Comments on: You can have the inflatable bananas

By: the art of passive resistance

the art of passive resistance — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:51:33 +0000

[...] related: you can have the inflatable bananas [...]

By: Canthz_B

Canthz_B — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 18:14:12 +0000

Heck, if the guy molested my kid, I’d cooperate fully.
Nothing says large civil suit win like a criminal conviction.
The burden of proof is much higher in criminal court, so a win there virtually guarantees a win in a subsequent civil suit.

“That’s when the big bucks roll in.”
– Louie Anderson in “Coming to America”.

By: ashmeadow

ashmeadow — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 08:45:28 +0000

I think some of you are mixing up civil court and state court. The settlement was for a civil court case. The state case goes on or not based upon evidence. The civil case stopped because of the settlement. The state case stopped because the father stopped cooperating with police, and the state had no other evidence. No settlement can ever legally specify that you stop cooperating with police. I can only speak from personal experience, but if I can get millions of dollars from someone who molested my child, and I could either get them put in jail, or drain their estate with court and lawyer fees from a state case, I would. I wouldn’t stop cooperating, just because I settled the civil case.

By: jjuice

jjuice — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 10:15:54 +0000

so was the whole Kelly’s .69 FD?

By: Alyssa Myers

Alyssa Myers — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 05:27:26 +0000

That’s an old wive’s tale! lol

By: Canthz_B

Canthz_B — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 03:14:59 +0000

You’re not thinking for yourself if you’re only working with spoon-fed information.
All you’re doing is forming the opinion others intend you to form.
In politics they call it “spin”.

By: Please

Please — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:13:37 +0000

Isn’t that kind of the whole point of an opinion? If we know for a fact whether he did or didn’t do it, it wouldn’t be an opinion. It would be a fact.

You can only base your opinion on the information available to you, or you can just refuse to ever think for yourself and decide your opinion on a matter until someone spoon feeds it to you.

To each his own.

By: Canthz_B

Canthz_B — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:15:52 +0000

To each his own.

Most things can be looked at in many different ways.

You choose to have an opinion knowing fully that you don’t have all of the facts, and that’s fine.

I choose to not have opinions when I don’t have the facts, and that’s fine as well.

I know that I don’t think a grown man should share a bed with a child, but I also know that “sleep with” might just mean , well, sleeping.

By: Please

Please — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:52:20 +0000

You can look at them taking the settlement another way, too. They may have (rightfully) feared that a star as big as Michael Jackson would have a pretty decent chance of beating the charges. Going into court would have been a crapshoot, at best.

Also, just because people form an opinion as to someone’s guilt or innocence based on what they have read and heard, it doesn’t make them incapable of being a fair juror. I definitely lean in the “he did it” column with regard to at least one of the charges against MJ, however, that’s just my personal opinion that impacts the participants in the case in no way. If I was on the jury and heard believable evidence that he was innocent, then I would have voted not guilty. I’m not condemning the man to the fiery bowels of hell or anything, I just think, based on my own opinion of the information out there (which includes things that he has said and done publicly) that there was a good chance he did it.

By: Canthz_B

Canthz_B — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 08:35:26 +0000

Interesting question (maybe not), but why would anyone settle for a reported $25 million if they could get $100 million if they won a court case?

Hmm, pay $25 million to make it go away, or throw away $75 million to stop prosecution of the guy that molested your child and take the money and run?

You make the call.

Still not taking sides because I cannot know, but my nature dictates that I look at things from more than one angle sometimes.

By: Canthz_B

Canthz_B — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 07:19:13 +0000

Please, I never said no guilty people cop pleas, just that that’s not enough info to form an opinion about guilt or innocence.
Tried to give you a real-life example from my own experience with “the system”, not to say that all people who plead guilty are innocent.

Again, the way people jump to conclusions without actually thinking something through is why I don’t want the likes of you in judgment of me in a court of law.

CRR, it was a municipal court in NJ. Towns set their own fines, but even the judge looked at the DA funny when he asked for $125. The judge imposed only $100.
Even a thief has some principles, it seems!

Now, you are free to hold whatever opinion you choose, based upon what you “know”, “hear”, “read” or whatever…but if you’ve ever done jury duty, you know that the facts of a case come only from the witness chair.

Oh, and I have given no personal opinion about MJ’s guilt or innocence…though some may have made baseless assumptions.
You see, I recognize that, though I may have the information that has been released to the public, I haven’t been given all of the information about a case (through the media) that exists, so I withhold judgment.

Would that more of us would do so more often.
Far too much “public opinion” is based upon far too little “public information”. Especially about things that are far more important.

OJ? Really? Get over it. Go tell Emmett Till’s mom about it.

By: Car RamRod

Car RamRod — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 06:57:48 +0000

Wow Canthz, where the fuck do you live that they charge 500 bux for a seatbelt violation? Lemme guess, the peoples’ republic of california? I thought NY and NJ were bad enough. But there if a cop is trying to give you a break on a speeding or red light ticket that involves points and therefore insurance rate increases, they give you a cheap seatbelt ticket so they can keep their quota up without really nailing you. NC takes it too far, cause if you have a good lawyer you can just pay a big fine for a DWI and get off on the other punishments. Shows they basically just want their money. A more subtle form of taxation.

As far as the original debate, I agree with please. Some people who settle are guilty, some aren’t. Thing is, I’m not lady justice, and I don’t have to assume someone’s innocence until proven guilty. I can make a guess based on what I know and hold whatever opinion I wish, and in MJ’s case, I find it pretty easy to believe. It’s not quite as clearcut as OJ, but come on…

By: Please

Please — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 06:41:53 +0000

So, just because you pled guilty to avoid a heftier fine, it means that everyone who settles out of court must be seen as innocent and a victim of their circumstances? Are some people who settle cases innocent? Yes. Are some people who settle them guilty? Yes. People settle cases for many reasons, some of which involve them actually being guilty.

By: Canthz_B

Canthz_B — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 05:27:44 +0000

umlaut, thanks for proving my point.

A settlement is not an admission of guilt. It’s a way of avoiding an even costlier court case.
Don’t let the millions cloud your thinking.

I once had an officer tack on a seatbelt violation to a driving with an expired registration ticket.
I went to court prepared to plead guilty to the registration violation, but wanted to fight the seatbelt ticket because I’ve always worn my seatbelt ever since I was in a bad car accident.

The DA said he’d have my seatbelt fine reduced to $125 if I were to plead guilty, but that if I took it to trial and lost it would be $500.

So now I’m thinking about this “trial”, and all I can see is the judge asking me if I had on my seat belt and me saying “Yes”, then he asks the cop if I had on my seatbelt, and the cop says “No”.
Then the judge says”Guilty” and I’m out $500.
I plead guilty and was out of that charge for only $100.

At the time, $100 might as well have been $25 million to me.
That’s what we call a legal settlement.