0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
... And good point about Candid Camera not being live. Hmm.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login... And good point about Candid Camera not being live. Hmm. And here is a statement from Allen Font, on the need for a legal release to be signed before putting someone on the air."I told him what we had done, I let him hear the record back, I paid him for his time, I had him sign a release, which permits us to use that sequence on the air …" {~5:30, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login}
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginBut if it was not a real court, not operating under real judicial laws (and was merely an entertainment movie), then WHY the need for the word "alleged"? NO OTHER MOVIE (or TV show) has been found, using the world "alleged"--so why would it be needed in this case, if there was no need to in other court movies?We could perhaps write it off as merely a hoax "clue"; but that seems like a rather shallow explanation, especially since it came at the END of the whole trial--where many clues had already been given, and what was the need to slip in one more clue at the end? Just for fun? And even if one more last minute clue was needed: why would "alleged" be a prime candidate for the final clue? Why not something, anything--other than a LEGAL term, that covers LEGAL situations?? :judge-smiley: ... "NO OTHER MOVIE...other court movies" ...interesting wording there TS.
But if it was not a real court, not operating under real judicial laws (and was merely an entertainment movie), then WHY the need for the word "alleged"? NO OTHER MOVIE (or TV show) has been found, using the world "alleged"--so why would it be needed in this case, if there was no need to in other court movies?We could perhaps write it off as merely a hoax "clue"; but that seems like a rather shallow explanation, especially since it came at the END of the whole trial--where many clues had already been given, and what was the need to slip in one more clue at the end? Just for fun? And even if one more last minute clue was needed: why would "alleged" be a prime candidate for the final clue? Why not something, anything--other than a LEGAL term, that covers LEGAL situations?? :judge-smiley:
... Even the Jackson family quit talking about conspiracy and the "real" murderer over a year ago.
You know where MJ is talking about Sony, his finances, business dealings, he would say, “It’s a very delicate situation.” And when he sings, TDRCAU, he is talking about TPTB, the NWO gang, bankers, all those in ruling positions who rob, cheat, lie, step on people to get what they want. I don’t think TS or MJ would openly say ‘they’ are a sting target—perhaps too dangerous. I think the evil people behind MJ’s false allegations and part of the ultimate target of the big STING, could be shown like a pyramid. At the bottom were Sneddon, Dimond, Grace, Even Chandler, the Arvizos. Next level could be Sony, Catholic Church, Racist powerful people. Next level possibly bankers, Bilderbergers, Illuminati. Next level IDK, alien/demonic powers. I say this because of 2 of Front’s early posts: (TS’ Sign #1 on the coming EOW and Michael Archangel=Jesus verifies this)
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginBut if it was not a real court, not operating under real judicial laws (and was merely an entertainment movie), then WHY the need for the word "alleged"? NO OTHER MOVIE (or TV show) has been found, using the world "alleged"--so why would it be needed in this case, if there was no need to in other court movies?We could perhaps write it off as merely a hoax "clue"; but that seems like a rather shallow explanation, especially since it came at the END of the whole trial--where many clues had already been given, and what was the need to slip in one more clue at the end? Just for fun? And even if one more last minute clue was needed: why would "alleged" be a prime candidate for the final clue? Why not something, anything--other than a LEGAL term, that covers LEGAL situations?? :judge-smiley: ... "NO OTHER MOVIE...other court movies" ...interesting wording there TS. Yes; and interesting also that these words came under the hypothetical situation, which was mentioned at the beginning of the paragraph: "But if it was not a real court ..."So IF it was only a movie, then (and only then) no OTHER movies or court movies use "alleged" in the verdict. There seems to be no valid reason for this anomaly. However, if it was NOT only a movie, then there is a simple explanation for the "alleged"--to keep things legal, since Michael Joseph Jackson was not legally and actually a victim (he was merely an alleged victim).
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginBut if it was not a real court, not operating under real judicial laws (and was merely an entertainment movie), then WHY the need for the word "alleged"? NO OTHER MOVIE (or TV show) has been found, using the world "alleged"--so why would it be needed in this case, if there was no need to in other court movies?We could perhaps write it off as merely a hoax "clue"; but that seems like a rather shallow explanation, especially since it came at the END of the whole trial--where many clues had already been given, and what was the need to slip in one more clue at the end? Just for fun? And even if one more last minute clue was needed: why would "alleged" be a prime candidate for the final clue? Why not something, anything--other than a LEGAL term, that covers LEGAL situations?? :judge-smiley: ... "NO OTHER MOVIE...other court movies" ...interesting wording there TS. Yes; and interesting also that these words came under the hypothetical situation, which was mentioned at the beginning of the paragraph: "But if it was not a real court ..."So IF it was only a movie, then (and only then) no OTHER movies or court movies use "alleged" in the verdict. There seems to be no valid reason for this anomaly. However, if it was NOT only a movie, then there is a simple explanation for the "alleged"--to keep things legal, since Michael Joseph Jackson was not legally and actually a victim (he was merely an alleged victim).You're right, and I think the movie is one aspect of the trial. Can't footage from a televised trial be used in a movie, without having permission from those who participated in the trial - like witnesses, court people, etc? Because it's already public record. Like in movies where they show televised footage of real world events - like Presidential speeches, interviews, famous people doing stuff, car chases, other court footage from famous trials. There are a number of movies that use actual footage, for whatever reasons. A valid reason for using the word "alleged" in the verdict when referring to victim and date is a hoax court aspect. It sort of annuls the whole trial, imo.
A trial ending up with the judgement "alleged victim" and "alleged date" seems paradoxical to me.
It's the timing that makes the difference.Pretrial and throughout court, "alleged" would not raise any eyebrows."Alleged" has to be clarified into "yes" or "no" during trial.If this is not achieved in a verdict, the trial has not seen a true finish.
I'm certainly no Lawyer, and I presume MJ has had a very astute legal team assisting him in this, but wouldn't "alleged victim" and "alleged date" being read during the verdict also go towards covering them in a legal sense if it was a sting court?
So tired... have been wanting to jump in so many places with no timE. I still think he went to an airport. MJ AIR notwithstanding, I don't think he got on an airplane. Pay as you go cell phones seem to provide some measure of security against survellience...Pay, use, discard........I also still think it is a sting and hoax. I believe the sting has multiple layers;the trial was necessary and gave opportunity to show not only how irresponsible the media is (really? all the legal anomolies in the trial and the likes of COURT TV "journalists" don't question anything because the coverage is worth so much money?--not really surprised anymore). Then we have all the investigation taking a look at the state of courts and the shoddy state of activities and misuse of power-- harkening back to 2005 trial and Sneddon (bearing in mind that Michael was only one of his victims)-- and all the institutionalized cover ups to support the continuation of such corruption. We have had our eyes open to a range of organized crime and corruption, from the Interfor Report re embezzlement, the FBI being given documents regarding organized efforts to litigate Michael into bankruptcy in 2006, to Chancery Club and Bet Tzedek Rico suits You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to acts of commission in Santa Barbara County and Los Angles CountyThe corruption in the State Bar of California You are not allowed to view links. Register or Loginand the US Supreme court looking at the corruption in the California Supreme Court.Then there is all the business corruption surrounding Michael... which really needed Michael dead to fully expose since TPTB couldn't blame him any longer for things THEY did (really, all close people to Michael changed over the month before he died?--well good to keep enemies closer to give them rope to hang themselves with).........So MUCH business corruption its really unbeLIEvable----and even tho there have been attempts to expose this corruption, it is allowed to continue...And frankly, the activity is just indicative of what is happening to ALOT of us-- using information to use identities to invest in bogus deals to launder money etc....Same thing that brought down Keith Corbain's estate is happening everywhere.Then there are all the evidence of and hints at further real physical threats of harm to the family. Now then, this is a family that had to FIGHT to get charges pressed against the man (Bohana) that murdered Dee Dee, Tito's ex-wife in 1994, despite clear evidence that pointed to foul play. And from what I read,it needed persistance to have the DA office take another look at the case. But I digressI could go on and on, but my very tired brain needs to stop-- I know I have only mentioned little bits of so many things that have been swirling around. I feel the sting is multi-faceted and has many targets. Some may have been direct and more personal, others indirect (heck look at so many things that have developed-- Murdock exposed, Goldman Sacs exposed etc etc etc) but no less personal and relevant to lots of people. I just cant see the reason for the whole hoax to not have a serious sting component to it, as well as being intriguing.ok, I have blathered on too much and not even touched on so many other aspects of things, but my eyes are trying to close, so I will stop now!Thanks for you patience :icon_redface: