[cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]soooooooooooo would you have let your kids stay over at his house then ? few nights of Uncle Mike in his Pjs slipping in their bed to read a bed time story to your kids ?
i think(hope) not.
I wouldn't let my kids 'sleep over' at any ones house if they didn't have kids..
[cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]soooooooooooo would you have let your kids stay over at his house then ? few nights of Uncle Mike in his Pjs slipping in their bed to read a bed time story to your kids ?
i think(hope) not.
I wouldn't let my kids 'sleep over' at any ones house if they didn't have kids..
Rose & Fred West had kids, as does Fritzl.
Being a parent does not automatically make you a sane decent person, you've only got to watch the Jeremy Kyle show to see that.
[cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]soooooooooooo would you have let your kids stay over at his house then ? few nights of Uncle Mike in his Pjs slipping in their bed to read a bed time story to your kids ?
i think(hope) not.
i have to agree, what sort of parents were they to do that? (not that i am saying that anything did or did not happen)
Those who perhaps knowing his reputation were out to bribe him if and when anything untoward happened.
I don't know what the truth of the child abuse scandals were but from the court case a few years ago I got the impression that he was being taken advantage of by a family who saw an easy way to scam a few million dollars out of him alleging child abuse. Were the other allegations true - did he pay a bribe to effectively buy off justice? Who knows, but I think he was more of a character that should inspire some pity and compassion for the hoops he was made to go through rather than for his faults. The only friends he seemed to have were either other screwed up stars who also had fame thrust upon them and were ripped off or people out to leech money off him, even his own family joined in this - shoving him into fame as a child and making money out of him - would the other Jacksons been as successful were it not for him, I don't think so. Even his father abused him and the result was that he led a sad existence. Modern stardom claims another victim.
[cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]soooooooooooo would you have let your kids stay over at his house then ? few nights of Uncle Mike in his Pjs slipping in their bed to read a bed time story to your kids ?
i think(hope) not.
I wouldn't let my kids 'sleep over' at any ones house if they didn't have kids..
Rose & Fred West had kids, as does Fritzl.
Being a parent does not automatically make you a sane decent person, you've only got to watch the Jeremy Kyle show to see that.
[cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]soooooooooooo would you have let your kids stay over at his house then ? few nights of Uncle Mike in his Pjs slipping in their bed to read a bed time story to your kids ?
i think(hope) not.
I wouldn't let my kids 'sleep over' at any ones house if they didn't have kids..
Rose & Fred West had kids, as does Fritzl.
Being a parent does not automatically make you a sane decent person, you've only got to watch the Jeremy Kyle show to see that.
[cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]soooooooooooo would you have let your kids stay over at his house then ? few nights of Uncle Mike in his Pjs slipping in their bed to read a bed time story to your kids ?
i think(hope) not.
I wouldn't let my kids 'sleep over' at any ones house if they didn't have kids..
Rose & Fred West had kids, as does Fritzl.
Being a parent does not automatically make you a sane decent person, you've only got to watch the Jeremy Kyle show to see that.
I quite agree
:-)
Indeed my point was really what were these parents thinking anyway..
[cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]soooooooooooo would you have let your kids stay over at his house then ? few nights of Uncle Mike in his Pjs slipping in their bed to read a bed time story to your kids ?
i think(hope) not.
I wouldn't let my kids 'sleep over' at any ones house if they didn't have kids..
Rose & Fred West had kids, as does Fritzl.
Being a parent does not automatically make you a sane decent person, you've only got to watch the Jeremy Kyle show to see that.
I quite agree
:-)
Indeed my point was really what were these parents thinking anyway..
[cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]soooooooooooo would you have let your kids stay over at his house then ? few nights of Uncle Mike in his Pjs slipping in their bed to read a bed time story to your kids ?
i think(hope) not.
I wouldn't let my kids 'sleep over' at any ones house if they didn't have kids..
Rose & Fred West had kids, as does Fritzl.
Being a parent does not automatically make you a sane decent person, you've only got to watch the Jeremy Kyle show to see that.
I quite agree
:-)
Indeed my point was really what were these parents thinking anyway..
[cite]Posted By: Addickted[/cite]I remember staying up to 1 o'clock in the morning to watch the first British play of the Thriller Video - an awesome experience.
Can't honestly think of many other artists I'd do that for.
Not particularly my cup of tea musically but undeniably talented and influential nonetheless.
As regards the other stuff he was never convicted in a court and thus has to be presumed innocent even if one's natural instincts go against that feeling.
He brought a lot of pleasure to millions of people so for that reason if no other
[cite]Posted By: SoundAsa£[/cite]Well said DA9.
I have no particular interest in Jackson or his music....though he was of course a huge talent.
He was never found guilty of any offence....but some of you obviously have made up your mind but 12 jurours and the judicary never found him guilty....that's a fact....it may not have suited your take on it or turned up the result 'you' wanted but a man is innocent until proven guilty in my eyes...and always will be, whether I 'think' he is or isn't or whether I like the decision or not!
You simply can't go through life condemning folk who are only arrested....the police often arrest and even charge folk who are subsequently found not guilty....and of all sorts of nasty and repugnant crimes I may add.
Didn't he admit himself that he had "shared a bed" with some kids? For me that is wrong and I have no sympathy for the man, agree with all that is said fantastic entertainer, great songs but just because a jury didn't convict him doesn't mean he didn't do anything and anyway weren't the court cases settled out of court so the jurys didn't get a say anyway? I can see your clearly a fan of MJ the entertainer but you shouldn't let it cloud your judgement when it comes down to someone that has done wrong. I'm sure no one here would defend a bloke down their road who had kids over all the time and there were allegations he slept with the kids, why should it be any different for Michael Jackson?
[cite]Posted By: SoundAsa£[/cite]Well said DA9.
I have no particular interest in Jackson or his music....though he was of course a huge talent.
He was never found guilty of any offence....but some of you obviously have made up your mind but 12 jurours and the judicary never found him guilty....that's a fact....it may not have suited your take on it or turned up the result 'you' wanted but a man is innocent until proven guilty in my eyes...and always will be, whether I 'think' he is or isn't or whether I like the decision or not!
You simply can't go through life condemning folk who are only arrested....the police often arrest and even charge folk who are subsequently found not guilty....and of all sorts of nasty and repugnant crimes I may add.
Didn't he admit himself that he had "shared a bed" with some kids? For me that is wrong and I have no sympathy for the man, agree with all that is said fantastic entertainer, great songs but just because a jury didn't convict him doesn't mean he didn't do anything and anyway weren't the court cases settled out of court so the jurys didn't get a say anyway? I can see your clearly a fan of MJ the entertainer but you shouldn't let it cloud your judgement when it comes down to someone that has done wrong. I'm sure no one here would defend a bloke down their road who had kids over all the time and there were allegations he slept with the kids, why should it be any different for Michael Jackson?
Me a fan????
I have never bought a single one of his albums or DVD's....I have no interest in him whatsoever....He's obviously a huge talent but not my cup of tea at all really.So I don't really give a flying fook....but I do mind about the rule of law as unpalatable as that might be at times.
Anyone who is accused of these kind of offences is always thought of as guilty until proven innocent(and then not believed anyway by some folk) instead of innocent until proven guilty.
Such is the way of the world we live in....I just don't agree with it, having witnessed something that happened in my family some 30 years ago...not the same kind of thing as we are talking about but someones life and reputation was ruined by the national media as the result of her being interviewed by the police(she wasn't even charged FFS!)....she later went on to prove her innocence(in a civil court) but the damage was done and she was never able to throw off the scars because she lived in a small community in The West Country where some folk wern't ever going to let her off the hook. She died a few years back still haunted by the experience....I didn't know her that well but members of my family who did said she was never the same again.
if jacko was so interested in rule of law and his innocence, why not fight it in court instead of settle behind doors, I guess the 'reason' would be damage limitation. In which case the public nature of such cases damages the application of justice.
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]if jacko was so interested in rule of law and his innocence, why not fight it in court instead of settle behind doors, I guess the 'reason' would be damage limitation. In which case the public nature of such cases damages the application of justice.
I honestly dont believe any decision like that would have been made by himself, but via strong pressure and advice from the people around him.
I would imagine there are plenty of examples over the years of the rich or famous settling out of court, even if they were entirely guilt free, advised by management teams, solicitors & PR people that it would be quicker, easier, less damaging in the long run to their reputation than a long protracted court case, and possibly cheaper also.
They just replayed that interview with Martin Basheer (?) on Sky news:
MB: Don't you think its wrong you share your bed with young boys who are no relation to you?
MJ: No, it's a beautiful thing, it's what the world needs.
Sorry, that is very wrong - if anyone else said that who wasnt famous etc they would get lynched - regardless if anything happened.
I feel sorry for his kids and hope Jacko rests in peace but he was a very very troubled human being.
[cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]They just replayed that interview with Martin Basheer (?) on Sky news:
MB: Don't you think its wrong you share your bed with young boys who are no relation to you?
MJ: No, it's a beautiful thing, it's what the world needs.
Sorry, that is very wrong - if anyone else said that who wasnt famous etc they would get lynched - regardless if anything happened.
I feel sorry for his kids and hope Jacko rests in peace but he was a very very troubled human being.
My feelings exactly WSS, your average person would get treated like scum, I'm not saying whether that is right or wrong but in this situation why do so many stick up for him?
I don't know whether he was guilty of anything really inappropriate or if he was just a big mindless kid who thought it was OK to be friends with little kids. He certainly had an inappropriate compulsion to be around children. Maybe being surrounded by toadies who just tell you that everything you do is A-OK, did not help. Maybe proper mates like normal folk have that tell you when you're being a tool would have improved him endlessly.
In the case in which he was found not guilty he'd had an ill child to stay at his place. Now, I'll not go into the mindset of the parents that thought it was ok to let their kid go to stay at the house of a man who had been repeatedly accused, but surely if you were falsely accused of something like that, if you didn't have some kind of a compulsion you'd make sure that you were never in a position to be accused again. Again, one of his friends or managers ought to have been stepping in.
Algarve I would argue that modern pop music really began with Hank Williams in the 40s.
My point was that in the last 50 years (ie 60 - 10) there have been very few entertainers that could match Jacko at his best - i am not a fan of his as a person, the baby dangling incident was appalling - but as a mass-market entertainer for a period up until the mid-80s he was pretty much unrivalled.
he didnt see that behaviour as inappropriate and it is perhaps more a reflection of his distorted view of the world and his own abusive childhood than a wish to have sex with children. certainly the parants had a very bizarre and imho cynical view of jackson. Whether they were motivated by his fame or his money who knows but certainly not by what was best for their children. At the very least they would have been confused by such attention from MJ even if it was quite innocently intended
Comments
I wouldn't let my kids 'sleep over' at any ones house if they didn't have kids..
Rose & Fred West had kids, as does Fritzl.
Being a parent does not automatically make you a sane decent person, you've only got to watch the Jeremy Kyle show to see that.
Those who perhaps knowing his reputation were out to bribe him if and when anything untoward happened.
I don't know what the truth of the child abuse scandals were but from the court case a few years ago I got the impression that he was being taken advantage of by a family who saw an easy way to scam a few million dollars out of him alleging child abuse. Were the other allegations true - did he pay a bribe to effectively buy off justice? Who knows, but I think he was more of a character that should inspire some pity and compassion for the hoops he was made to go through rather than for his faults. The only friends he seemed to have were either other screwed up stars who also had fame thrust upon them and were ripped off or people out to leech money off him, even his own family joined in this - shoving him into fame as a child and making money out of him - would the other Jacksons been as successful were it not for him, I don't think so. Even his father abused him and the result was that he led a sad existence. Modern stardom claims another victim.
I quite agree
:-)
Times' MJ Obituary
Indeed my point was really what were these parents thinking anyway..
Can't honestly think of many other artists I'd do that for.
An absolutely superb entertainer.
RIP
definitely
my line of thinking as well
As regards the other stuff he was never convicted in a court and thus has to be presumed innocent even if one's natural instincts go against that feeling.
He brought a lot of pleasure to millions of people so for that reason if no other
RIP
Didn't he admit himself that he had "shared a bed" with some kids? For me that is wrong and I have no sympathy for the man, agree with all that is said fantastic entertainer, great songs but just because a jury didn't convict him doesn't mean he didn't do anything and anyway weren't the court cases settled out of court so the jurys didn't get a say anyway? I can see your clearly a fan of MJ the entertainer but you shouldn't let it cloud your judgement when it comes down to someone that has done wrong. I'm sure no one here would defend a bloke down their road who had kids over all the time and there were allegations he slept with the kids, why should it be any different for Michael Jackson?
Me a fan????
I have never bought a single one of his albums or DVD's....I have no interest in him whatsoever....He's obviously a huge talent but not my cup of tea at all really.So I don't really give a flying fook....but I do mind about the rule of law as unpalatable as that might be at times.
Anyone who is accused of these kind of offences is always thought of as guilty until proven innocent(and then not believed anyway by some folk) instead of innocent until proven guilty.
Such is the way of the world we live in....I just don't agree with it, having witnessed something that happened in my family some 30 years ago...not the same kind of thing as we are talking about but someones life and reputation was ruined by the national media as the result of her being interviewed by the police(she wasn't even charged FFS!)....she later went on to prove her innocence(in a civil court) but the damage was done and she was never able to throw off the scars because she lived in a small community in The West Country where some folk wern't ever going to let her off the hook. She died a few years back still haunted by the experience....I didn't know her that well but members of my family who did said she was never the same again.
I honestly dont believe any decision like that would have been made by himself, but via strong pressure and advice from the people around him.
I would imagine there are plenty of examples over the years of the rich or famous settling out of court, even if they were entirely guilt free, advised by management teams, solicitors & PR people that it would be quicker, easier, less damaging in the long run to their reputation than a long protracted court case, and possibly cheaper also.
Your time will come...LOL!!
MB: Don't you think its wrong you share your bed with young boys who are no relation to you?
MJ: No, it's a beautiful thing, it's what the world needs.
Sorry, that is very wrong - if anyone else said that who wasnt famous etc they would get lynched - regardless if anything happened.
I feel sorry for his kids and hope Jacko rests in peace but he was a very very troubled human being.
Mind you I had just caught my scrotum in my jeans zip.............
On a serious note it is sad and I do feel for his family.
In the case in which he was found not guilty he'd had an ill child to stay at his place. Now, I'll not go into the mindset of the parents that thought it was ok to let their kid go to stay at the house of a man who had been repeatedly accused, but surely if you were falsely accused of something like that, if you didn't have some kind of a compulsion you'd make sure that you were never in a position to be accused again. Again, one of his friends or managers ought to have been stepping in.
My point was that in the last 50 years (ie 60 - 10) there have been very few entertainers that could match Jacko at his best - i am not a fan of his as a person, the baby dangling incident was appalling - but as a mass-market entertainer for a period up until the mid-80s he was pretty much unrivalled.
Man will always condemn in others that which he most fears in himself.