MICHEAL JACKSON CLEARED OF ALL CHARGES

Goody. Were his antennas charged with anything?

"Christopher O'Callaghan" wrote in message
...
MICHEAL JACKSON CLEARED OF ALL CHARGES

Yes, he is quite obviously as innocent as OJ... with his money, I think
we knew that right off... still, it would interesting hearing how the
jury arrived at that conclusion. It is almost like they were angry at
the prosecutor and sending him a message with their verdict--as I
expected them to find him guilty of at least the misdemeanor of
furnishing wine to the kids...

John

"Christopher O'Callaghan" wrote in message
...
MICHEAL JACKSON CLEARED OF ALL CHARGES

John Smith wrote:
Yes, he is quite obviously as innocent as OJ...

Which proves that $500,000 lawers are better than $50,000
lawyers. Why are we surprised?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"Which proves that $500,000 lawyers are better than $50,000 lawyers."

Yes. I was in Scotland a week ago and someone told me that there,
besides guilty or not guilty, the Scots have a third verdict available.
It is "Guilt not proven". In this verdict the person charged is not
exonorated but is released. This "guil not prioven" verdict is said to
be the origin of the term "Scot free".

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 15:47:05 -0500, (Richard
Harrison) wrote:

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"Which proves that $500,000 lawyers are better than $50,000 lawyers."

Yes. I was in Scotland a week ago and someone told me that there,
besides guilty or not guilty, the Scots have a third verdict available.
It is "Guilt not proven". In this verdict the person charged is not
exonorated but is released. This "guil not prioven" verdict is said to
be the origin of the term "Scot free".

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Thank you -- I had no idea that three-state logic was a
Scottish invention. :-)

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 15:47:05 -0500, (Richard
Harrison) wrote:
Thank you -- I had no idea that three-state logic was a
Scottish invention. :-)

It's 4 state logic - you forgot PAR.

Ken
--
Just my 2¢... 73 es gd dx de Ken KGØWX
Grid EM17ip, Flying Pigs #-1055
Proud builder & owner of Elecraft K2 #4913

On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 22:45:19 +0100, "Christopher O'Callaghan"
wrote:

MICHEAL JACKSON CLEARED OF ALL CHARGES

Excuse me, but "Cleared of all charges" or "Not guilty" are not the
same as "innocent".

Wes:

I disagree, and as tough as it is, I am an American first with real
respect for the forefathers...

.... and a person suspicious to Jackson's motives and actions second...

Truth is, you run the gauntlet and face a jury of your peers--if found
innocent, YOU ARE!!!

Any man who would deny that is worse than the criminal which may go
free...

To sum it up short and sweet--forefathers believed it is better to let a
hundred guilty men go free than to convict one innocent man... you can
read Jefferson's, Washington's and Franklins' personal writings to
verify this is correct...

Warmest regards,
John

"Wes Stewart" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 22:45:19 +0100, "Christopher O'Callaghan"
wrote:

MICHEAL JACKSON CLEARED OF ALL CHARGES

Excuse me, but "Cleared of all charges" or "Not guilty" are not the
same as "innocent".

Regardless, the law simply says that he is not guilty of the charges AS
PRESENTED. Innocence is a nice thought but not factual. If double jeopardy
did not exist his so-called "innocence" might be turned into a guilty
verdict. So, once again for the stubborn of thought - he is not innocent.
Rather he is NOT GUILTY OF THE CHARGES AS PRESENTED. The jury has already
said that they did not believe the PRESENTATION OF THE CHARGES beyond a
reasonable doubt.Let his publicity machine proclaim "innocence". They will
do a masterful job and lure loving teens into expensive concerts.

In the meantime let his antenna wire wrap around his.......


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Wes:

I disagree, and as tough as it is, I am an American first with real
respect for the forefathers...

... and a person suspicious to Jackson's motives and actions second...

Truth is, you run the gauntlet and face a jury of your peers--if found
innocent, YOU ARE!!!

Any man who would deny that is worse than the criminal which may go
free...

To sum it up short and sweet--forefathers believed it is better to let a
hundred guilty men go free than to convict one innocent man... you can
read Jefferson's, Washington's and Franklins' personal writings to verify
this is correct...

Warmest regards,
John

"Wes Stewart" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 22:45:19 +0100, "Christopher O'Callaghan"
wrote:

MICHEAL JACKSON CLEARED OF ALL CHARGES

Excuse me, but "Cleared of all charges" or "Not guilty" are not the
same as "innocent".