 2005! It's much worse. I'm not sure fans realize what this means. This whole situation is extremely stacked against MJ. Is it though? MJ would have been sent to jail for the rest of his life (possibly) with his career ending and leaving him and his legacy in the same category as Garry Glitter, not even R. Kelly. No #MJInnocent campaign would have lasted a day with a guilty conviction in 2005. LN did more damage than a negative outcome in this trial IMO, but a positive outcome will definitely mend a lot of bridges. I'd be sick at the thought of the 2 dipshits getting the payout they wanted, but I'm just going to let this one play out and see what happens. I'm definitely going to hold onto the thought that this could potentially be very positive. But I would advise anyone against getting too invested in something we cannot change or do anything about. MJJC is a car crash at the minute. The only negative comments I've read accidently on Twitter are fans responding to naysayers. Yes it's shit, but there are still some reasons to feel slightly hopeful. I didn't want to start a back and forth about feeling this way over that way, btw. But it just seems like optimistic posts are very slim here.
|
|