Michael Jackson Dies, Aged 50.

I honestly don't see the problem with keeping the thread open - just play nicely :)

From what I understood, MJ didn't hate the colour of his own skin, he had a skin condition causing it to lighten. He might not have liked his face and had surgeries, but he admitted to that and how many people other than MJ have had plastic surgery to change the way they appear.

As for the allegations, I don't think for one minute he wanted to cause anyone any harm - as a mother of 4 boys, if any SOB had touched my boys in anyway, shape or form, I would have taken them to court and no amount of money would have changed my thoughts on that - he would have been punished and humiliated - I certainly wouldn't have accepted a million dollar payout on its own, with no further charges to be brought. He was a boy thrust into the spotlight, who didn't have a childhood, who was beaten by his father - like him or loathe him, you wouldn't really want any child to be brought up in that way surely?!

But of course, all of the above, is my own point of view.

Problem with the child abuse was:

1. they were never proven
2. money talks and he was an easy target

There are numerous interviews with children who spent time with MJ that state nothing ontowards occurred. Not saying he's innocent cause you don't make a statement saying "its beautiful to share a bed with a child" unless your mentality is of a four year old.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rimmer

Problem with the child abuse was:

1. they were never proven
2. money talks and he was an easy target

There are numerous interviews with children who spent time with MJ that state nothing ontowards occurred. Not saying he's innocent cause you don't make a statement saying "its beautiful to share a bed with a child" unless your mentality is of a four year old.

---

And you dont pay 20 million dollars to the family of a young boy for nothing. It will be interesting to see if the Jackson family sue Sen. Peter King who called him a paedophile and child molester earlier this week.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by di marco

i wondered why after all the effort michael jackson made of keeping his kids hidden that his daughter would then be allowed to speak at his memorial in front of millions of people worldwide. maybe she wanted to, i dunno, but it looked very upsetting/destressing for her and i just thought it might have been better if she spoke at their private funeral rather than letting her speak there. but as i said maybe she wanted to do it

---

I felt all his effort was for nothing in the end too :( He had tried sooo hard and now he's gone..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alan45

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rimmer

Problem with the child abuse was:

1. they were never proven
2. money talks and he was an easy target

There are numerous interviews with children who spent time with MJ that state nothing ontowards occurred. Not saying he's innocent cause you don't make a statement saying "its beautiful to share a bed with a child" unless your mentality is of a four year old.

---

And you dont pay 20 million dollars to the family of a young boy for nothing. It will be interesting to see if the Jackson family sue Sen. Peter King who called him a paedophile and child molester earlier this week.

---

For MJ it was probably the fact he could make a problem go away by throwing money at it. I would also be questioning the ethics of the boys family. Money isn't the solution when your child has been abused.

This whole affair stinks from both sides.

Edit: as for Peter King - there's nutters who are always pushing the barriers. Looks at that nutter Rush Limbaugh

For those who don't know what Peter King said:

Quote:

---

New 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?"

---

and

Quote:

---

US congressman Pete King has defended his recent comments regarding media coverage of the death of Michael Jackson.

The Republican had previously described Jackson as a "pervert" and a "child molester" and opposed calls for a motion to honour the singer in the House of Representatives.

King told Fox News's The O'Reilly Factor: "The reason I was harsh, if you want to call it that, is I had to cut through this ten-day cacophony of glorification, this onslaught where he was being made out to be a saint or a hero.

"This man was a child molester. By his own admission he slept with young boys. You walk to a neighbourhood and say, 'If a grown man sleeps with young boys in his bed, is he a pervert?', 99 out of 100 people would say yes."

When it was noted that Jackson was not convicted of abusing children, King added: "I would say an adult male who sleeps with young boys is a child molester. If nothing else he's molesting and abusing their psyche.

"How are those children possibly going to end up normal after spending nights in bed with Michael Jackson?"

---

Michael was acquitted on all charges, what King has said is slander.

I'm more concerned for his children having to live through all this whilst grieving for their father. I hope the family are shielding them from most of the bad press reports, they shouldn't have to listen to and read that their father is a paedophile when he was proved innocent.

As for Jordan, would you as a parent accept a 20million dollar pay out if your child had been abused rather than go to court and see the abuser punished? I certainly wouldn't. When one has money, it is easy to make things disappear without much fuss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abigail

As for Jordan, would you as a parent accept a 20million dollar pay out if your child had been abused rather than go to court and see the abuser punished? I certainly wouldn't. When one has money, it is easy to make things disappear without much fuss.

---

Look at it another way. Would you payout $20,000,000 if you were not guilty:hmm:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alan45

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abigail

As for Jordan, would you as a parent accept a 20million dollar pay out if your child had been abused rather than go to court and see the abuser punished? I certainly wouldn't. When one has money, it is easy to make things disappear without much fuss.

---

Look at it another way. Would you payout $20,000,000 if you were not guilty:hmm:

---

I'd like to think not but if I was MJ and there was a real risk I would go to prison for something I hadn't done then I'd pay up. Much easier to part with 20million than go down for years and end up with a criminal record and label as a paedophile. I don't know what state he was to be tried in; perhaps the death penalty was a possible sentence, in which case I definitely would pay up.

I'm not defending him or his actions. I don't know the full story or case therefore I'm in no position to give an informed comment. I'm merely saying if I were a mother, no amount of money would make me drop a case against someone who abused my child.

i dont think we can really judge seeing as we dont know the full story. ok he was accused of it and he was let off but obviously the kids parents are gonna say he did it and he was gonna say he didnt. the only people that know for sure certainly are michael jackson and the kids that stayed there. whether he abused these kids or not i definitely wouldnt let my kids stay over at his house or any other persons house who i didnt know really well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abigail

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alan45

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abigail

As for Jordan, would you as a parent accept a 20million dollar pay out if your child had been abused rather than go to court and see the abuser punished? I certainly wouldn't. When one has money, it is easy to make things disappear without much fuss.

---

Look at it another way. Would you payout $20,000,000 if you were not guilty:hmm:

---

I'd like to think not but if I was MJ and there was a real risk I would go to prison for something I hadn't done then I'd pay up. Much easier to part with 20million than go down for years and end up with a criminal record and label as a paedophile. I don't know what state he was to be tried in; perhaps the death penalty was a possible sentence, in which case I definitely would pay up.

I'm not defending him or his actions. I don't know the full story or case therefore I'm in no position to give an informed comment. I'm merely saying if I were a mother, no amount of money would make me drop a case against someone who abused my child.

---

If he was innocent he could have hired the best lawyers to defend him. Insteade he just handed over 20 million dollars.. What would be to hinder other people from making the same allegations in order to get money