Guest Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 I may be wrong, but I don't think Michael Jackson was ever convicted of any child molesting was he? They couldn't prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.
Shrenchel Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 I hope everyone is this upset when Garry Glitter dies.
Dr The Singh Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 I hope everyone is this upset when Garry Glitter dies. I'm upset he's still alive!!!
Fox92 Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 I may be wrong, but I don't think Michael Jackson was ever convicted of any child molesting was he? Na it has never been true anyway in my eyes (or in anyones eyes because it never got proved), that lads dad and that were just after money. Dont think there will never be another Michael Jackson - there will never be nobody as good a dancer and entertainer. Just like there will never be another John Lennon/Paul McCartney and there will never be another George Best.
lou Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 I may be wrong, but I don't think Michael Jackson was ever convicted of any child molesting was he? Like I said he openly admitted sleeping with young boys in his bed on TV interviews. Saying it was a "beautiful thing". If it was one of your neighbours you, and everyone else would be very quick to call him a paedo I suspect.... why is it any different for Jacko? I still dont think an innocent man with nothing to hide would have paid off his accuser with millions of dollars? Just because he got off doesnt mean he didnt do it. Theres been many guilty people aquitted either through lack of evidence or on technicalities. MY OPINION is he was a weirdo and a probable child molester. I wouldnt let my kids sleep in the same bed as a middle aged man, regardless of who he is!!! I hope everyone is this upset when Garry Glitter dies. Indeed
Joe. Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 Like I said he openly admitted sleeping with young boys in his bed on TV interviews. Saying it was a "beautiful thing". If it was one of your neighbours you, and everyone else would be very quick to call him a paedo I suspect.... why is it any different for Jacko? I still dont think an innocent man with nothing to hide would have paid off his accuser with millions of dollars? Just because he got off doesnt mean he didnt do it. Theres been many guilty people aquitted either through lack of evidence or on technicalities. MY OPINION is he was a weirdo and a probable child molester. I wouldnt let my kids sleep in the same bed as a middle aged man, regardless of who he is!!! TV interviews which were allegedly heavily edited. For example in one documentary, the reporter asks, "Do you let children sleep in your bed?". The MJ response you hear on the television is "Yes", when really the full response says, "Yes, but I sleep on the floor". I'm not one to judge whether or not he did do these things, but there's no doubt the truth was heavily tampered with by the media.
BlabyFox Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 I may be wrong, but I don't think Michael Jackson was ever convicted of any child molesting was he? He paid hush-money to the victims.
Joe. Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 He paid hush-money to the victims. Oh right, sorry Mr. Inside knowledge.
BlabyFox Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 This guy hits the nail on the head: Rex FeaturesNew York congressman Pete King has described Michael Jackson as a "pervert" and a "paedophile" and hit out at journalists for their positive coverage of the star since his death. In a video posted by FriendsofPeteKing on YouTube, the Republican politician argued that it was wrong for "this low-life" Michael Jackson to receive such coverage when policemen, firefighters, soldiers and teachers do not get their due recognition. King said: "Let's knock out the psychobabble. This guy was a pervert, he was a child molester, he was a paedophile and to be giving this much coverage to him day-in, day-out, what does it say about us as a country? "We're too politically correct. No-one wants to stand up and say we don't need Michael Jackson. He died, he had some talent, fine. People are dying every day." He added: "I really think the media has disgraced itself. I think too many people in public life have made fools of themselves by talking about Michael Jackson as if he's some kind of hero. "There's nothing good about this guy. He may have been a a good singer, did some dancing. But the bottom line is would you let your child or grandchildren be in the same room with Michael Jackson?"
Webbo Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 I can't help feeling there is hypocrisy on both sides of the argument here. The people on here saying that MJ was a paedophile are same people who accuse the papers and TV of making up/exaggerating the crime figures, unemployment, swine flu and anything else that doesn't support their world view. And yet even though they've never met MJ they know for a fact that he was a paedophile. Personally I have no idea whether he was or not but I do know that not being able to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt is not proof that someone is guilty.
StanSP Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 I hope everyone is this upset when Garry Glitter dies. Yeah but what did Gary Glitter bring to the world?? MJ brought timeless music and was an international superstar from a very young age. You don't get many legends like him nowadays, which is why all the child-molesting etc is discounted for. Why can't people just respect all that he did (musically and as an all-round international star) and all that he brought to us over the years?
Koke Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 I can't help feeling there is hypocrisy on both sides of the argument here. The people on here saying that MJ was a paedophile are same people who accuse the papers and TV of making up/exaggerating the crime figures, unemployment, swine flu and anything else that doesn't support their world view. And yet even though they've never met MJ they know for a fact that he was a paedophile.Personally I have no idea whether he was or not but I do know that not being able to prove someone guilty is not proof that someone is guilty. Mate, if you sleep in the same bed with 10 year old boys, then you really are asking for trouble. Jackson thought it was perfectly normal to do that. What kind of sick person does that? If that was any other random Joe on the street, everyone would unanimously judge him as a paedophile.
Webbo Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 Mate, if you sleep in the same bed with 10 year old boys, then you really are asking for trouble. Agreed, but that doesn't definitely mean he's a paedo. My main point was more about believing tabloid hype when it suits and dismissing it when it doesn't.
Guppy Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 Like I said he openly admitted sleeping with young boys in his bed on TV interviews. Saying it was a "beautiful thing". If it was one of your neighbours you, and everyone else would be very quick to call him a paedo I suspect.... why is it any different for Jacko? I still dont think an innocent man with nothing to hide would have paid off his accuser with millions of dollars? One of them has came forward since his death and said he was forced to lie by his dad to get money (£20m was paid by Jacko out of court I believe), I never really believed he did commit any child molesting, but if one person admits they lied, surely he's not the only one? and it certainly makes me doubt he did do anything wrong even more, even if some of his actions are abnormal. Also, as some people have already said, the media have totally over exaggerated what he did and twisted stories to sell more papers, etc and unfortunately it will tarnish Jacko's legacy forever.
James. Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 My main point was more about believing tabloid hype when it suits and dismissing it when it doesn't. That's exactly what I was just about to write.
Guest Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 I can't help feeling there is hypocrisy on both sides of the argument here. The people on here saying that MJ was a paedophile are same people who accuse the papers and TV of making up/exaggerating the crime figures, unemployment, swine flu and anything else that doesn't support their world view. And yet even though they've never met MJ they know for a fact that he was a paedophile.Personally I have no idea whether he was or not but I do know that not being able to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt is not proof that someone is guilty. I personally would prefer to read the court transcript before making my mind up either way, if you are implying that I am a hypocrite.
lou Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 One of them has came forward since his death and said he was forced to lie by his dad to get money (£20m was paid by Jacko out of court I believe), I never really believed he did commit any child molesting, but if one person admits they lied, surely he's not the only one? and it certainly makes me doubt he did do anything wrong even more, even if some of his actions are abnormal. Also, as some people have already said, the media have totally over exaggerated what he did and twisted stories to sell more papers, etc and unfortunately it will tarnish Jacko's legacy forever. No, him openly ADMITTING on TV to sleeping with young boys will do that.
Dr The Singh Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 No, him openly ADMITTING on TV to sleeping with young boys will do that. Worse still when asked, he thought there was nothing wrong in doing so!!!!!!! He was a disturbed individual, I can't say whether he was a paedo or not, but I wouldn't let my kids stay with him............
Zingari Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 I can't help feeling there is hypocrisy on both sides of the argument here. The people on here saying that MJ was a paedophile are same people who accuse the papers and TV of making up/exaggerating the crime figures, unemployment, swine flu and anything else that doesn't support their world view. And yet even though they've never met MJ they know for a fact that he was a paedophile.Personally I have no idea whether he was or not but I do know that not being able to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt is not proof that someone is guilty. spot on
Bellend Sebastian Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 Worse still when asked, he thought there was nothing wrong in doing so!!!!!!! He was a disturbed individual, I can't say whether he was a paedo or not, but I wouldn't let my kids stay with him............ I would. He categorically denied being a paedophile, whereas most people I know haven't made this clear. Do they have something to hide? Hmmmmm
StanSP Posted 6 July 2009 Posted 6 July 2009 Hitler's found out! did you do that? 'Shitting Rainbows'
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.