Brian Hill wrote:

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"Brian Hill" wrote:


"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"Brenda Ann" wrote:
I'm sorry... just because the mother is a sleazeball doesn't exonerate
Jacko. It has been said before -- if he weren't a wealthy celebrity
with a high profile, the case would have been open and shut. *Not
having heard the courtroom presentation,* I can only go by what I see,
and I acknowledge that the jury may have seen it differently.

--
Eric F. Richards

"The weird part is that I can feel productive even when I'm doomed."
- Dilbert


Wouldn't he have had child porn too?

B.H.


Actually, he didn't have any kiddie porn. Even with this group of
mouth-breathers on the jury, that would've sealed his fate.


That's my point. If he really is a pedophile , I would think he would have
had at least one article of child porn?

B.H.

I don't think you can use the absence of child porn as a strong indication he's
not a pedophile.

Garden variety porn might have been a tool used in the grooming process.

I imagine if a pedophile showed a kid child porn, it wouldn't take very long for
the kid to figure things out and get very uncomfortable.

I'm not sure he's a pedophile - but if I was a parent, I wouldn't want him alone
with my kids.

"Mark S. Holden" wrote in message I'm not sure he's a
pedophile - but if I was a parent, I wouldn't want him alone
with my kids.

I would just like to know what the truth is. It just seems like these things
never get to the heart of the matter. I felt strongly OJ was guilty but he
got off. Our system of law never leaves you satisfied with knowing the
absolute truth.

B.H.

On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 23:42:36 GMT, "
wrote:

wrote:


That He Got Acquitted on all counts..

Hard to Believe California Justice..

Law and order have nothing to do with justice!

And now there is the OJ killer and the fruit pervert out there.

I hope the whole state slides into the ocean.

After the big one, California will remain and the rest of the
country will slide into the Atlantic.

"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"Mark S. Holden" wrote in message I'm not sure he's a
pedophile - but if I was a parent, I wouldn't want him alone
with my kids.

I would just like to know what the truth is. It just seems like these
things
never get to the heart of the matter. I felt strongly OJ was guilty but he
got off. Our system of law never leaves you satisfied with knowing the
absolute truth.

B.H.


That's because for the most part, the absolute truth is unknowable. Better
that an occasional guilty person get off than for a single innocent person
to lose liberty or life.

"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"Brian Hill" wrote:


"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"Brenda Ann" wrote:
I'm sorry... just because the mother is a sleazeball doesn't
exonerate
Jacko. It has been said before -- if he weren't a wealthy celebrity
with a high profile, the case would have been open and shut. *Not
having heard the courtroom presentation,* I can only go by what I
see,
and I acknowledge that the jury may have seen it differently.

--
Eric F. Richards

"The weird part is that I can feel productive even when I'm doomed."
- Dilbert


Wouldn't he have had child porn too?

B.H.


Actually, he didn't have any kiddie porn. Even with this group of
mouth-breathers on the jury, that would've sealed his fate.



That's my point. If he really is a pedophile , I would think he would have
had at least one article of child porn?

For a bunch of people who've been following the trial, you guys haven't
really been following the trial. (Maybe that's a good thing.)

He's had books of naked boys in his bedroom. They might not qualify as porn
for any of us, but perhaps they served that purpose for him.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in691878.shtml

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"Mark S. Holden" wrote in message I'm not sure he's a
pedophile - but if I was a parent, I wouldn't want him alone
with my kids.

I would just like to know what the truth is. It just seems like these
things
never get to the heart of the matter. I felt strongly OJ was guilty but
he
got off. Our system of law never leaves you satisfied with knowing the
absolute truth.

B.H.


That's because for the most part, the absolute truth is unknowable.
Better
that an occasional guilty person get off than for a single innocent person
to lose liberty or life.




Smiling I know Brenda. I just meant it's frustrating.

B.H.

"Honus" wrote in message
news:084se.18829$gL4.919@trnddc07...

"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"Brian Hill" wrote:


"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"Brenda Ann" wrote:
I'm sorry... just because the mother is a sleazeball doesn't
exonerate
Jacko. It has been said before -- if he weren't a wealthy celebrity
with a high profile, the case would have been open and shut. *Not
having heard the courtroom presentation,* I can only go by what I
see,
and I acknowledge that the jury may have seen it differently.

--
Eric F. Richards

"The weird part is that I can feel productive even when I'm doomed."
- Dilbert


Wouldn't he have had child porn too?

B.H.


Actually, he didn't have any kiddie porn. Even with this group of
mouth-breathers on the jury, that would've sealed his fate.



That's my point. If he really is a pedophile , I would think he would
have
had at least one article of child porn?

For a bunch of people who've been following the trial, you guys haven't
really been following the trial. (Maybe that's a good thing.)

He's had books of naked boys in his bedroom. They might not qualify as
porn
for any of us, but perhaps they served that purpose for him.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in691878.shtml


I said I haven't been following it but I thought I heard he did have what
you stated.

B.H.

Brenda Ann wrote:

That's because for the most part, the absolute truth is unknowable. Better
that an occasional guilty person get off than for a single innocent person
to lose liberty or life.


Think US gulags....





mike

"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"Honus" wrote in message

snip

For a bunch of people who've been following the trial, you guys haven't
really been following the trial. (Maybe that's a good thing.)

He's had books of naked boys in his bedroom. They might not qualify as
porn
for any of us, but perhaps they served that purpose for him.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in691878.shtml


I said I haven't been following it but I thought I heard he did have what
you stated.

I think the -really- telling thing is that he had those books in his
bedroom, in a -locked- cabinet.

MII - Some call it Cana-Duh ) ~ RHF
. . . . .