Michael Jackson is dead

[QOD]

sad

I'm saying dittany that you have an agenda that is crystal clear in all your posts. It doesn't leave any space for discussion, debate or ambiguity.

I disagree with your absolute assertion that MJ abused young boys, although I think on balance he may well have done. However I don't think you-or I- can possibly know for sure.

I don't agree that there are any posters on here that have condoned or excused paedophilia. I think you have deliberately interpreted posters that have disagreed with you in this way. Personally I find that offensive but its a great way for you to become even more entrenched in your chosen position.

You criticise me for not addressing the content of your arguments when its clear that your personal agenda pervades them. And me patronising? pot, kettle, black

Thought the first case was civil, so he could negotiate a financial settlement and the second case was criminal?

Great post staggerlee.

I also find the assertion that some posters on this thread 'condone paedophilia' totally offensive. In fact if you are looking for abuse of other people, look no further than that assertion. For someone who claims to be anti abusive behaviour, it's a worrying assertion to make about other people.

Gosh...am fascinated by who the 'well travelled, intelligent, well-educated' (ifshedoessaysoherself) KerryMumbles knows in the entertainment industry?

not counting the fella at her local Blockbuster video

THe first case was indeed civil - my understanding is that the state refused to prosecute a criminal case due to lack of evidence. MJ should of course have defended the civil case rather than pay up to that particular family.

But as SGB says, just because the family in question had a felonious history, does not mean that in this case they were not telling the truth. It just seems kind of unlikely to me.

the fact that he settled definitely didn't do him any favours - but i gather he was forced into settling by 3rd parties who had both his business interests and his health at heart. Noone close to him thought his mental / physical health could withstand a trial. In retrospect perhaps it probably would have discredited the Chandlers and nipped any further copycat suits (Arvizo) in the bud

Ooh I wonder how much the Mirror would pay me for a story like that. I've got a spare ten minutes to knock one up now

exactly Violet Hill.
man dies
let's watch people crawl out of woodwork to discredit someone who can't answer back
great!

The prosecution in the crinimal case certainly leaked rumours that there had been other boys. They just couldn't come up with any names, or indeed any evidence whatsoever.

And the kid told lie after lie and continually contradicted himself on the witness stand. His teacher testified that he was a trouble-maker and a liar. She had heard him tell his classmates that Jackson had never touched him. Other celebrities testified that the Arvizo family had tried to extort money from them also.

This kid knew exactly what he was doing.

Ah well a multi millionaire. Can't possibly be a liar then can he.

okay - a copycat allegation then- if you will. Or a similar allegation to the one made by the Chandlers. Maybe the district attorney should've picked a more credible family than the Arvizo's to make the case for the prosecution, as it's been widely stated here, they weren't exactly strangers to extortion or sexual assault.

Believe me, if the above story was true, this guy would have been called as a prosecution witness in the Arvizo case.

Which isn't to say he didn't think it was Michael Jackson on the phone. Just that it could have been anyone really who knew him and was trying to wind him up.

Exactly bobbysmum. I wonder if he also thought Freddie Starr ate his hamster

So he was so traumatised by Jackson's inappropriate behaviour towards him as a child that he chose not to testfiy against him when he had a chance and perhaps stop this evil man ruining any more children's lives.

No he chose to keep quite until he dies - then rings the Mirror.

Just because he's wealthy doesn't mean he doesn't crave attention - surely this could be his motivation for speaking out now? Tabloid expose in 'might not be entirely true' shocka!!

Dittany,
I have a huge amount of anger towards child abusers-I work with a lot of people whose mental health has been destroyed because of abuse.
However I do object to the way you insult and make snide digs at others who don't share your opinions and interpretation of the 'facts'.
If thats 'attacking' you then I feel fine about it. I don't know any absolute truths or morals-I live in the real world where its a bit more complicated.

Anyway this is turning into one of those cul de sac arguments that you seem to specialise in

Dittany, this seems a bit obsessive and feels as though it is striking a very personal chord for you.

May I suggest that your personal experience might not be the right basis for assessing MJ?

Schoolboy fantasy I think. Or probably making prank phone calls and wanking and then needed an excuse when his parents got the phone bill.

"Sorry mummy and daddy, but you see I was forced to phone Michael Jackson 3 times a week and listen to him wanking..!" ROFL Oh my god, you couldn't make it up, could you!

You are worth the effort dittany. Who knows what to make of the allegations-sadly I wasn't a fly on the wall.I wouldn't automatically think it was true or false unless, of course, I had an agenda.