29 Responses to “Numenarh asks what?”

1. Sue Says:
   June 25th, 2005 at 5:12 am

   It’s an answer to your original question… which I believe was… where have all the people that think MJ was guilty gone?

   Yes, you have repeatedly insulted me and others. Your continuios use of the word “innocent” instead of not guilty is insulting to say the least.
   I quote you here “What repeated insults are you talking about? Do you mean where I explain stuff or what?”
   What “stuff” have you explained? I asked you several times to provide a source or link for your statements during the trial, you never did. You later stated (after the trial and verdict) that your sources were watching CNN, Fox News and reading “stuff” (as you put it) on the internet.
   I repeatedly asked you to stop emailing me, yet you continued until I blocked your emails.

   As far as your blind statements that I “can’t stand me and hate me and all that jazz” is incorrect. I never said any of those things and to be honest, I don’t care about you one way or the other.
   I hope that answers your questions.

2. roseena Says:
   June 25th, 2005 at 6:33 am

   Numerah and Sue - I think i can add to this topic and also answer numerahas initial question- I was/am a person who believes MJ is guilty - he was simply fortunate enough to manipulate the system and the jury into being found not-guilty - and sue is very correct in pointing out mj was found not guilty - he was NOT found innocent.
   Now, your question about “where are the people who believe MJ is guilty” - well, in my case, I continued to post for several days after the verdict - and since have only popped in and out of the forum every so often to see who is blogging. The reason for my disinterest in the site is the participants and posting changed drastically after the verdict - the “regulars” are gone - when i say regulars, i mean the posters who were both opposed and for MJ - but they were people who were challanging and interesting and intellegent sounding - after the verdict it seemed all the freaky supports flocked to the forum and gushed non-sense… how can one reply to that? the forum lost its substance following the verdict. I do not intend to sound mean, but everyone currently on the site appear they are either mentally instable, on crack, or very
   creepy-strange - with the exception of cheetah, who is one of the originals i was referring to earlier.
   SO numerah, we believers of mj’s guilt are here but lost interest because the forum became remedial with remedial participants. SO please do not flatter yourself or the image of mj by assuming the mj opposers left the site with their tail between their leg - we left because it is silly to debate with the odd people and their pointless posts - I am the first person who loves to debate a topic and challenge as well as be challeneged but there isnt any competition on this site anymore. The forum transformed from a stormy site with powerful witty views to a graveyard of sappy strange thoughts of mj lovers. eek. BTY - Juror number 5, you know the old woman who discredited the “mother’s” testimony due to her snapping habbit…..well, her grandson is a convicted child molestor. Hmmm, isn’t that interesting. Do you think she had bias towards pedophiles? probably. Do you think the system can be flawed? probably. I will still respect our system, but i am still strong and wise enough to know nothing is flaw-proof.
   MJ was lucky. The jury was star-struck.
   So, continue on all the MJ supports, i hope your posting of inner love and thoughts for the pedophile will give you the satisfaction your seeking.

3. Sue Says:
   June 26th, 2005 at 2:09 pm

   I totally agree with you Roseena! Too many Wacko Fans spouting “I love Michael” all over the place. There was no one left to have a decent discussion with.

4. Cheetah Says:
   June 27th, 2005 at 1:35 am

   The issue of “not guilty” vs “innocent” is all semantics to me. Whatever the language used, the results are the same. He, meaning MJ, got to leave the courthouse and go home whether he committed the crime or not.
   Yet, I think you’re both right in your assessments of the verdict. Nuemenarh, you’re right because in a court of law a defendant is presumed “innocent” until proven guilty. The jury found the evidence to be lacking and could not find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, the defendant is reverted back to his “presumed innocent” status before the trial began.
   Sue, you are also correct because the verdict was not a sweeping assessment of MJ’s character. The verdict was decided based on the “evidence”. So if it is an assessment of anything, it is by a unanimous decision of the jury that the evidence was too weak to bring about a conviction. It doesn’t mean that MJ didn’t commit the crimes. It only means that his guilt was not proven.
   I am ambivalent about MJ but happy with this verdict. We would all suffer in a country where you could be locked away forever based on unproven allegations.
   I would rather have a guilty man go free for lack of proof than have an innocent man lose his life due to trumped up allegations.
   I do understand those who are opposed to the verdict. It can be more than frustrating to watch someone who you believe to be guilty of such a heinous crime go free. However, better that than having us all be presumed guilty simply because we appear to be so.
   I’m sorry to hear that the site may have to close due to lack of posts. I’ve enjoyed posting but Roseena is right about the loss of substance here. Prior to the verdict the site was colorful with a texture of many different and interesting opinions. Now, it has taken on the feel of a fan forum. That’s unfortunate. If you’re not a fan you won’t find much of interest here.
   I’ll continue to pop in and out but just in case the site doesn’t make it, I’ll give my propers.
   Thanks for the compliment, Matt. I find your opinions refreshing too. Rosie, I really enjoyed your posts, especially the play between you and Rafe. I found it so interesting that the two of you could meet in the middle despite your differences of opinion. I miss Rafe’s poetry and overwhelming intelligence. Rachel, I loved your topics! Yvette and Danii, I’ll pray for your guy. He’s going to need all the prayer he can get. Let’s also pray for the accuser and his family. What the law can’t sort out, God can.

5. Yvette Says:
   June 27th, 2005 at 2:10 pm

   Numenarh, There is a lot mor topics to discuss here… how about Mr. Jackson was being railroaded by the the prosecutor?
   How everybody got it wrong? Mr. Jackson has never molested anyone!
   Why not do a post mortem about how the news coverage that isn’t filied with excuses as to why Mr. Jackson was villified before and during the trail?
   How about writing how blatanly and disrespectful way in which some networks heads were busy chasing the dollars generated from Mr.Jackson’s pain and were not even concerned about treating him as a human being?
   Let’s talk about that you Kackson haters whom have seem to tucked their tales between their legs and are not posting anymore!

6. Yvette Says:
   June 27th, 2005 at 2:12 pm

   Court TV’s Nancy Dis-Grace! and buddies…

7. HERB Says:
   June 27th, 2005 at 2:22 pm

   WHAT BULLSHIT, roseena and sue were very strong in the belief that mj was guilty and would be found guilty. he was not now you want to say that those who believed he was innocent were stupid supporters. you were wrong, you say that this forum has now become the mj fan site. he won, he was presumed innocent untill proven guilty. meaning he was proven to still be innocent. since you were wrong in your opinions people now want to say that 12 people were blinded by mj and ignored what little evidence that was in this case. people never really looked at the evidence in an objective view. people took what the prosecution put out and said that if he was charged with it then it must be true. he walked out INNOCENT, NOT GUILTY, AND A FREE MAN. so have all the counter stories you want. accuse the jury of being star struck, accuse mj of buying the jury, say the jury was stupid. but, admit that the evidence was not there to prove guilt. the only thing that was proven beyond a reasonable doubt was that people make money off of michael jackson. book deals, selling stories, false accusations. even those who were against mj are now making money about michael. so yes let US who looked at this case and said he was innocent have our day. if he was found guilty you would be doing the same thing in saying that you were right all the time. SO LET IT GO

8. Cheetah Says:
   June 27th, 2005 at 3:51 pm

   Yvette, you’re right about there being a lot more topics to discuss here but not all of them have to be so “fan” centered. I also disliked the pundit shows like, Nancy Grace. I was also disgusted with Court TV’s biased covering of the case not to mention Gloria Allred’s third attempt to have MJ’s children taken away. You don’t have to be a fan to be outraged by these examples.
   You say that you know Michael personally. Not everyone has that close of an association. Why not talk about the “why” behind your conviction that he is not a pedophile.
   I remember an interview I saw on TV with the mother of a young AIDS victim, Ryan White. Ryan, a hemophiliac from birth, contracted AIDS from a blood transfusion. He was made a modern day leper in his home town of Kokomo, Indiana eventually being forced out of his middle school. After a bullet was shot through a picture window in his home, Ryan and his family moved to Cicero, Indiana where they were better recieved.
   Michael Jackson personally contacted Ryan and befriended him. He offered the family financial, emotional and personal support. Michael literally showered Ryan with gifts, visited often and talked to him for long hours on the phone. Michael helped start foundations and scholarships in Ryans name. When Ryan lost his battle with AIDS, Michael wrote the song “Gone Too Soon” as a dedication to him. This story speaks volumes about MJ’s character. Do you know any more?
   You’re a fan. Instead of wasting your breath or fingers in this case, trying to contest his haters defend Michael with your personal stories of his kindness. Erase every bad word spoken of him with a good one of your own. Don’t worry about the people who don’t like him. Make up for their dislike by liking him all the more.

9. HERB Says:
   June 27th, 2005 at 11:49 pm

   very well put cheetah, you never hear of all the things that mj has done to help people or the millions he has donated to various causes. stuff like that will never make the news because it is not what people want to hear. if he would of been found guilty there still would of been talk about it, but because he was not the story has died away. anyway i still would like to hear from the other side, now that it is over.

10. roseena Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 1:04 am

    herb and others - you missed the point of my post - I did NOT label the supporters or believers in MJ innocence as “tupid”- i pointed out this site lost “substance” and “quality” since the verdict was read primarily to the gushing posts and the “new” participants as well as the loss of the “old” participants. Ok herb, 10 people post “i love michael because… (fill in the blank with any shit story) - ok, how does a person reply to that, whether they are a mj supporter or not , how does one reply to that level of communication? you cannot.
    I think you and maybe others got a little confused, there is a place for people to rally and “have your day” as you put it herb…. the place is not forum whose purpose is to spark conversation and debate, the place for what your looking for is called a fan website or fan chat room. Try looking in either of those places, i think you will be more satisfied with the results.

    and one last thing - why didnt ANYONE have a comment on juror number 5? the old granny who closed her mind to the possibility of molestation as soon as the accusers mom snapped at her? Ah, her grandson is a CONVICTED CHILD MOLESTOR, this as well helped MJ.
    So does this mean I can rob a bank and all i have to do is have a prosecution witness snap snap snap at the jury and like magic, i will be cleansed of all charges. come on - spare ME the bullshit.

11. Cheetah Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 3:30 am

    Oops, Roseena, I’m sorry about the oversight. I meant to comment on the info you inserted about juror #5.
    While I’m sure the defense considered juror #5 as an asset , there were many liabilities also.
    First of all the jury was made up of non blacks. In surveys taken blacks were shown to be more sympathetic to MJ’s side of the case and less likely to believe in his guilt. Also juror #8, the 42 yr old special education school aide, had a sister who was raped at age 12 and two nieces who had been sexually molested by her brother-in-law who is currently serving a sentence in a Florida prison.

12. Sue Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 3:57 am

    Herb..
    Please don’t put words in my mouth..I NEVER said any of you that believe in MJ’s innocence were “stupid supporters”. I’m honored to be grouped in with Roseena, but the only one I’ve had a problem with is numerath. This person emailed me several hateful emails and I repeatedly asked him to stop….only to get more emails. I had to block him before the hate stopped. I believe that MJ is a pedofile and I am entitled to that opinion. I also know that the evidence against him was not good enough or he would have been convicted.

13. roseena Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 4:41 am

    wow sue - i thought i was the only one to get “on-the-sly-hate-mail to my private email acct from numenarh. I will say though, when i asked him to stop, he did. Maybe he didn’t realize you wanted him to stop. On that note, WHY - WHY does it seem the MJ supporters are radical? I find the behavior of “emailing mean messages” to a bloggers personal email account as radical and aggressive - Almost sending the unspoken message of “don’t disagree with me or i will send creepy emails to your private email account” - That form of agression just does not sit well with me. Is it just me, or does it seem the MJ opposers, the people NOT tolerant to pedophiles are more conservative and ultimately more classy? it just seems the mj believers are too liberal and forceful.

14. roseena Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 4:44 am

    THANKS for the reply cheetah. The other juror with the molested nieces could go either way… she could be resentful to molesters or very open minded and forgiving since her brother in law was also an offender. I just hope the jury came to the conclusion of “not guilty” based on the fact of desiring more powerful evidence and not based on a whooping case of star-struck syndrome or worse….. a personal dislike for the accusers mom.

15. Cheetah Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 7:15 am

    You know, Roseena, your “star struck jury syndrome” theory is interesting. I wonder what the psychology is to support that? It does seem that for whatever reason celebrities get off with lesser punishment despite the seriousness of the crime. However, I don’t have any statistics to prove this. It just seems that way.
    Have you thought about this? One of the jurors in the case attended the big party held to celebrate the verdict at a California casino. His/her attendance may have been just a matter of curiosity or something more. Hmmm….

16. Cheetah Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 7:25 am

    You know, Roseena, your star-struck jury syndrome theory is interesting. I wonder what the psychology is to support that? Celebrities do appear to get off with lesser sentences but I’m not sure if this is really true.

    Just a thought…
    One of the jurors attended the big celebration at a California casino held shortly after the verdicts were announced.
    Maybe he/she was just curious or maybe it was something more. Makes you say hmmm…huh?

17. roseena Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 11:48 am

    i guess my star struck theory can never really be proven true (not sure if there is a way to measure levels of star-strucken-ness) but is also can never be disproven for the same reasons.
    So basically, we have granny juror who was swept up in the drama of the courtroom, we have the unstable sobbing woman who lost control simply from hearing a song, and yes, the party-gal who attended the casino celebration - sounds like at least 25% of the jury did fall ill to the star struck syndrome.
    cheetah, it would be interesting to hear of results from psych research on this topic. If there are formal results with conclusive data on this topic, sneeden should have used it in the jury selection process! and isn’t there rules concerning the mental state or a juror?
    oh, bty - i put michaels passport in the mail - he’ll have it anyday now

18. roseena Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 11:49 am

    i guess my star struck theory can never really be proven true (not sure if there is a way to measure levels of star-strucken-ness) but is also can never be disproven for the same reasons.
    So basically, we have granny juror who was swept up in the drama of the courtroom, we have the unstable sobbing woman who lost control simply from hearing a song, and yes, the party-gal who attended the casino celebration - sounds like at least 25% of the jury did fall ill to the star struck syndrome.
    cheetah, it would be interesting to hear of results from psych research on this topic. If there are formal results with conclusive data on this topic, sneeden should have used it in the jury selection process! and isn’t there rules concerning the mental state or a juror?
    oh, bty - i put michaels passport in the mail - he’ll have it anyday now

19. numenarh Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 11:32 pm

    Herb, you are kind of fiery aren’t you? It appears Sue wants to make friends with you and Cheetah. But not old Numenarh. That is okay. Herb is exactly correct…though I wish he’d phrased it more (Different) but I support his main idea totally. Also I really like what Herb and Cheetah have to say on the matter. Oh and to the Classy Roseena let me say…Kiss my butt. You are hateful and kind of superior like Sue. Maybe you two should meet in real life and discuss how unfair you would make the world so you could achieve your superior and more classy lifestyle. I am sure that was Hateful but I am not sorry about it cause you two keep spouting such trash. I was going to kind of Chastise Herb for the BS remark and then I just thought about your “Classy” we are better mail and I just decided you were a bit loopy Roseena. Sue…you too. I don’t know why you guys have to insult people but now, FINALLY, you have gotten me to bite on this whole crush you deal. I have really taken enough abuse without firing back. You have attacked my character and I don’t like it. MJ is legally innocent and all those of you that hate is so much you have to decide you’re better than those that support the verdict then you can…fill in the blank. Okay, enough of that. Kind of got hot under the collar. Going ot leave the first part in however.
    As I said Cheetah and Herb are dead on in my opinion. If you keep posting stuff like what you have sent me then I bet you get even more angry posts from Herb. I think Cheetah is more laid back than me and probably will not fall victim to your anger-making ways. I did for a minute there…but honestly just think about it a minute….Why do you guys have to be more “classy” or “better” than the supporters of MJ?? I don’t have to feel like I am better than you. Even now.

20. numenarh Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 11:58 pm

    Yvette is dead on too. Railroaded? Yes.

21. roseena Says:
    June 29th, 2005 at 1:44 am

    numenarh - your posting proves my theory… irrational MJ supporter’s tend to be agressive and tacky. Bottom line, you as well as other mj supporters get very angry when someone else disagrees with you or speaks badly about MJ, and that to me is lacking class and depth. Numerah, you should be careful with your words, the only hateful remarks are truly your own. If you dislike hateful people, why behave as one?

22. Cheetah Says:
    June 29th, 2005 at 2:39 am

    Roseena, I’ll bet that some of the jurors were star struck. It’s just common sense if you think about it. Jurys are really just microcosms. They’re made up of the guys and the girls next door.
    What do we do? We go to the show, watch TV, read gossip and entertainment magazines. We really start to identify with and in some cases elevate these entertainers in our minds. Yet, all of a sudden in the jury box we’re suppose to instantly forget that these people are our idols and treat them just like the average Joe who ends up on the court docket? This doesn’t stand to reason.
    Fans of entertainers are more likely to believe that they are victims of a predjudiced legal system that is bent on persecuting their heros for who they are instead of what they’ve allegedly done.

    BTY- Kudos on returning the passport! Oh, you wouldn’t happen to have?..uh, you know, well, He wants the penis pictures back too!

23. Cheetah Says:
    June 29th, 2005 at 3:26 am

    Numenarh, given Tom Sneddon’s hound dog attitude I agree with you and Yvette about MJ being railroaded. Either Sneddon did not give his evidence due consideration or he was niave enough to believe that he’d be able to overcome the weakness of the evidence with prosecutorial skills. (classic bigheaded thinking on his part). What a blowhard!
    He set up a website to attract MJ accusers and even pushed new legislation through to allow him to use 1109 evidence all to no avail. Talk about laying track!
    Some people may call this tenacious. I call it obsessive and unfair. He needs to pay Santa Barbara County back its millions and retire into oblivion.

24. HERB Says:
    June 29th, 2005 at 10:06 am

    THIS IS GETTING INTERESTING. first let me say to sue and roseena, that if i did misquote you i am sorry but, the reference was still the same on how you feel. it is perfectly ok with how you feel about mj but let me give you this to think on. with michael being aquitted let us forget about michael the superstar and michael the person. the prosecution tried to prove its point that michael was a pedephile, nothing wrong with that. but, when you try to destroy a person that is not right. the prosecution was suppossed to be out for truth and justice, not revenge and humiliation. the point that i am trying to relay is that when he was aquitted it is not right to call him a pedephile. if michael was just a normal person and went to court and won, and if people would still call him a pedephile it would bias a whole society against him. would the belief that he is a pedephile stop him from getting a job, buying a house, or just going to the park. there is a certain vindication about winning in court because it says that the accusation was wrong. that you did not do what was said you did. how then does it feel to win but still lose because people will still feel that you are what you just proved you were not. also in your last post you wanted to know why we like mike i will try to explain why i am a fan

25. HERB Says:
    June 29th, 2005 at 10:56 am

    let me start that i am a black man in my late thirties. african american people had suffered so much in this country, to be told you were worth nothing and had no value. with all the contributions that african americans had made to this world they were still looked over as petty and not worth mentioning. so what is the one thing that moves all races, music. so along comes berry gordy and motown is born. for the sake of time i will pass by all the other great artists such as wonder, gaye, ross, temps, and topps. the jacksons were dirt poor, the typical black family. rising above poverty to achieve something great was and still is something to admire. every black kid wanted to be michael. he danced like no one else even as a kid. not even the osmonds had the energy of the jacksons. such early j-5 songs as one day in your life, spoke of love lost and love found. going places took you to far away lands, got to be there helped with that first crush. there are plenty more. the jacksons were and still are an inspiration for what they overcame. wanting that level of success was something to reach, even with people telling you that it could not be attained. with thriller it was awsome to have a black man being the biggest selling artist in the world, it was not a matter of not liking music by white artists but taking pride in one of our own. sure there are issues with michael just like everybody else. there is plenty more i would like to say but no room or time. let us just be kind to one another and give each other the respect and courtesy we each would want. AND NO IT IS NOT OK TO ATTACK ANOTHER PERSON FOR WHAT THEY BELIEVE.

26. Sue Says:
    June 29th, 2005 at 5:51 pm

    Herb..
    Both of your posts were very good..and I understand what you are trying to say.
    You asked, “how then does it feel to win but still lose because people will still feel that you are what you just proved you were not.” It should not matter what others think.. if you know you are innocent then you have lost nothing. You should be glad that the system worked for you and your life can get back to some kind of normal. No matter what … people will still want to believe the worst in others… even when it’s not there… that’s just human nature I’m afraid. There are people that live for drama and are not happy unless they have it in their life.
    As for the racism you face as an african american, I’m sorry that you or anyone has to endure that. I’m a white woman in my mid 50’s and I’ve seen some of what you’ve had to endure. I wish I could speak for everyone that has ever made a racist comment and say “I’m sorry”.. but I can’t speak for others, even if I feel they are wrong. I too.. feel we should be kind to and respect one another.

27. yvette Says:
    June 29th, 2005 at 6:51 pm

    Herb, very well said. Sue thank you for your understanding. I too am a mixture of black and this and that…and I have had my share of racism. I have found to love to learn, going to school to improve myself. As I have said before, I have a MS degree and this fall I will continue in a doctoral program. Why? because NO ONE CAN TAKE MY EDUCATION FROM ME!
    I am very happy to know that Mr. Jackson is now a free man because I love to see and hear him perform. Always did and I will alway continue to do so.
    Now it has come time to clean the Santa Barbara’s County Court house out, (Snedddon). Put Nancy Diagrace off the air and her best buddies, Ms. Cryier, Lisa and Gloria Alred! Goodbye…maybe they can all huck up togther and start their own businesses together in Finland, is that far enough? well, how about Pluto? yeah-out of this world!

28. HERB Says:
    June 29th, 2005 at 10:23 pm

    well, the gloria allred thing makes no sense. what does she hope to gain. this is what i ment by michael still losing. he still has a civil case with marc sheffell, a possible civil case by the accuser, and gloria allred. people need to let it go give the man a minute to think. there are plenty of kids in this country that are starving, and need help. she would be better served by giving them some attention.

29. Cheetah Says:
    June 30th, 2005 at 5:31 am

    Herb, I enjoyed both of your posts. The issues you raised in post #22 I found to be particularly interesting because you addressed destroying a defendant’s public persona as a prosecutorial tactic. In the event that you are a public figure like Michael Jackson, this can be particularly damaging.
    I don’t believe this tactic is fair because it can only be used against those with a public persona and under the law we are all to be considered equal. However, given that this trial was heavily based on circumstancial evidence I can’t see how else the prosecution could have presented their case without attacking the character and credibility of MJ. Partly because of the nature of the allegations and partly because the evidence was so thin that the case basically boiled down to a he said/they said scenario. The defense countered with some of the same tactics against the Arvisos’ credibility although they had no public persona to destroy.
    Considering the outcome of the trial, I think MJ’s only recourse is to file a case of malicious prosecution against Tom Sneddon and his office. There is evidence to support that Sneddon did have malicious intent.
    The trial aside, there were public suspicions regarding whether or not MJ is a pedophile prior to the trial. These suspicions were largely fueled by past allegations and pay-offs, the Martin Bashir documentary and the vast media coverage after each of these events.
    Because the trial only addressed the allegations made by Gavin Arviso, the belief that MJ is a pedophile will remain in the minds of many. Infact, because of public perception prior to the trial many felt that MJ was sure to be convicted. The outcome of this trial would not exonerate him in the minds of those people.