Who's going to see the child molesterer?

[chris]

He can sing, he can dance and he can touch kids and get away with it.

Now he's making a comeback.

http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famecrawler/2008/10/23-End/michael-jackson-neverland.jpg

Who cares if he touched a few kids, he can dance man, dance!

[darketernal]

I find it rather disturbing that people attend the concerts of a suspected pedophil.

[jojo]

no way!

jarvis cocker at the brits has my vote :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upbbz_Eyq4Q

about 30 secs into, just incase you cant stand watching the child molester giving it large

[unusual_suspect]

no way!

jarvis cocker at the brits has my vote :D

Lol, that was quality! :D

[darketernal]

As much as I might find Kat Williams a bit annoying, he sums it up fairly well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XEg6RH0zh0

[unusual_suspect]

Well, any grown man who hangs around with kids and grabs his crotch as much as he does has got to be a wrong-un imho.

[crimsonblade]

Jackson is definitely a suspicious one. But no-one looks more boy-hungry than James Randi:


http://www.williamhkennedy.com/randi.jpg

[void]

Wow, most of the replys here are very media programmed (IMO).

[unusual_suspect]

Wow, most of the replys here are very media programmed (IMO).

How so?

[dmt head]

I find it rather disturbing that people attend the concerts of a suspected pedophil.


I agree but loads of folks still see him as a total legend. I used to work with a guy who idolised him.

[chris]

How so?

There's a 'child molester witch hunt' out there...Or so they say LOL.

I agree, the paranoia out there is ridiculous about suspecting the average person on the street. However when a person walks talks and quacks like a duck, people still go to worship at his feet.

It came out in his trial that while he was entertaining the children at his neverland ranch, he got the kids drunk on 'Jesus Juice' then just by coincidence, Michael found a dirty magazine which was laying around even though they were at his house...And got everyone to look at it.

Now if I did that to a fully grown woman, that would make me quite a pervert...What does that make him?

He's a nonce plain and simple, a dancing one at that.

[lostwonderer]

Pedophile or not, his music is still great.

[chris]

Pedophile or not, his music is still great.

Ye, If I ever go on a killing spree, I think I better take dancing lessons instead of hiring a lawyer.

[unusual_suspect]

There's a 'child molester witch hunt' out there...Or so they say LOL.

I agree, the paranoia out there is ridiculous about suspecting the average person on the street. However when a person walks talks and quacks like a duck, people still go to worship at his feet.

It came out in his trial that while he was entertaining the children at his neverland ranch, he got the kids drunk on 'Jesus Juice' then just by coincidence, Michael found a dirty magazine which was laying around even though they were at his house...And got everyone to look at it.

Now if I did that to a fully grown woman, that would make me quite a pervert...What does that make him?

He's a nonce plain and simple, a dancing one at that.

Well indeed, he walks, talks and quacks like one and definitely has some duckishness about him. Jesus Jucice wtf!! Lets just hope he never got his Jacko juice out!

As my son said, "look at him, he's a freak", he's 10, has never met him and he thinks he's a wrong-un, that's good enough for me!

[nofuture]

He's bad, he's bad, he's really really bad.

[hunter77]

jacksons back on the" i need to pay my legal team" tour part 1:D

[void]

It came out in his trial

Do you by default believe every accusation given in court against someone?

As far as I'm aware (I may be wrong) each case that has gone against him has been settled by out of court payments. I believe the first charges against him were settled by US$20 million? (after haggling, on the part of the accuser's Father). So, is that shifty behaviour on 'his' part? Or, insincere behaviour on the part of the accusers? Did they want 'truth out there'?

Or did they want money? Hey, Jackson got up to a lifestyle that leaves you wide open for accusations in today's climate, and he certainly put his head on the chopping block in that regard. But from what I've seen, the various unusual goings on behind the scenes on the part of some accusers, make it seem far less clear cut than it appears. Most people will reject it all with - "NO! He's guilty". Yet, nobody can produce evidence beyond accusations.

Judges didn't find him guilty on the last court case, despite a flood of accusations, which means that the so called evidence must have been shaky to say the least, or he would have been put away. Some may say he bought off the right people. But, please prove it! If not, the guy should be considered not guilty no matter how folks think he's a bit odd in the head.

I remember in one of my old workplaces, a conversation came up about this guy and the mindset was medeival. "Castrate the fucker with a hacksaw" and that kind of thing, even before the trial. Trial by media. All the monkeys were collectively declaring him guilty because it was a hate fest. Sorry, but if the guy was not found guilty then he was found not guilty and that doesn't make him guilty no matter what people's 'opinions' are.

Over here in Britain we had the case of Matthew Kelly, a really nice guy in our TV history, and someone whos life was utterly ruined by the trashy tabloids overnight for years, after they jumped the gun and went on a campaign of ripping him to shreds over 'allegations' against him. Already the damage was done. Kelly WAS a child molester as far as the public taboid readers were concerned, with their good old - "No smoke without fire, yeah?" justification. You can see smoke rising from outside a house, but it doesn't mean that the owner lit it. Anyone can come along and start a fire with some kindling and a few matches. Easily.

Fact is, Matthew was cleared of the allegations by police who found no evidence. It took years for Matthew's life in show business to be revived, and today when you see him (he was on a chat show this morning) it is 'still' an 'association' that pops up into your mind, despite him being cleared.

Accusations of this kind mark people forever even if they're cleared, and the tabloids have no mercy. If they say someone is guilty, the public usually says "Yeah, must be. No smoke without fire".

[chris]

Do you by default believe every accusation given in court against someone?

I believe it when his own team admitted it happened. that's why I said the little story, I didn't say the actual real molestation part he was accused of...

As far as I'm aware (I may be wrong) each case that has gone against him has been settled by out of court payments. I believe the first charges against him were settled by US$20 million? (after haggling, on the part of the accuser's Father). So, is that shifty behaviour on 'his' part? Or, insincere behaviour on the part of the accusers? Did they want 'truth out there'?

Or did they want money? Hey, Jackson got up to a lifestyle that leaves you wide open for accusations in today's climate, and he certainly put his head on the chopping block in that regard. But from what I've seen, the various unusual goings on behind the scenes on the part of some accusers, make it seem far less clear cut than it appears. Most people will reject it all with - "NO! He's guilty". Yet, nobody can produce evidence beyond accusations.

Judges didn't find him guilty on the last court case, despite a flood of accusations, which means that the so called evidence must have been shaky to say the least, or he would have been put away. Some may say he bought off the right people. But, please prove it! If not, the guy should be considered not guilty no matter how folks think he's a bit odd in the head.

Like I said, I didn't mention the actual accusations made against him, I was talking about what did come out in the trial. Yes I'm sure the kids family that accused him did it for the money.

I remember in one of my old workplaces, a conversation came up about this guy and the mindset was medeival. "Castrate the fucker with a hacksaw" and that kind of thing, even before the trial. Trial by media. All the monkeys were collectively declaring him guilty because it was a hate fest. Sorry, but if the guy was not found guilty then he was found not guilty and that doesn't make him guilty no matter what people's 'opinions' are.

I'm not talking about castrating him, I'm simply ridiculing people for allowing their kids to go to a concert of a guy that gets children drunk and then flashes porno mags infront of them. He's a very dirty bastard at least...

[brainfreeze]

The parents of the children who accused MJ may have been after the money, but to pay millions to settle out of court is not the actions of an innocent man.

MJ built himself a pedo's delight in his own backyard. What's the full/true story regarding him and Macauley Calkin? Look at the women the man married. How seriously can you take those relationships?

Kiddy Fiddling is a hard case to prove. Everyone knows that.

He's not getting any of my money in ticket fees or album sales.

[armoured_amazon]

If I send my kids to stay unsupervised with a man suspected of child abuse I am the one who is the abuser.

[brainfreeze]

If I send my kids to stay unsupervised with a man suspected of child abuse I am the one who is the abuser.

Correction - you too, are the abuser

[armoured_amazon]

Correction - you too, are the abuser

Potato, potato.

[brainfreeze]

Potato, potato.

I agree with you. The parents are as guilty as MJ, if they knew or suspected him to be a pedo. The kids remain innocent in this matter, though innocents may have been stolen from them.

It's not uncommon for abuser parents to pass out their children to other abusers. The parents may have set MJ up. A kid still payed the price.

[armoured_amazon]

I agree with you. The parents are as guilty as MJ, if they knew or suspected him to be a pedo. The kids remain innocent in this matter, though innocents may have been stolen from them.

It's not uncommon for abuser parents to pass out their children to other abusers. The parents may have set MJ up. A kid still payed the price.

I think the parents who sent their kids to Neverland after the first set of allegations should also have faced prosecution.

eta: I never thought about the aspect of them being prior abusers but that makes sense.

[unusual_suspect]

I think the parents who sent their kids to Neverland after the first set of allegations should also have faced prosecution.

eta: I never thought about the aspect of them being prior abusers but that makes sense.

Even if if you didn't know if it was true, you just wouldn't take that chance, something strange is going on there.

[nofuture]

Weird how Jackson is kosher yet Glitter is a pariah.

Funny old world.

[armoured_amazon]

I think the difference in Glitter and Jacko opinion is because it appears Gary Glitter is not a victim of his handlers, whereas Michael's whole life has been a rigorously controlled experiment.

Even if if you didn't know if it was true, you just wouldn't take that chance, something strange is going on there.

+1

My personal opinion is that MJ is split into alters and either an alter is an abuser or the whole thing is a CON. Either way, no good parent would allow their child within a hundred miles of Neverland Valley ranch, just in case it was true.

[joe911]

nope,not going to see a child mollesterer going to see the innocent and amazing talent that is michael jackson.

[darketernal]

If I send my kids to stay unsupervised with a man suspected of child abuse I am the one who is the abuser.

Absolutely. Enabling a known/suspected pedo makes one just as guilty.