NationStates Jolt Archive

What's going on? is this the first time in history that a man, about to stand trial for child abduction and molestation will be allowed to address the nation to protest about the charges laid against him. The contents of some of the transcripts from the accuser's interviews were leaked to the press, so now the judge has deemed it fair that jackson get a nationwide 'address to the nation' style interview to comment on these.

What do you think: is california suspending judicial process for a rich rich man, or is it only right that he gets to comment on pretrial allegations that could prejudice the jury pool?

Bump

(i know its crap to bump your own but am surprised no one cares)

As long as the jury is not affectted or even allowed to hear this address then it will not ifringe the trial so basically let him do what he wants.

no it's beingbroadcast to the nation the night before jury selection takes place. messed up, huh?

Is the jury really allowed to hear his on air statement??

If so, what a farse.....and all because he is very rich!! sad world!....

no it's beingbroadcast to the nation the night before jury selection takes place. messed up, huh?

Well the jury will have some sort of pre bias either way making jury selection nigh on impossible. The has to be some sort of restriction on the viewing

If this is indeed so, it'd be nearly impossible to get an unbiased jury pool.

where would you get people that havent heard of him?? Do they have to be USA citizens I wonder?

where would you get people that havent heard of him?? Do they have to be USA citizens I wonder?

A deaf American who cannot listen to music? Perhaps someone from America's antartic base? Hermits from deliverance country? :cool:

where would you get people that havent heard of him?? Do they have to be USA citizens I wonder?

it needs to be a jury of his peers, so race changing multi millionairres only i guess

so thats a race changing multi millionaire deaf hermit from the antarctic

they should have asked us.....its seems so obvious! LOL!

Any nationwide address by Jacko has got to be hillarious. I say let him speak.

I voted "YES--other" for the simple fact that this is not a question of whether Mr. Jackson "should be allowed" to publically address his charges; the First Amendment gives him the right of free speech. The fact that he has charges pending does not abrogate this right.

We will leave the constitutionality of "gag orders" aside for another conversation.

Finally, it was the prosecution that opened to door to this by "leaking" portions of the accuser's statements to the press. They did this in order to taint prospective jurors. The judge is simply allowing Mr. Jackson to counteract this. Again, however, I don't believe this is even a matter over which a court should have authority.

I voted "YES--other" for the simple fact that this is not a question of whether Mr. Jackson "should be allowed" to publically address his charges; the First Amendment gives him the right of free speech. The fact that he has charges pending does not abrogate this right.

We will leave the constitutionality of "gag orders" aside for another conversation.

Finally, it was the prosecution that opened to door to this by "leaking" portions of the accuser's statements to the press. They did this in order to taint prospective jurors. The judge is simply allowing Mr. Jackson to counteract this. Again, however, I don't believe this is even a matter over which a court should have authority.

you must still agree it sets an unhealthy precedent - in any other case a defendant would not be granted such large scale pre-trial access to potential jurors. it is simply the fact that he's wealthy and famous that mean that he will be able to.

it needs to be a jury of his peers, so race changing multi millionairres only i guess

Race changing? I dont know what kind of magical land you hail from but here on planet Earth, one cannot change their race.

Yes - other. Freedom of speech. You don't have to listen, but he has the right to speak.

Race changing? I dont know what kind of magical land you hail from but here on planet Earth, one cannot change their race.

since it's only skin deep i posit that they can, and indeed have. however that's for another thread. off topic

since it's only skin deep i posit that they can, and indeed have. however that's for another thread. off topic

Race is only skin deep? I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry at your ignorance.

Race is only skin deep? I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry at your ignorance.

Back the statement

Yes - other. Freedom of speech. You don't have to listen, but he has the right to speak.

If Jacko gets to make an address, everyone will want to. We cannot allow this unless we want trials to turn into the circus.

I voted "YES--other" for the simple fact that this is not a question of whether Mr. Jackson "should be allowed" to publically address his charges; the First Amendment gives him the right of free speech. The fact that he has charges pending does not abrogate this right.

We will leave the constitutionality of "gag orders" aside for another conversation.

Finally, it was the prosecution that opened to door to this by "leaking" portions of the accuser's statements to the press. They did this in order to taint prospective jurors. The judge is simply allowing Mr. Jackson to counteract this. Again, however, I don't believe this is even a matter over which a court should have authority.

I agree up to a point......although it all doesnt really even out!

I (along with many others i'm sure) didnt hear about the leak to the press (until by chance I read someones post here) but everybody in the world with a tv will definitely see and hear his point of view. It will give him a huge advantage, more of an advantage than the prosecution got with the leaks....

Freedom of Speech

Back the statement

You honestly think we're all the exact same except for the color of our skin? So you mean to tell me that culture, language, and physiology mean nothing to you?

This whole American thing of Jury selection makes a farce of justice. A jury should be a randomly selewcted group of twelve adults. not a specially selected to have the opinions and tendencies that my lawyers want group of twelve adults.

To expect that a jury can be neutral is simple naïvety, and unnecessary. If neutrality had to be the case, then one truly neutral judge would be much better than twelve truly neutral jurors, as at least the judge would have the technical expertise required.

This being the case, let Jackson, or anyone speak. They have the right to do so.

You honestly think we're all the exact same except for the color of our skin? So you mean to tell me that culture, language, and physiology mean nothing to you?

you are not born with a different culture or language - physiology is tantamount to skin deep

If Jacko gets to make an address, everyone will want to.everyone should be allowed to.

Why are they not allowed to speak up, what is the big secret?

If Jacko gets to make an address, everyone will want to. We cannot allow this unless we want trials to turn into the circus.

Who pays for Jackos speech. If he is paying himself, then fine. I do not advocate that the state(nation) should pay. Everyone can make such a speech if they have the means.
That some do and some don't is a consequence of market freedoms that most Americans appear to hold dear. If you dont like this inequality in getting your message heard as a consequence of this, then you have some hard choices to make.

Let him speak with his lawyer and at a trial.

What the hell makes this asshole so special that he is allowed to 'address the nation' and some other asshole, charged with the same thing isn't allowed? The guy broke the law and therefore should be given no special exemption.

physiology is tantamount to skin deep

You clearly have never studied biology at any length. I cannot believe that in the 21st century, you still think that there is only one species of Homo sapien. wow....

Let him speak with his lawyer and at a trial.

What the hell makes this asshole so special that he is allowed to 'address the nation' and some other asshole, charged with the same thing isn't allowed? The guy broke the law and therefore should be given no special exemption.

He is not being given a special exemption, he is exercising his right to free speech. What is the problem?

You clearly have never studied biology at any length. I cannot believe that in the 21st century, you still think that there is only one species of Homo sapien. wow....
Yes, there is only one speceis of Homo Sapien. You aren't even bright enough to understand that by using the name homo sapien to refer to all people you are admitting that they are the same genus, Homo, and species, Sapien. Get a clue, retard.

What the hell makes this asshole so special that he is allowed to 'address the nation' and some other asshole, charged with the same thing isn't allowed?
again, everyone should be allowed to.
Why are they not allowed to speak up?
what is the big secret?

He is not being given a special exemption, he is exercising his right to free speech. What is the problem?

its not really fair on those accused who dont have these resources.......if we were in the same predicament *spelling* though, we would all use our money to defend ourselves as best we could!...

Yes, there is only one speceis of Homo Sapien. You aren't even bright enough to understand that by using the name homo sapien to refer to all people you are admitting that they are the same genus, Homo, and species, Sapien. Get a clue, retard.

One species true, but apparently those with a brain and those without. Just because you have the brain Drunk Commies, you should be above resorting to crude insults. Leave that for those brainless Homo Sapiens who think that there is more than one species of man. :)

..if we were in the same predicament ...we should be allowed to speak to the public and the media (whatever media is interested in your case)

its not really fair on those accused who dont have these resources.......if we were in the same predicament *spelling* though, we would all use our money to defend ourselves as best we could!...

See my post #27

You clearly have never studied biology at any length. I cannot believe that in the 21st century, you still think that there is only one species of Homo sapien. wow....

"Homo sapien is the description of mankind in his present state of evolution. It means wise man"

http://homepage.eircom.net/~mtstmichaels/FoodProject/FoodPages/Developmentofhs.html

now counter that

See my post #27

i agree......it wouldnt seem fair though if you were joe bloggs on minimum wage and couldnt afford it though!.... but I do agree with you anyway....

This shouldnt be any different from any other trial just because he is a *thinks of word other then personality*....

i agree......it wouldnt seem fair though if you were joe bloggs on minimum wage and couldnt afford it...afford what?

afford what?

am I wrong in thinking he is paying ludicrous amounts of money for airtime??

i agree......it wouldnt seem fair though if you were joe bloggs on minimum wage and couldnt afford it though!.... but I do agree with you anyway....

No one ever said life was fair. :)

am I wrong in thinking he is paying ludicrous amounts of money for airtime??
yes you are. If anything, they wanna pay him.

The only people that pays gazillion$$$$ to the press are the Politicacas (candidates)

yes you are. If anything, they wanna pay him.

The only people that pays gazillion$$$$ to the press are the Politicacas (candidates)

Uh Uh. The advertisers, that think that millions will watch his presentation are paying for it. If you were as famous as Jackson is, then the same would be made available to you. A price you pay for having a market economy.

He is not being given a special exemption, he is exercising his right to free speech. What is the problem?
Let's say your neighbour committed the same crime, would you allow him the same right, or feel that he should be allowed to do what Jackson wants to?

If I was his lawyer, I would advise him to stop acting like an ass.

Dancing on top of your car is inadvisable.

Public interviews on potentially hostile programs (make that probably) are inadvisable.

I first read that as 'Michael Jackson to undress America'.

I guess he's already made a good start.

Hey, he should be allowed to say whatever he wants to the press, if they're stupid enough to listen. If he's not a child molester he's one of the most abyssmally stupid human beings on the planet.

Jackson should have to follow the laws same as everyone else.