Michael Jackson 咁都打得甩!!! 回應啦~(頁 1) - 吹水版 - 娛樂滿紛 26FUN

timho1027 發表於 2005-6-15 04:16 AM

Michael Jackson 咁都打得甩!!! 回應啦~

Michael Jackson 咁都打得甩????8W!]*rrW
金錢可以買到公義
我唔相信Michael Jackson 無狎童:mad:

vivienna 發表於 2005-6-15 04:18 AM

疑點利益歸於被告﹐法律需要保障雙方面。

happylion99 發表於 2005-6-15 04:22 AM

人地講左啦~;d7`6BqtzV7umN
打得甩唔代表佢無做過,(打得甩係因為冇十足的證據),並唔代表佢無做過
係鬼都知佢有做啦,唔係邊有咁多人搵佢話佢狎童,2S6A5r$Z w7m.\3|
你去下<<空間靈幻異次元>>應該可以問到Michael Jackson死了後會有什麼審判~WAmv/X
that"s all
+E$cxj5CAHc
[[i] Last edited by happylion99 on 2005-6-15 at 04:44 AM [/i]]

nine5er7 發表於 2005-6-15 04:28 AM

寧縱勿枉

vivienna 發表於 2005-6-15 04:42 AM

有無做過真係無人知﹐你唔會知道D人係咪勒索不成後所以出黎屈距。

spector.R 發表於 2005-6-15 04:46 AM

有人影到佢ja 住個BB 係露台 fing 下fing 下~Z [ Z:M8^3UX%s

[url]http://www.killsometime.com/games/game.asp?Game=Michael-Jackson-Baby-Drop[/url]

[[i] Last edited by spector.R on 2005-6-15 at 04:56 AM [/i]]

vivienna 發表於 2005-6-15 04:47 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]spector.R[/i] at 2005-6-15 04:46 AM:
有人影到佢ja 住個BB 係露台 fing 下fing 下~ [/quote]
尼個的而且確係真﹐距真係癲癲地架。

karate_pau 發表於 2005-6-15 04:47 AM

我100%支持米高,但係有冇做過只有佢自己先知喇,
但係證原告男童母親都唔係好可信,屈錢都未定6_A4v\t OUw#t
仲有個tom sneddon 好似同佢有仇咁,好似一定要釘死米高咁

事後mj前妻德比·羅維事後發表聲明稱，“我肯定不會與一個戀童癖結婚的，這次審判也證明了我的判斷。”

happylion99 發表於 2005-6-15 04:49 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]vivienna[/i] at 2005-6-15 04:42 AM:JVi"T(m,f'pi
有無做過真係無人知﹐你唔會知道D人係咪勒索不成後所以出黎屈距。 [/quote]
L?9f-t8VIZ{!GD
除非個條友好有$,先咁得閑同佢打官司,咁得閑出黎屈佢,d律師費都唔少.
用d假証據博勝訴?同自己的錢(律師費)鬥氣?3BxC3z$D-s

你地會唔會俾大筆律師費老屈一條友博一件冇發生過的事的勝訴J:^m.]Q]i
U#n*| s"U$y+g
[[i] Last edited by happylion99 on 2005-6-15 at 04:52 AM [/i]]

vivienna 發表於 2005-6-15 05:00 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]happylion99[/i] at 2005-6-15 04:49 AM: tJ-Bu;Z3h@M%J

除非個條友好有$,先咁得閑同佢打... [/quote]W+fnt Jj
先生﹐刑事罪係由政府出錢告架﹐如果你被人打﹐如果你有足夠證據既話﹐你靜係需要報警﹐然後律政處會起訴果位人兄。法例係保障市民﹐如果要市民出錢告人既話﹐甘D法例咪等如無法例。而果位人兄就要位辯護律師幫距打官司喇﹐尼個就要比錢。7kT#L*ci.}~l
g$y!k!P T?*OmtE!R
Civil Law 既民事訴訟就係如果你想告人﹐甘你就要自己出錢喇。

johnwu 發表於 2005-6-15 05:02 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]happylion99[/i] at 2005-6-15 04:49 AM: L @/s},oq\$n'a&z
.Yq2qh!wP#@

除非個條友好有$,先咁得閑同佢打... [/quote]
5Rb%u _^5M!c)@%F
This is a crimial case, the goverment/tax payer pay for everything.
Find out the fact before you speak lar....

johnwu 發表於 2005-6-15 05:02 AM

hello vivi, you beat me to it

happylion99 發表於 2005-6-15 05:06 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]vivienna[/i] at 2005-6-15 05:00 AM:
@.V+N`6j;U(yy!M Lo
先生﹐刑事罪係由政府出錢告架﹐如... [/quote]/B k zZP+jzq#Zl

照你咁講,咁樣告人個條友有咩錢要支付呢? ;)
如果無錢要支付的話,咁個個都會走去博一博,告一告,屈一屈

我讀得書少,唔好蝦我~

[[i] Last edited by happylion99 on 2005-6-15 at 05:07 AM [/i]]

vivienna 發表於 2005-6-15 05:07 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]johnwu[/i] at 2005-6-15 05:02 AM:tW:Bpjb4o'{U:@%c
hello vivi, you beat me to it [/quote]#agc lg
haha Mr Wu, beating you is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity ar ma, i will grab hold of it for sure.:D:D:D

johnwu 發表於 2005-6-15 05:09 AM

刑事罪::];K+`8dz"uv6lfn)kU
告人個條友= your goverment (not you)-jV$~#zW#D
,tKs {0C9|{
民事訴訟:+zh+O7Y7}Z
告人個條友 =you

vivienna 發表於 2005-6-15 05:11 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]happylion99[/i] at 2005-6-15 05:06 AM:

照你咁講,咁樣告人個條友有咩錢要支付呢? ;)
如果無錢要支付的話,咁個個都會走去博一博,告一告,屈一屈 [/quote]X$c8|%H Rp!s6{
大錯特錯﹐你如果告人唔成功既話﹐將會被人反告毀謗(defamatory)﹐到時你就真係要出錢喇﹐或可以用法律緩助處既。
s1QE$MI t9E
答番你個問題﹐[color=LimeGreen]告人個條友[/color]唔係一個人﹐而係成個律政處告﹐受害者靜係需要做證人。

happylion99 發表於 2005-6-15 05:14 AM

thank you for your teaching

vivienna 發表於 2005-6-15 05:14 AM

仲有再補充既就係律政處靜係會o係有足夠證據既情況下先會落CHARGE﹐唔係話告就告。

johnwu 發表於 2005-6-15 05:17 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]vivienna[/i] at 2005-6-15 05:14 AM::pl | Zzf
仲有再補充既就係律政處靜係會o係有足夠證據既情況下先會落CHARGE﹐唔係話告就告。 [/quote] S_3^0M[
h/klpO9B
Not always... like this case..
or SingTao newspaper case is 有足夠證據既情況下 but no charge

timho1027 發表於 2005-6-15 05:19 AM

我想聽大家自己的觀點
如果你喜歡
您可以加入討論
但如果某人認為那"人地講左啦~"
已經代表自己的觀點ks*f5UIT
您沒有需要繼續吠
THE END

頁: [1] 2

娛樂滿紛 26FUN's Archiver

Michael Jackson 咁都打得甩!!! 回應啦~