Michael Jackson The Farewell

[KIMItheThreadSlayer]

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

rhubarb...are you cross examining me...are you ever off duty?

Sorry for the children, the childhood Michael was denied, 'his' children losing their only parent, and the children whose innocence MJ robbed.
he was a text book peado.

i do think that's interesting, rhubarb, in that diane sawyer interview he said that he wouldn't stop sleeping with boys. on the one hand i think it's fair to see that as supporting his innocence, i can see that. but otoh he is reportedly very shrewd indeed, he spoke with a pretty normal voice on the itv thing, not the wispy girl voice. so i think it could also be interpreted as the response of a man whose every whim is indulged. plus, i have seen interviews with paedophiles where they sincerely and genuinely believe that they are loving children by fellating them etc. they really don't get the damage they do, so i think you could interpret the MJ response in that manner also.

also, re 'they found nothing'. they found pornographic magazines containing naked young boys with the fingerprints of gavin arviso and mj on them. and a picture of a nude boy with a towel falling off him was up in MJ's bedroom. and it's not the sort of place kids can follow you into, it's double-locked and alarmed.

i'm not getting why i'm being described as militant, btw. this case wouldn't in a court of law have to be proven 100%, just beyond a reasonable doubt.

Well my only conclusion is that I'm happy staying right here on this fence.

I can see both points of view, but none are persuading me either way.

If I were a judge, I'd have to throw the case out because you can't convict on a hung jury.

DP - where were you at the time of MJs death? Do you have an alibi?

check out those locks and of course the king of pop's ghost.

how certain am i?

beyond reasonable doubt certain.

plenty of his staff were bought off

probably for more than they could have sold and syndicated stories for about him, but that is just conjecture

and of course, people may not have believed it.

how sure you are , tdiddy, he did not do it>

maybe he thought that by admitting he slept with the boys, no-one would thikn he would do anythign else.. who'd be stupid enough to admit they slept with boys and abused them?

so far, the things that are not in dispute:

he had no real sense of what was appropriate and was emotionally stunted

he shared his bed with many young boys

he had drug addiction

he paid off Jordy Chandler and a number of staff

he gave alcohol to minors who were sleeping at his house

he gave large gifts to teh families of the boys and the boys themselves that he favoured

it all leaves a nasty, nasty taste in the mouht, before you even wonder if he molested any children

My dad has a picture of a young naked girl glancing behind her - painting rather - doesn't mean he's a paedo.

I'm surprised that details of what were found were made public. That's not normal.

O.k. so we have someone here who is purportedly a paedophile, yet of all the possibly 1000s of children he has stay over his house/passed through neverland-including his own children, you're telling me that being a rampant sexual deviant, he abuses just a couple of children? So he's a highly controlled paedo then?

Neither can you convict someone for having locks on their bedroom door.

Did I hear a "Whoo-Hoo" noise on that footage?

"former aides or security staff could have sold teh story for millions. they never have. "

mamzon, they have. plenty of them are on record, some spoke at the trial. what are you talking about?

there was proof, there were witnesses, the DA should have had him banged to rights. but there was also an immensely clever defence strategy to discredit the mother (which some of you on this thread buy wholeheartedly, that she is MORE guilty than an abuser for putting her son in his orbit in exchange for shoes and bangles). they won.

same as OJ's defence team won. i'm not saying anyone was bought off, really i amn't, but i agree with rhubarb the judge should have thrown them out of court the minute he heard that some of them had negotiated sales for their stories prior to entering the court.

he abused two that we know of.
thats two too many, no?

he purportedly had relationships with some young boys, for months. so he was not just abusing loads of children, but having more relationships with them. as it were. allegedly.

one the one hand he appears totally asexual.

and on the other, this totally unhealthy interest in young boys.

no-one is ever going to know the truth, how many were molested or not. it might have been none and the CHandler/Arvizo cases were simply extortion. or it might have been 100.

the truth will never come out now.

agree , two too many

and let's say Chandler and Arvizo were not abused.

their lives were ruined. their child hoods ruined, their relationships with their families torn down

hardly terribly edifying for michael jackson

aitch....he was found innocent...as someone said, he couldn't have paid everyone off, he wasn't that rich...and not everyone can be bought....a half decent lawyer would have got a conviction based on what you're saying.

Did Aitch just say she agreed with me?

daftpunk!

hang on, rhubarb. you said nothing was found. you were wrong, that's all. i'm not convicting him on the grounds of having a nudie boy pic on his wall.

you said nothing was found, that was completely innacurate. i'd have thought dna from both arviso and mj on a child porn mag would have at least raised your eyebrow a little. seems like you're the one ignoring evidence to suit your own 'we can neeeever know' theory.

and as to him being a controlled paedophile, i don't think the rule is that they have to be hissing, spunking maniacs desperate to enter any passing kiddie, is it? how ridiculous. MJ clearly thought it was love, he said on the bashir film that he loved gavin arviso, and gavin arviso loved him back.

I'm on the fence Aitch, I don't have an argument one way or the other. Where did you find out about the evidence they collected? Because it's not normal police practice to leak out details of what they found.

yes, it was love and cosmic and beautiful and the people who suggested otherwise were just plain wrong

i would have a serious problem with a 35 year old man claiming to be in love with my pre pubsecent teen and even more so that that love was reciprocated

it was you who started talking about paying people off wrt the trial, dp, i don't htink i've said he did.

he certainly paid off the chandlers, and gave 2.7mill to a maid who found him in a sleeping bag with her son, so he does have form in that regard. and he did employ a very heavy goombah PI who's now in jail for threatening witnesses and wiretapping etc. according to the DA Tom Seddon the Chandlers would have testified but fot he fact that the LA police said they couldn't keep them safe and that's what made them take the money.

so it's not outwith the bounds of possiblility that potential witnesses were tampered with, i think. but yes, it's a bit of a stretch imo that the jury were bought off. although it may, i suppose, have felt some pressure to let him off in order to cash in on their tabloid deals. my opionion on the jury is that they were distracted by the defence tactics, as intended.

it's all in those articles, rhubarb. they really are worth a read, no kidding. i think you'd enjoy them. and i always fooking agree with you when you're right.

Hmm, yes well I did glance at the articles but as with all things media related, I'd like to know the source. Where is the police statement providing the info about what they found at his house?

My point is, and I speak from experience: Paedophiles cannot control themselves. That is why they must be monitored when leaving prison. That is why they often move close to schools and choose to work with children. That is why they always re-offend. That is why so many of them feel they must get off on child-porn just to stop themselves from looking for a child. That is why they go to cambodia and third world countries to use children. That is why they link up and trade their children.

Frankly the idea that Michael was a paedo, who, despite having open access to thousands of children abused only 2 in a space of what? 10 years? Is a naive notion of paedophilia. Real paedophiles form a pattern of behaviour that is mostly unfixable. Having formed the twisted desire, it becomes habitual, and they are simply uable to stop themselves.

Personally, I believe Jordys parents wanted money, which they got. What parent who really believed that their child had been violated would accept any amount of cash? My bet is that the parents of the second child were also hoping for a cash settlement and didn't expect court.

LOL, just googled and found this! "Concrete Evidence Found at Neverland (flag)
www.tmz.com ? Filed under: Michael Jackson A shipment of concrete was just delivered to the Neverland Ranch.We saw the concrete truck drive onto the property. A rep from the construction company told"