I think everyone knows about Michael Jackson's case.
What do you think about it?
If you click here, u'll c his mug shot, funny isn't it?
I think he will go to jail for a while, not long though.
Printable View
I think everyone knows about Michael Jackson's case.
What do you think about it?
If you click here, u'll c his mug shot, funny isn't it?
I think he will go to jail for a while, not long though.
Well I belive it will be a fine. Just because it wont really hurt him in any way. Jail is a possiblity though if there is proof discovered of unbethical activitys.
Oh and your MJ mugshot link is a broken one.
I heard something about this but I really don't know what its about....so what is it about?
I'm now almost convinced that this is entirely bullshit, and the parents know they can milk the nutjob dry, so they will
Another settlement
Do the parents actually have any proof to back up their claim. So far I haven't seen any, but then again I haven't been following the case that closely
Yeah, i really haven't been listening that closely to the case either. What's going on with his case anyway (if anyone could be so kind and explain plz)
I really believe that he is guilty. He said that he admitted to sleeping in the same bed with children but thought that there was nothing wrong with that. He's Guilty IMO
Michael Jackson in 100% guilty......of being a weird guy. Thats it. The media is just crucifying him for being weird. Innocent. THis poll is slanted in the fact that you assume he is guilty. Ironically in the system he is being prosecuted under there is the presumption of innocence.
Quote:
Originally posted by KingCane
I really believe that he is guilty. He said that he admitted to sleeping in the same bed with children but thought that there was nothing wrong with that. He's Guilty IMO
So let me get this straight, Sleeping in a bed with some children automatically makes you a pedophile? Thats ridiculous. Oh my god they ****ing slept its not like there were intimate. I continue that Jackson is a weird guy but not a pedophile.
I always agreed with that point of view by myself. I mean he has so many celebrity freinds who are willing to vouch for him. Granted celebraties aren't always the best judge of charector, but enough people seem to think he's an ok guy, that I'd tend to agree.
honestly i say he's innocent but an idiot all the same..what was the deal with dangling the baby outside the balcony last year.. media is still buggin out about that.. but as for this case he's ignor.. i'm mean innocent..
There is a option "let him off the hook".Quote:
Originally posted by Fu�y
THis poll is slanted in the fact that you assume he is guilty.
I believe he will get a very short jail sentence (a month at the max) and a small fine (5k max). He is pretty much innosent, but he is a wierd guy, and being a wierd guy he probably did some illgal things with the children. They should be tensified and explained the sutuation. You can esialy persuade a little kid to tell the true, even if michael beforehand brainwashed em with garbage, you still can convince them to tell truth.
How is that rediculous? THE GUY SLEEPS WITH CHILDREN. It's just as rediculous for you to assume he's innocent as it is for someone else to assume he's not. Given the fact that he is indeed sleeping with children that are not his own, it's not an unreasonable conclusion to come to. Your assumption of his innocence is no more valid then anyone else's assuption of his guilt. The courts will decide wether or not he's innocent based on the evidence at hand, at any rate.Quote:
Originally posted by Fu�y
So let me get this straight, Sleeping in a bed with some children automatically makes you a pedophile? Thats ridiculous. Oh my god they ****ing slept its not like there were intimate. I continue that Jackson is a weird guy but not a pedophile.
I for one couldn't care less what happens to the guy, or wether or not he's guilty. As for what will happen should he be found guilty, I'd imagine he'll do some jail time....
Hey has a stong point that i agree on entierly, exept I rather not see him in jail, for the fact that I like Michael Jaskon, not as a singer cuz he blows, hes had some good songs that i like here and these, not because he abbuses children or w/e. But because I feel he is a good to society.
I'm never one to abandon my points so here goes.
I dont think its right to determine hes a pedophile because of these things. Yeah,I'll admit hes a weird guy. And for Cyberxion, i will repeat yes he slept with children but how is it fair to determine hes a pedophile from this. Yeah its sure is odd, but still you cant just determine that.
So I'd like to clarify, weird people are and just based off them being weird, are most likely child molesters? Come now, i think that is far too general. If we decided if someone were guilty by if their weird or not there would be lots of innocent people in prison.Quote:
but he is a wierd guy, and being a wierd guy he probably did some illgal things with the children.
Yes well haven't we put enough innocent people in jail?
Umm yeah sure.
Ack, I just realized who I'm defending. Even if hes Michael Jackson I stand by everything I said. THat being said I think I'm gonna take a shower now. =/
Fury, that's an admirable quality you have, standing by your convictions so strongly. But sometimes it can work against you as well. It can blind a person to other ways of thinking, and sometimes it can blind a person to the truth. You should stand by your convictions, but you should also not be so stubborn as to entertain other ways of thinking.Quote:
Originally posted by Fu�y
I'm never one to abandon my points so here goes.
I dont think its right to determine hes a pedophile because of these things. Yeah,I'll admit hes a weird guy. And for Cyberxion, i will repeat yes he slept with children but how is it fair to determine hes a pedophile from this. Yeah its sure is odd, but still you cant just determine that.
I'll reiterate my post once more, so as to clarify my stance. Hopefully you'll consider what I'm saying.
I merely said that it's just as reasonable to believe he's done something wrong, as it is to believe he's innocent. You can no more assume his innocence then the next person can his guilt, especially given what we know about the man. You seem to be convinced that there is absolutely no reason to suspect Jackson of being a pedophile, and that's clearly not the case. He is a 45 year old man that's admitted to sleeping with young children. If that's not enough to raise a red flag, then what is? Given that he is indeed sleeping in the same bed as children 30 years his junior, it's not at all unreasonable for one to wonder wether or not his actions extend beyond just sleeping with them. In fact, it may be more of a stretch to say he's not guilty, as it's highly unusual for a person of that age to be sleeping with young children. Sure, his sleeping with children doesn't automatically label him a pedophile, but it's not unreasonable for people to wonder, given the facts at hand.
Yeah, im surprised that everyone just hates him. according to the votes though, many fined him, let him off the hook, or gave him a short jail sentence and a fine. :|
Cybers EDIT: I've taken care of the smiley for ya'. Next time just use the edit button below your post. :)
I actually find Micheal Jacksons music to be very entertaining. I've been a fan since I was a kid. That said, I find Michal Jackson as a person to be a strange individual, and I wouldn't put the pedophilia past him. He's admitted to sleeping in the same bed as children, and that doesn't strike me as a very normal thing to be doing. I also think he's not fit to be a father, and his children should be removed from his custody and put in a home that's able to better care for them.
Anyway, I honestly don't care wether or not he's guilty. That's up to the courts to decide, and they'll do so based on evidence and not media here-say. That is, if justice exists. I'm not too sure it does here in America anymore. If it ever did.
Quote:
Originally posted by Cyberxion
Fury, that's an admirable quality you have, standing by your convictions so strongly. But sometimes it can work against you as well. It can blind a person to other ways of thinking, and sometimes it can blind a person to the truth. You should stand by your convictions, but you should also not be so stubborn as to entertain other ways of thinking.
For instance, you have succeeded in missing the entire point of my post, because you are too stubborn to give my views consideration.
I'll reiterate my post once more, so as to clarify my stance. Hopefully you'll consider what I'm saying.
I merely said that it's just as reasonable to believe he's done something wrong, as it is to believe he's innocent. You can no more assume his innocence then the next person can his guilt, especially given what we know about the man. You seem to be convinced that there is absolutely no reason to suspect Jackson of being a pedophile, and that's clearly not the case. He is a 45 year old man that's admitted to sleeping with young children. If that's not enough to raise a red flag, then what is? Given that he is indeed sleeping in the same bed as children 30 years his junior, it's not at all unreasonable for one to wonder wether or not his actions extend beyond just sleeping with them. In fact, it may be more of a stretch to say he's not guilty, as it's highly unusual for a person of that age to be sleeping with young children. Sure, his sleeping with children doesn't automatically label him a pedophile, but it's not unreasonable for people to wonder, given the facts at hand.
Well allow me to reitterate, while i do find it odd that he did sleep with children, I dont think this alone can determine whether he did it or not. Your're sure as hell right in saying that is definately not usual, I'll giv you that, the point I'm trying to make is that alone isn't enough to decide whether he is guilty or not.
On another note, through my time here you've always been the one I enjoy arguing with most. We've gone at it several times and not once do I think its ended on a bad note.
Oh, I understand man, and I agree. I can understand that you'd be against someone stating it as a matter of fact that he's a pedophile, as his sleeping with children alone is not enough to come to that conclusion. But on the same note, one cannot be chastised for suspecting him of being a pedophile, given his penchant for sleeping with the kiddie crowd. So is he a pedophile? Who knows? Is it unreasonable to suspect him of being guilty? Absoltuely not. :)Quote:
Originally posted by Fu�y
Well allow me to reitterate, while i do find it odd that he did sleep with children, I dont think this alone can determine whether he did it or not. Your're sure as hell right in saying that is definately not usual, I'll giv you that, the point I'm trying to make is that alone isn't enough to decide whether he is guilty or not.
On another note, through my time here you've always been the one I enjoy arguing with most. We've gone at it several times and not once do I think its ended on a bad note.
Oh, and thanks. I'm glad we've not gone to the mat on these things. It's fun to argue a point with someone who's able to take it all in stride. I've been to too many message boards where a simple debate can quickly degenerate into a petty argument.
I don't really know much about Michael Jackson or this case or about his custody of those children/s. But gathering that he does have custody I don't see it as pedophilic (is that a word) to sleep in the same bed as them. I don't know the age of the children so that might influence the situation.
Actually, it's not his children we are talking about. If it were, perhaps it wouldn't be as un-natuaral for him to have them sleep in his bed. No, this is other people's children he's sleeping with. Children who'm he invites to his home for sleepovers on the Neverland Ranch.
Another thing though....the parents of this kid have previously accepted a settlement in liew of actually pressing charges before, right? Now what kind of parent would actually take cash (of any amount) rather than following through on charges if they really believed this sort of thing had happened to their kid? If they REALLY believed this had happened, would they not have said "screw your money, you're going to jail"?
It's highly fishy to me
These aren't the same people. Not as far as I've been able to tell.
i don't exactly know the facts of this case but i know that many people are shocked at the fact that he admitted to sleeping with children...however half the world overlooks the fact that a married gandhi used to sleep naked with young women.
i'm not trying to make a point here...i'm just comparing the reaction of society towards different personalities,putting aside their work or reputation.
Anyway, the difference betweem what Ghandi did and what Micheal did may lie with the times. Perhaps back then what Ghandi did was acceptable, whereas today it's not so great for a 45 year old man to admit to sleeping with children, especially ones that are not his. And that are boys to boot.
And even if that's not the case, you do indeed have to take into account their work and repuatations. First off, I doubt Ghandi had ill intentions in mind when he laid down with those girls, whereas with MJ, it's hard to tell. See, he's an eccentric pop-star who's physical appearance has been alterered so much that he's virtually unrecognisable as a human being, who hides his children behind masks, dangles them out of windows and calls them blanket. He's also not someone who was ever inclined to make grand changes in the world, as Ghandi was. Given that, it's not at all hard to imagine he took those children to bed with something more then sleeping on his mind.
Comparing Ghandi to MJ is a stretch anyway, as it's a case of comparing two different people from two completely different backgrounds, cultures and moral/ethical codes. It's pretty much like comparing apples and oranges as I see it.
well oranges have an obvious peel that almost any sane person avaoids eating and is peeled off before eating. Whereas Apples get eaten all but the core and pips, you avoid the pips in an orange too!
oh.... MJ is a sicko..
yeah,i know but in either case we don't know the intention....i'm not defending either case,just pointing a similarity in the action and disimilarity in the reaction.however it is interesting to note,that in both cases the individuals admitted to their deeds,coz if i'm not mistaken gandhi talked about this in his autobiography.as i said earlier i'm not trying to make a point with the example=)Quote:
Originally posted by Cyberxion
Anyway, the difference betweem what Ghandi did and what Micheal did may lie with the times. Perhaps back then what Ghandi did was acceptable, whereas today it's not so great for a 45 year old man to admit to sleeping with children, especially ones that are not his. And that are boys to boot.
And even if that's not the case, you do indeed have to take into account their work and repuatations. First off, I doubt Ghandi had ill intentions in mind when he laid down with those girls, whereas with MJ, it's hard to tell. See, he's an eccentric pop-star who's physical appearance has been alterered so much that he's virtually unrecognisable as a human being, who hides his children behind masks, dangles them out of windows and calls them blanket. He's also not someone who was ever inclined to make grand changes in the world, as Ghandi was. Given that, it's not at all hard to imagine he took those children to bed with something more then sleeping on his mind.
Comparing Ghandi to MJ is a stretch anyway, as it's a case of comparing two different people from two completely different backgrounds, cultures and moral/ethical codes. It's pretty much like comparing apples and oranges as I see it.
this is the best thing i've seen so far besides cyber and fury.. the first people got off on some bullshit, now everyone feels they can do the same to the man.. all they wanted was money and who better to get it from than Michael Jackson.. For the "pedophile-type" actions performed on your child, how can you settle for money..? oh and it's not the same people.. but all the same, they knew he would settle just to keep it out of the air, in a way.. i'm actually shocked that i'm defending him now that i think about it.. i used to crack jokes on him all the time..Quote:
Originally posted by DeathChicken
Another thing though....the parents of this kid have previously accepted a settlement in liew of actually pressing charges before, right? Now what kind of parent would actually take cash (of any amount) rather than following through on charges if they really believed this sort of thing had happened to their kid? If they REALLY believed this had happened, would they not have said "screw your money, you're going to jail"?
It's highly fishy to me
Well, I understand where you are coming from, but while the actions may be similar, there are so many differences between the circumstances surrounding the actions that it's just not sensible to compare them. Times have changed since Ghandi. Societes perception of what is acceptable has changed. You can't compare the two actions, simply because not only is what Ghandi did nowhere near as abnormal as what MJ's admitted to doing, but it may very well have been acceptable for the time.
no,in fact society has become more tolerant,in such extreme cases however media has given exposure,no where comparable to earlier times,which is why it wasn't such a big deal back then,coz no one knew about it!and in this case,i haven't been following it up,so i'll take my leave from this discussion for now:D.
Uh...no. Society hasn't become more tolerant. Look at the limitations our society puts on it's youth. Look at the paranoia we live in today. If anything, we've taken several steps backwards as a society. At any rate, you really haven't contributed anything worthwhile to the discussion, so perhaps it's best you leave. :P
I agree that society now isn't tolorant, we put so many restraints. When I was in 6th grade they started suspending for fights. Before that It was no big deal. When I entered 9th grade,
they started giving 10 day suspensions and they still do.
By the way, I dunno about the rest of you, but I eat the whole entire apple, every last piece except the stem.Quote:
Originally posted by Norgus
well oranges have an obvious peel that almost any sane person avaoids eating and is peeled off before eating. Whereas Apples get eaten all but the core and pips, you avoid the pips in an orange too!
EDIT: Just to add some spice to the table. I'd like to ask 2 MJ jokes;
1)What do K-mart and MJ have in common? and
2)What time is bedtime @ the MJ Mansion?
I used to listen to MJ when i was little. i then bought a biography book about him. I f people read that, they would maybe sort of change their minds about him. his music isn't even all that bad, it just doesn't appeal to me as much anymore. (my mind has been corrupted by rap, metal, techno, and hard rock)
You said it wrong, it should've said "(my mind has been corrupted by rap, <u>crappy</u> metal, <u>awsome</u> techno, and <u>nasty</u> hard rock)" ;)Quote:
Originally posted by MAGNUS
I used to listen to MJ when i was little. i then bought a biography book about him. I f people read that, they would maybe sort of change their minds about him. his music isn't even all that bad, it just doesn't appeal to me as much anymore. (my mind has been corrupted by rap, metal, techno, and hard rock)
And yea, MJ was cool when i was a younger, I watched that biography and some other biographical things about MJ @ my uncle's (which is a huge MJ fan and is crushed by the recent news)
Edit: The answer to the jokes;
1)They both have pant's half off
2)When the big hand touches the little hand
Hey! u dont have to diss the music i listen to!
Yes i do, it is in my religion :P jk
Is it just me or did the release of MJ's new album and this incident happen at a REALLY close time?
IMO, he is innocent until proven guilty. I haven't seen any hard evidence against him, granted I haven't followed it to well. Is there any tangible proof against him? I don't think the case will go to far on the testimony of one child.
No evidence as of what I knew. And ya Invincible (or invisible or w/e it was called) came out really close to the baby/balcony insedent.
On a side note, I'd like to add that I downloaded the new MJ album when it came out, and I was very disapointed. It was horrible! I don't think he even sold 1000 copies, lol. (JK he sold more)
EDIT: I'd also like to add that out of his many albums. I only like "Thriller" and "Bad". "Off the wall" is ok, but not that great.