Help me settle a Michael Jackson debate with a friend

pitkin said:
Why didn't the people he paid off, refuse to take his money and continue to pursue him legally? They could have still claimed damages when he was found guilty. Surely that would have been the better option, potentially jailing him and saving other children he may have done it to afterwards? They basically allowed a paedophile to carry on with his actions by not challenging him in court.
Click to expand...

Facing Michaels world-famous lawyers in any sense would be terrifying for even the average lawyer... In 1994 his lawyer was Johnnie Cochran, the same lawyer that got OJ acquitted for murder after OJ's blood was found at the crime scene and the victim's blood was found at his house and in his car...

Michaels lawyers threatened anyone who dared challenge him in court.
 
Suppose for a moment that unequivocal evidence surfaced that showed that Leonardo da Vinci raped the Mona Lisa. Should we then remove the painting from the Louvre and all his other art should be spurned.

I'm no great fan of MJ but I can separate the music he made from the man he was, irrespective of whether he did or didn't abuse these kids. He was also seriously pyschologically damaged and clearly not "normal". I'm not excusing him from being potentially culpable but I'm very uncomfortable at someone being accused and convicted after death with no opportunity to defend himself. Especially when he successfully defended himself while alive.
 
MikeTimbers said:
Suppose for a moment that unequivocal evidence surfaced that showed that Leonardo da Vinci raped the Mona Lisa. Should we then remove the painting from the Louvre and all his other art should be spurned.

I'm no great fan of MJ but I can separate the music he made from the man he was, irrespective of whether he did or didn't abuse these kids. He was also seriously pyschologically damaged and clearly not "normal". I'm not excusing him from being potentially culpable but I'm very uncomfortable at someone being accused and convicted after death with no opportunity to defend himself. Especially when he successfully defended himself while alive.
Click to expand...

I understand your point but Michael Jackson's estate owns the rights to many things that bring in millions annually, he owns happy birthday for god sake.

The Da Vinci, Mona Lisa example is a bit too far out of the realms of possibility to make sense, even if he did rape her it was probably legal.. regardless.

I'm not calling for Michaels music to be terminated and a Krusty the clown-esque memorabilia burning session take place in every street... But the awareness knowing that he was, in fact, a paedophile that prayed on and destroyed the lives of young boys needs to be known.

He isn't here to defend himself, but it's probably best...
 
a more worthy investment of time - motivation for HBO broadcast - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ldc61tv-EgE

46398060965_eccf46569f_z_d.jpg
 
SexyGreyFox said:
I wonder if there are any child abuse 'experts' who thought they were telling lies?
I know two people who deal with this sort of thing and they know when lies are being told.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call myself an expert, but I did used to work as a support liaison for victims of childhood sexual abuse. I felt they were telling the truth, although with a degree of embellishment.
 
Irrespective of this documentary I was always believed that Jackson was a pedophile. I also believe that he molested both of the boys in this documentary.

After watching the program I do not believe that it fell 100% in line with my confirmation bias, because both Wade and Jimmy are simply not bulletproof when it comes to their credibility.

They convincingly lied before to their parents, police and under oath, and I cant help listen to their story without being reminded of the 'boy that cried wolf'.

So despite my own personal beliefs I completely understand the question marks over this documentary, its far from watertight.

On the issue of Culkin? I believe that Culkin was also molested, and I believe that he denies it because he does not want to be identified by what Jackson did to him.
 
I have to admit I only watched a bit of the program. Find it a bit grim to be honest. I think he did it, just rich enough to get away with it.

But why are the parents not being held partly accountable.
 
I watched the Saville stuff and had to nope out, it was too much, I am glad this was split into two parts, that first 1hr30 mins felt like it went on for three hours, those accounts of what happened where horrific.

Being around in the 90s you know of all the stories, it was huge back then and you always know he's weird, even by the admission of the man himself he shares a bed with kids, but there was always question marks over how much he did to them when alone, well this answers those questions for me, I believe Jimmy and Wade, and I also believe there are many more out there.

You can see the effect it has on Jimmy, and you can also see the coping mechanism that Wade talks about MJ teaching him in full effect with the way he is about it all.
 
SexyGreyFox said:
I wonder if there are any child abuse 'experts' who thought they were telling lies?
I know two people who deal with this sort of thing and they know when lies are being told.
Click to expand...

The only thing I did notice in the first part was the older guy kept mixing up his tenses and was referring to MJ in the present tense which was a little odd.
 
Rather surprisingly, his albums have been climbing the charts since the documentary.

Also,

However, stations in the UK have not pulled the singer’s music, with a BBC spokesperson confirming that they do not ban artists.

“We consider each piece of music on its merits and decisions on what we play on different networks are always made with relevant audiences and context in mind,” the spokesperson said.

https://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/...rland-documentary-and-radio-ban-a4086136.html
 
RfQYVNh.gif

A very hard watch. Even outside of the x-rated stuff and imagining he didn't actually abuse those kids, the behaviour is still extremely abnormal.

Also the way he just dumped these kids after lavishing them with attention, money, worldwide trips etc. and moving on to another 'friend' was heartbreaking. That alone was enough to mess them up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom