Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Michael Jackson The Farewell

619 replies

KIMItheThreadSlayer · 07/07/2009 18:48

I think it is a rather nice send off,
Fitting.
Nice to hear others sing his songs

OP posts:
pingping · 08/07/2009 15:09

Again if someones child is abused and the parents are willing to accept money for this then they in fact are selling there children!! and even worse than the accused himself!

I was hoping that this was going to be a nice thread in memory of Michael Jackson rather than all the discussion about how awful the Jackson's were for allowing his kids on the stage and all this child abuse shit!!!

As for the Chandler thing surely he would of come forward by now and said the stories are not true!!

It would not shock me that its not all over the media the same people that destroyed Michael Jackson hounded his every movement and wrote terriable things about him.

I know that Jackson himself admitted to sleeping in the same bed as children but that doesn't mean he was abusing them it was very clear that Michael had many issues and clearly was not of a complete sound mind but its also clear that the minute that Jackson interview was shown on TV and the uproar it caused it was only then that Gavin's family got on the hype and decided to take Jackson to court another family that accepted payment from a man they believed abused there son!!!

As far as I am concerned Michael Jackson was and will remain the greatest musical artist of all time!
He is the only artist who's music has been passed through generation to generation and even before he died songs like Thriller, Bad, Annie are you ok, Heal the world, ABC, blame it on the boogie, Ben. Were still being played everywhere!

Michael inspired most of the artists in today's music and you only have to see the way they dance to confirm that!!!

brightongirldownunder · 08/07/2009 15:11

Aitch I'm not a tribute kind of girl, thankyou and I ain't lighting my Diptyque candle for anyone.
Nice one Nancy...

Hulababy · 08/07/2009 15:13

Nancy66 - I think you may be forgetting the key words "in my opinion" after your stateent.

Just as IMO - I don't have a clue if he is or isn't guilty; I just am aware that he was not found guilty at court.

Nancy66 · 08/07/2009 15:14

No sane person can read the evidence and reach any other conclusion. The emphasis on 'sane' - not a state of mind that bothers too many MJ fans

brightongirldownunder · 08/07/2009 15:16

Keep it going Nancy...
(and I don't regard myself as a "fan" of MJ)

Cesario · 08/07/2009 15:19

The girl was not egged on, she was nervous, she fiddled with her bag. They al seemed amazingly kind.

BUT

THEY WERE AL CHEWING GUM

brightongirldownunder · 08/07/2009 15:21

I wasn't sure about the glove thing...bet I have a nightmare about a huge sparkly glove tonight now

pingping · 08/07/2009 15:22

LOOOL @ Nancy so would you accept payment of a star to shut you up if someone abused your children???

There is no evidence that Jackson abused any children just statements from the apparent abused! that then went on to drop the charges for a payment! KMT!

SO it works both ways as so many have already said we will never know the truth of what happened so how can we judge or critize a man that was cleared of all charges!!!

pigletmania · 08/07/2009 15:22

I really dont know, i agree with 3littleboysmum, he was a child trapped in a mans body, I guess like you have boys trapped in girls bodies and the other way round. MJ was also not of an entirely sound mind to do all those things with kids, like have sleepovers and other things that I have heard of that I cant remember what now. Inappropriate yes, abuse no, not nessarily.

AitchTwoOh · 08/07/2009 15:23

"Again if someones child is abused and the parents are willing to accept money for this then they in fact are selling there children!! and even worse than the accused himself!"

precisely the argument used by the MJ legal team to discredit mrs arviso and obfuscate the facts re their own client.

you really should read the maureen orth pieces. i'm re-reading the first one now, haven't seen it in fifteen years. very interesting, very even-handed (sufficiently so that the bit i'm on is making a good case for Jordy being an extortionist, if that wets the whittle of any of the naysayers).

lol at diptyque, bgdu. i LOVE the fig one, have you smelled it?

AitchTwoOh · 08/07/2009 15:24

yes, cesario, i thought they seemed like a kind family, and let's not forget from what we've seen of jermaine and latoya on CBB, they were nice people. (if a little cowardly in the face of strong characters).

Nancy66 · 08/07/2009 15:25

There are indeed pages and pages of evidence, witness statements and photographs.

If you were wrongly accused of child abuse would you pay somebody off? Works both ways.

varicoseveined · 08/07/2009 15:26

Too late to revert to the original purpose of the thread, IMO...

The truth is, all we can do is speculate unless some concrete evidence were to emerge.

By the way - not all Michael Jackson fans are the crazed ones you see on the telly who cry when they see him perform like he's a deity, so less of the generalisations of those who appreciated his talent. I for one felt sick at the abuse claims; I can't dismiss them or believe them without good evidence. Yes that makes me a bit of a fence-sitter, I suppose.

I'll have a read of those articles someone posted earlier.

kiddycat · 08/07/2009 15:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

AitchTwoOh · 08/07/2009 15:28

and just in case anyone is reading the 1994 article, anthony pellicano, MJ's chief investigator who grilled Jordy Chandler... he'll be in prison for the next fifteen years. nice guy

brightongirldownunder · 08/07/2009 15:28

Don't go there Aitch, I friggin love it and they are even more expensive over here. My real fav is Feu de Bois.

If I'm going to get dragged into this argument even though I should be asleep, can I just ask this question again:-

Why oh why would you let YOUR CHILD sleep with a non-related adult? Especially an adult with known preference for childrens company? And then accept money from him instead of proving him guilty.

Bizarre...

AitchTwoOh · 08/07/2009 15:29

lol, kiddycat. i refer you to the statement made earlier by nancy66.

pingping · 08/07/2009 15:31

Aitch so you think that it was ok for them to accept money from Michael Jackson after they thought he abused there Son in fact I am sure it was only the Father in the Jordy case that believed his son was abused!!!

No amount of Money could ever make up for a child being abused the parents sold out there children that is a fact they took money off a man that they thought abused there son!!!

AitchTwoOh · 08/07/2009 15:32

omg feu du bois, that's my other favourite. lovely. and nightmarish expensivve in oz i'd imagine.

wrt your question.

  1. if you're a bit mental/vulnerable/greedy/in denial/a big MJ fan/bullied by MJ's 'people'.
  1. see above.
  1. see above.
AitchTwoOh · 08/07/2009 15:32

pingping, have you actually read what i've written on this thread?

brightongirldownunder · 08/07/2009 15:35

But to actually SLEEP with him?

No.... and I think thats why none of us can truly know what the hell went on.

To go back to the OP, its just a shame Minnie Ripperton wasn't alive to sing at his memorial. She's the only one who could truly replicate his early songs. Now she had an amazing voice. RIP Minnie.

AitchTwoOh · 08/07/2009 15:39

according to the VF piece, Jordy's mother was not pleased at all but MJ broke down and cried and said they were all family etc and that he was like a brother and had a special bond and that's what convinced her. wouldn't convince me, i don't think, but the mother does rather seem to have enjoyed her brush with fame so maybe she wanted to be convinced. same with mrs arviso i'd hazard.

brightongirldownunder · 08/07/2009 15:41

Yes but tears or your childs safety. Its seriously fucked up and I think the parents are just as guilty as MJ.

AitchTwoOh · 08/07/2009 15:52

well no, they aren't. you can't let a crime slide unless there's a criminal. the criminal is guilty of (in this instance) child abuse, the parents may be guilty of neglect or child endangerment. but without the original crime, they have no case to answer.

nevertheless, this was the approach taken by MJ's defence team, most successfully. they used mrs arviso's greed and stupidity and the fact she allowed her children into MJ's orbit to make her look untrustworthy. and if you can't trust a mother to keep her child safe from a paedo, then you can't trust her word that he's a paedophile at all. a miraculous argument, very clever and imo wicked.

Upwind · 08/07/2009 15:54

"Yes but tears or your childs safety. Its seriously fucked up and I think the parents are just as guilty as MJ."

the "they were asking for it" defense