Michael........once again you are dead on with your observations and comments. I look forward to more.......there are so many subjects and news events that I would like to know your views on. Keep it up!!

Thank you for saying it so well, Mr Lucas.

Only in America can a poor black boy grow up to be a rich white "man?",get away with molesting children and make himself the victim.
There is a HUGE difference between innocent and not guilty.

Shaking the cum of babies! ...What has this world come to. I of course heard that Michael Jackson has traded in his surgical mask for more suitable facial attire. Young boys underoos bottoms slightly used.

Actually I don't think he was dead on at all. It is not a joke that 12 jurors acquitted him of the charges because in my opinion he most likely didn't do what she or her child accused him of. Almost every day the case revealed why this was a staged accusation. Nothing about this woman made sense and the jurors obviously agreed. Basically she was a scam artist.

Now, does this mean he didn't molest any other boys? Well this case has nothing to do with that. As one juror mentioned, although he believes Michael probably has molested other children (which is just his opinion and not based on fact btw) he said his job was to judge solely on this case.

I also have a hard time understanding that if he has molested so many boys, why does the prosecution have such a hard time finding any reliable accusers? It certainly isn't for a lack of trying and there certainly wasn't anything kept from being heard in this court case.

If there is anyone that you should be angry for the millions of wasted dollars it should be against the idiots who can't find/provide the proof and will stoop at getting people like this total lunatic (the woman of the child accuser I mean) to be the only witness to put on the stand. Sure there were other witnesses but if you followed the trial, none of them helped the prosecution whatsoever and they certainly didn't have any reason to be on michael's side. Take his former wife, Debbie Rowe. Even though Michael refuses to let her see her children she didn't even give one bad word against him.

Only in America can you find people told they are innocent until proven guilty but treated otherwise just because the media needs to make some bucks and everyone believes in what they see or hear even if they don't know the person they are reading about. Now that is what I call pathetic.

You're so so right about all the observations about Michael Jackson, and spot on about religious clerics being like sending the kids off to the lions den.

At least one of the jurors explicitly stated that he believed MJ had committed these acts at other times. He said it's just that he wasn't guilty of these specific charges. Maybe he wasn't. I didn't attend the trial.

To me this is an OJ all over

A STRANGE MAN THAT WILL NOT ACCEPT HE IS MIDDLE-AGED, LIKES CHILDREN OF A CERTAIN AGE AND GENDER, HATES HIS COLOUR, FACE AND HAIR AND BELIEVES THAT GETTING MARRIED AND SIRING OFFSPRING (if there his), TELLS THE WORLD 'I'M NORMAL'. YEA, LIKE MONICA IN THE WHITE HOUSE BENDING DOWN TO PICK UP A PIN THAT CLINTON DROPPED!
UNFORTUNATELY HE HAS NOT CHANGED OR EVER WILL AND CLEMENT FREUD WOULD HAVE HAD A FIELD DAY?

Hey Michael Lucas!

I'm really ashamed about the lines you wrote regarding Michael Jackson!

Who do you think you are to judge him like that?? The jury decided he's innocent and HE IS! No need to be cleaver to know that the mother only wanted his monney.

Actually I think you're just jaleous about Michael Jackson because he is A STAR. A real Artist, the greatest entertainer of all time and not a pathétic, pretentious and frustrated porn actor like you, who sells his body for a living!!!

So, before attacking innocent people (and moreover talended people)look at yourself and shut up!

Men Of Color on Michael Lucas on Michael Jackson

In a post titled Not Guilty or Innocent, Michael Lucas of Lucas Entertainment weighs in on the Michael Jackson verdict decrying the outcome and then pontificating about the injustice of it all. In his withering criticism, he attacks the 12 men and women who composed the jury that found that the evidence wasn't beyond a reasonable doubt. A jury, by the way, that is part of a legal tradition that Michael Lucas has very little experience with. So I suppose as a Russian emigre, Mr. Lucas can afford the intellectually holier-than-thou position he has staked out. After all, innocent until proven guilty translates roughly into "not guilty or innocent" in Russian. Of course, pedophiles are sad but, in case you didn't know, they're sad because, according to the gospel of St. Michael," ...[T]hey are. They’re attracted to someone they can’t or at least shouldn’t have sex with. I can’t imagine a more horrifying place. There is no cure, just the refuge of one’s own imagination." I'm sorry, Michael, but didn't you build a financial empire from filming men who most people can't have sex with? Didn't you put on a reasonable facsimile of a live sex show in a club in Israel? Is that somehow sexually okay while the suggestion of impropriety with a child is not. Now don't get me wrong. I am no way suggesting that pedophilia is somehow okay. It's not. But coming from someone who's gotten rich off exploiting the sexual insecurities of the general gay population, you are hardly the one to be lecturing us about the injustice of it all from a morally tenuous position.

I don't agree with you at all. In fact, I'm pretty shocked at some of the things you said.

Don't get mad at the law or the jurors who did what the juror rules instructed, because if it can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, a person should not lose their freedom.

Thank God you weren't on the jury. You weren't in that courtroom and your paws are just lustin' for a conviction based on evidence that WASN'T there.