No the term "A little left of center" is referring to the fact that he is a very, very, very strange human being. Here is a 46 year old man, who was black, is now white, has totally changes his apperance, and plays with little boys.. That is a little left of center in my book
Originally Posted by CARLA
he is a lost soul, who is a little left of center, and mentally ill. :-2
ALOHA!!
MOTTO TO LIVE BY:
"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, champagne in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming.
Now I get it - we'd use the phrase "a little off-center" in England. As in unbalanced.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
paul wrote: in the following statement:an acquital does not mean actually innocent, just means it wasn't sufficiently proven what do you believe "it" refers to? specifically, please.spot wrote: Do tell me if I've trimmed too much.
Each of the charges individually, taken as a whole (hence "it" instead of "them").
fair enough. i thought your confusion might have arisen from reading that statement asan acquittal does not mean actually innocent, just means it (jackson's innocence) wasn't sufficiently proven.
that would somewhat explain your insistence that the statement was "simply an abuse of both language and logic" - unfortunately, now we don't even have that to hang your confusion upon.
On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 11 of which states: "(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence."
now, i believe the above to be a good example of legal terms of art in use. my interpretation is that it confers the presumption of innocence upon someone *charged* with a penal offense, until such time as they are proved guilty. If the person charged is found guilty, then the presumption of innocence no longer obtains. however, i believe that as well, if they are acquitted of the charges, the presumption *also* is no longer conferred, as they are no longer charged with a penal offense, and the presumption confers only to those so charged. after a finding of not guilty, the person is no longer a person charged with a penal offense.
i would say Carla's intent was clear in the context of her statement. my man is English, we don't have these translation difficulties despite being two countries separated by a common language.
anastrophe wrote: however, i believe that as well, if they are acquitted of the charges, the presumption *also* is no longer conferred, as they are no longer charged with a penal offense, and the presumption confers only to those so charged. after a finding of not guilty, the person is no longer a person charged with a penal offense.I congratulate you on your reading. It would never have occurred to me. I do bring back, however, the remarks made time and again by the English bench when a jury has returned a verdict of Not Guilty. The Judge will often address any members of the press, to the effect that the consequence of that verdict is that the accused now returns to society with no stain on his character resulting from having been charged and tried. It's an attempt by our judiciary to balance the pressure of public opinion to tar and feather in defiance of the jury's conclusion.
So, perhaps our judges also mis-read the declaration, and assume that the presumption of innocence extends beyond the trial, in the event of a not guilty verdict being returned. It's notable that they don't say it after a pardon.
As an aside, some of the jury courts in the UK allow the jurors to return three possible verdicts - guilty, not guilty or not proven. The last of those corresponds to the removal of the presumption.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Well in deference once again to the original topic, this guy has stains on his character that 1,000 "not guilty" verdicts will NEVER erase. Neither will all the skin bleaching.
Semantics and phrasing be damned.
[FONT=Arial Black]I hope you cherish this sweet way of life, and I hope you know that it comes with a price. ~Darrel Worley~ [/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We are all flawed, BabyRider. Let her who is Spotless cast the first clout.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Just as a matter of interest, hasn't the thread as it stands contained more interest than a mere spitting contest at the expense of MJ would have managed? I only ask because the T-word was used a while back.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
spot wrote: I congratulate you on your reading. It would never have occurred to me. I do bring back, however, the remarks made time and again by the English bench when a jury has returned a verdict of Not Guilty. The Judge will often address any members of the press, to the effect that the consequence of that verdict is that the accused now returns to society with no stain on his character resulting from having been charged and tried. It's an attempt by our judiciary to balance the pressure of public opinion to tar and feather in defiance of the jury's conclusion.
So, perhaps our judges also mis-read the declaration, and assume that the presumption of innocence extends beyong the trial, in the event of a not guilty verdict being returned. It's notable that they don't say it after a pardon.
As an aside, some of the jury courts in the UK allow the jurors to return three possible verdicts - guilty, not guilty or nor proven. The last of those corresponds to the removal of the presumption.
an interesting way of doing it. here, (and possibly there, i have just about zero knowledge of the english court system besides that the judges wear powdered wigs), 'not proven' would effectively be the same as a 'hung jury', where the jurors cannot agree on a verdict. that implies to me that the case was clearly not proven. that leads almost always to refiling of charges and a new trial.
i'm of mixed emotion on the trial. celebrity and money often do influence the outcome of a trial. or at least, we can *presume* that, though we can't prove it. john gotti certainly had plenty of money, but he didn't escape his charges. martha stuart also didn't escape her charges - although, as white collar crime goes, she got barely a blush of red on the wrist.
it's easy enough to try jackson in the court of public opinion - we have that right here. i watched the lengthy interview with jackson where he spoke about sleeping with children. as an expression of a very mixed up person who was denied a childhood by fame and parents bent on fame and fortune, along with his fascination with all things pertaining to childhood (his own zoo, merry go rounds and ferris wheels at his home, etc) - having 'sleepovers' with "other kids" seems like it would seem to him a rational thought, in his irrational mental capacity. whether he really is a molestor or pedophile? again, i just don't know. it's easy enough to just assume that he is. that's the easy path. i don't think the easy path is the right path however.
because of the climate surrounding this issue, i must take pains to point out that i have absolutely, positively, zero 'tolerance' for child molesters and abusers. taking advantage of those who are incapable of informed consent is a truly heinous act, a cowardly, yet simultaneously savaging, act. a child can rarely defend him or herself from a person several times their size, and with the power of an adult mind, adult capacity for 'reasonable argument', and capacity for evil as well.
*i do not know whether michael jackson is a child molester*. it's easy to just look at the evidence, all hearsay, and conclude 'oh, duh, child molester, string him up'. on the other hand, perhaps lost in the sands of time and rhetoric, there's the mcmartin preschool case of a couple of decades ago, which in many respects marked the start of the child molestation hysteria that gripped the country for quite some time after it. they were charged with the most bizarre and outrageous abuse and molestation imaginable. devil worship within the classrooms, animal sacrifices, raping and sodomizing very small children. they were convicted. years later, they were acquitted of all charges, and with the benefit of hindsight - and the recanting of many of the children their testimony - it was quite obvious that the stories of abuse and horror that were recounted were simply nurtured by credulous 'investigators', who gave not a whit to dealing with the children *as children* with a child's mentality and capacity. very small children are incredibly easily manipulated - both by molesters, and by those seeking to root out molestation.
motives can be funny things.
i hope MJ finds some peace in his life. he's clearly a deeply troubled person. at minimum, i hope he's learned the lesson that sleeping with underage persons, whether or not it is purely innocent, is inappropriate for a grown man, except in very specific circumstances, none of which apply in his case.
BTS wrote: Down my way we call em "WACKOS"BTS, we had a television program a while back called "Wacko". It was about an all-boy school whose Headmaster was overly fond of using his cane to chastise his recalcitrant pupils. "Wacko!", he would cry, flailing as he went, thrashing to left and right. The hero of the Remove (or lower fourth, or... let me get it right... K10), one Billy Bunter by name, inordinately fat by reason of cream buns and outright theft of food wherever and whenever possible, invariably suffered at some point during each episode. It was a fairly accurate reflection of school life as I lived it.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
anastrophe wrote: an interesting way of doing it. here, (and possibly there, i have just about zero knowledge of the english court system besides that the judges wear powdered wigs), 'not proven' would effectively be the same as a 'hung jury', where the jurors cannot agree on a verdict. that implies to me that the case was clearly not proven. that leads almost always to refiling of charges and a new trial.Nonono - I'll read the rest in a minute... Not Proven leaves the stain, being a more jaundiced view of the defendant, but says the jury dismisses the charge, and it can't be brought a second time. A hung jury is quite possible too, in which case the judge will decide whether to order a re-trial.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Damn... which of you evil people has my swimming trunks...
Good post, Sir. I wish I'd written it. There must be a pressure involved in owning screaming hordes of underage fans, some eager to get into bed with any star, too. I don't even think it applies here, but I mention it.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
......one juror's thoughts.....Juror: Jackson 'Probably' A Molester
SANTA MARIA, Calif. -- One of the jurors who acquitted Michael Jackson on all counts said he believes the pop star is "probably" a molester, but the prosecution didn't prove it.
In an interview on CNN, juror Raymond Hultman questioned the way Jackson has shared his bedroom and bed with young boys. Hultman said "that doesn't make sense" to him.
But, he said, that didn't make Jackson guilty of the charges presented in this case.
I'M OUT!! But somebody took my towel.......................................................................................Spoooootttttt??? LOL Just kidding really!
First of all I like to thank lady cop for sharing that she has pms and a gun. Now we can all sleep soundly knowing she is in england.
About the micheal jackson thing well I still think he got out of it because their is celebraty. But I also think he got away with it, because this child'd mother was a lying gold digger. Hey Micheal Jackson asked for this when he said he slept in the same bed with young boys. "THAT:"S Disgusting.
First of all I like to thank lady cop for sharing that she has pms and a gun. Now we can all sleep soundly knowing she is in england. ---my sig is just a little joke, as most people are aware... and i'm not in England yet, or i wouldn't have my gun! LOL
)
