|
|
|
|
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/1/2009 9:17:14 PM |
We were drenched in it when I was a kid, and for years. For myself, I actually don't know much about OJ to be honest. Never even heard of him at all until the court case stuff and didn't really follow it.
Same for me to all of the above.
Same verdict.
See H'luau this is the bit that I don't get... Simpson was charged on both occasions. The first time with "guilty of wrongful murder"... whatever that is.... and the second time "guilty on all charges." However Jackson gets "Not Guilty" on all charges. That says "different verdict" to me.
Same level of achievement. Same perception of superstardom to risk. Same idol worship status.
Now, if we must compare the two .... same public 'status', both accused of despicable acts of violence against a helpless innocent person, same massive media coverage, both receive a fair trial, both are represented by "clever" lawyers, in the same state and in the same court but, one gets guilty the other gets "not guilty"..... hmmmm wonder if that says the same to others as it does to me. *sigh* | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/1/2009 9:18:27 PM | Fair enough as well.
All of this media attention is really eye opening as to magnitude of Michael's popularity on a worldwide level.
Enormous, more than I remembered or imagined.
For the record I wasn't the one comparing the two, rather just trying to explain the comparison.
OJ's popularity pales to MJ on the worldwide scale, now I see your' points.
| |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 12:57:28 AM | | Yes , kids DO notice things about adults not acting 'right' and looking 'right' . When I was 7 , with a girlfriend of little brain, I was walking round the streets , looking for mischief , but what we got was an 'old' fellow who asked us if we would like an ice cream . Oh yessir . But then he said that he would get it for us down one of the back lanes . He pushed open a back gate and warning bells began clanging in my little head . He said to take down our panties , at which I kicked him , grabbed my friend and dragged her home with me . It's a bit of a blur but ,altho, we had agreed not to tell our parents , I evidently started acting strangly , climbing into my younger sister's cot and sucking my thumb . Finally my father and mother got me to talk about it . Next I was scared witless, because this Detective kept asking me what he looked like and all I could remember was that 'he had a red nose ' .... That nose and secretive way of getting us into the toilet area at the back of the house were actually what put me on guard and made me run like hell for home . That and the fact that my mother had always said 'nevaagin , it is not good manners to go into a person's back gate when you're visiting ! Thanks Mum on behalf of Rose and me . And thank God for my child's notice of what looked 'not right' about an adult . | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 4:16:58 AM |
I molested Michael Jackson
You mean, like, over the past couple of days? Ewwwwwww....
I'm baaaad.
But it's nice to crack open a cold one now and again... | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 5:12:27 AM | MJ's case was civil...he was never charged as a pedophile..he was sued by the kids parents...during the trial our own Jamie Redfern stated he and MJ had a relationship for over 2 yrs...he also said he knew of a few other adult gay relationships MJ had.
A gay man has an adult sexual/erotic attraction to another adult man....my understanding of pedophilia is defined as a psychological disorder in which an adult experiences a sexual preference for prepubescent children.
The two do not exisit in the same person. One is an adult sexual orientation, the other a psychological disease. He was never charged! | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 7:19:26 AM | My stated position on MJ was that on the balance of probabilities, he's likely guilty of being a kiddie fiddler. I now think that's probably wrong (boy, I'm gonna cop it). In my own defence, I probably didn't take a lot of notice of the case details and largely went along with the media speculation and the idea that . . 'where's there's smoke, there's fire.'
But it seems to me that once a super star like MJ is accused of anything, that's the end of it. There's nothing that will change that perception once the possibility has been aired. And it's not in the interest of the media to see it happen any other way. It doesn't matter what anyone says . . mud sticks.
From that point forward, MJ was 'damned if you do and damned if you don't.'
If he went to court and was found not guilty, there would always be a lingering suspicion with a sensitive issue like child molestation.
If he decided to pay 'em off in order to get his life back in order as expeditiously as possible, he's automatically presumed guilty.
Given that we don't have much in the way of facts, maybe we could examine the motives of some of the key players:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lVUvOLdg50
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_child_sexual_abuse_accusations_against_Michael_Jackson | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 7:47:39 AM |
MJ's case was civil...he was never charged as a pedophile..he was sued by the kids parents
I didn't realise that... well that fills in a lot of blanks (for me, maybe others realised). There was no evidence to even get a criminal prosecution to court, reflecting on what Photoman was saying earlier about where there is no case it never gets to court. And therefore in accordance with all those distinctions being bandied about earlier, we aren't talking about a "not guilty" man, we're talking about an innocent man. The kid's Dad was just trying his luck at a personal lotto.
My stated position on MJ was that on the balance of probabilities, he's likely guilty of being a kiddie fiddler. I now think that's probably wrong (boy, I'm gonna cop it). And there was me...looking forward to your post since our last chat when you said you disagreed with me...looking forward to some more meaty debate...but left to your own devices you've rolled over of your own accord!! 
Well that YouTube answers a few more questions that have been raised. The insurance company paid the dosh out and MJ objected. Just like in business where decisions are not always as the individual chooses.
And yeah....McCauley Culkin. I was thinking about him today. There's a kid who was rich and famous in his own right and had no need to extort anyone, and nor did he have reason to fear a wealthy megastar or accept money to shaddap. He is kind of more on a par with the MJ entity than the average kid. And because he's famous too, his word would hold serious weight if he concurred with the allegations. (Not meaning that his word was worth more than any other kid, but just making reference to some beliefs expressed here that 'celebrity' has had some bearing on all of this.) And as posted earlier (by Poss I think it was) he slept at MJ's heaps, explained it usually as something unplanned, that they'd all just play then crash out when they were tired, no biggie. He defended MJ in court. Along with the hundreds of other kids who said MJ never touched them, and god knows he couldn't have paid them all off.
Very sad to read the bit about the kid (the one whose Dad was shouting the loudest about MJ and took the civil action) being so physically abused by that same Dad. Some piece of work he was. Actions speak louder than weird noses and I reckon it's clear who the real freak was. So....how do you guys feel about Dads who hit their kids with dumbells, spray their eyes with mace and try to choke them? I reckon I'd rather my kid got cuddled. | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 8:33:25 AM | ^^^ Poster 132...I just read in that Wiki article that there was a criminal trial.
The People v. Jackson trial began in Santa Maria, California, two years after Jackson was originally charged. During the trial the judge allowed...(etc)
...lordy please don't confuse me Makes the first section of my last post invalid...the jury will please disregard.  | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 3:17:41 PM | Evidence presented to support the defense in post 132, although being (intelligently) supported and argued for the defense by poster 134 has been "over ruled"! .... by the defense?? (scratches head) due to the evidence presented herein... by the defense
(1) In 1994 jackson had to pay $25 million to Jordie Chandler and his family in order to settle a "civil suit".
(2) People v. Jackson was a 2005 child sexual abuse trial involving recording artist Michael Jackson. The alleged victim was a boy, Gavin Arvizo, referred to as "The Accuser". Arvizo was 13 years old at the time of the alleged crimes. Michael Jackson was indicted for four counts of molesting a minor, four counts of intoxicating a minor, one count of abduction, and one count of conspiring to hold the boy and his family captive at his 2700-acre Neverland Ranch compound.[1] He denied all counts and asserted that he himself was the victim of a failed extortion attempt. On June 13, 2005, the jury found Jackson not guilty on all charges.
A juror, from a 62-year-old civil engineer, said there was no defining moment in the trial, but rather an accumulation of evidence that undercut the prosecution's case.
"We considered all the evidence," he said "and since this was a "criminal trial", it had to be beyond a reasonable doubt. And looking at all the evidence this was the conclusion we all came to."
1 civil and 1 criminal so far..... were there any more? cause now I'm confuuuuused too.  | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 3:23:12 PM | | Its an unfortunate reallity of the American Justice system, the burden of proof is not as high in the civil court therefor the civil suit, if allowed to play out instead of being settled would possibly lead to a criminal action, and it did, the People v. Jackson trial (2005) began in Santa Maria, California, two years after Jackson was originally charged. This was not a civil action. | |
|
| |
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 4:12:04 PM | Post's132 & 134 . were actually a crafty trick of the defenses to prove a point to the jury ....
Furthering the defense .... How often do"we" draw conclusions all too soon on what we read without looking for the facts to back up our belief ..... It would seem that this is what many people have done concerning MJ.
I wonder how many people have read that post and just believed what they read without checking the facts first???? ....
(Phew) saved by the skin of our teeth....  | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 6:44:24 PM |
"Where there's smoke...there's fire" can hardly be called a "racial" adage.
Try reading what I wrote without the smoke from your ears clouding your eyes (which, doesn't mean that I am presuming that you are about to self combust) and you might see the statement as reading ....
in addition 'stereotyping' can also be 'seen' in this statement...
A stereotype is based on a schema. Therefore it can be 'seen' in this adage. | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 6:54:06 PM | **shakes head slowly at faux pa**
of all people, one of the wisest on the forums a Mickey jay lover.
Possi: yep agreed, guilty or not he has payed 'a' price ! | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 7:34:49 PM | ^^^ Yep...wise indeed.
And for the record, I did not give FauxPa that drug that the Chandler bloke gave his own son...you know, the one that makes a person more susceptible to suggestion, that Chandler gave his son before convincing him to tell porkies about MJ.
* moon walks to the right, moon walks to the left, trips over own feet* | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 8:07:28 PM | I see everybodys angle the kids(or parents) did it for the cash.
why hasn't mick jagger, steven tyler, paul mc cartney, the wiggles,farwcett, james packer, pink and every other high profile actor muso been extorted by money hungry parents!!!
Let me tell you: none of the above thought they were peter pan or had choo choo trains in their back yard and openly admitted sleeping/cuddling with kids watching fantasia !!
this just sets a precedent for kiddie fiddlers, if you can dance and sing your off the hook | |
|
| |
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 10:12:03 PM | why hasn't mick jagger, steven tyler, paul mc cartney, the wiggles,farwcett, james packer, pink and every other high profile actor muso been extorted by money hungry parents!!!
Let me tell you: none of the above thought they were peter pan or had choo choo trains in their back yard and openly admitted sleeping/cuddling with kids watching fantasia !!
Stop saying interesting stuff... I am trying to get my work done :laugh:.
Certainly MJ made himself vulnerable by enjoying spending time with kids in a way most people don't, so it was the obvious angle to take. He left himself open...but then when you're innocent you don't see how your own actions might later be twisted into guilty ones. He had 100's of kids at Neverland, and only 3 sets of parents decided to try to extort him. (You said earlier kiddy fiddlers can't help themselves, so I will equally ask you, how come the hundreds of others said he was innocent rather than jumping on the gravy train?...I suspect some people just have more morals than the guy who beat his kid up and made him lie about MJ) MJ is far from the only rich famous bloke to ever be extorted, but an extortionist needs to pick a target wisely, based on something likely to be believed.
In Extortion 101 you learn that you gotta pick something you can sell to the public, because our blind belief and propensity to be shocked and outraged by the claims, and the famous person's inclination to avoid the palaver, is the leverage that gets them the money. So it's gotta seem to 'fit' for it to work. Mick Jagger is far more likely to be accused of fathering someone's child or giving someone an STI or even rape, cos that fits in with his womaniser persona....but of course DNA testing has messed with that whole gig of late. They can now prove it's not true whereas before the public would simply believe the dirt....some still will despite conclusive evidence to the contrary. The MJ kiddy fiddler angle was simply the most obvious one, and such an emotive one for the public, who had their role to play.
And bear in mind, successful extortionists who have the real goods on someone don't end up in the media...they get paid, and they stay quiet...that's the lucrative deal. We never hear about the real stuff getting covered up thanks to some hefty cheques. So the only ones we do hear about are the failed extortionists...the ones where the star pretty much says, actually, fukc you... go to the media. And they do cos the media will pay them something at least. So we see media stories like "This person is gay" (not a big potential earner these days as 'gay' is socially acceptable)...or "This person is the father of my kid" (as I said, getting harder cos of pesky DNA tests)...."I have nude photos of this person" (guy tried to blackmail Cameron Diaz, but she turned the tables and took him to court)...or "I shagged this married person." (Women pop up like gophers claiming to have bedded Beckham) and a particularly nasty one, "This person raped me." Then of course there's claims to know a person uses drugs, or dresses in women's clothing in private, or has a profile on PoF (jebus, imagine that).
And it's not just the rich and famous who can have a life ruined by false accusations and mud sticking despite the accusation being groundless, because money isn't the only motivation for lying...maybe revenge, envy, political maneuvering, publicity, insanity, etc. Check out these poor b@stards...
Man hangs himself after being falsely accused of raping women and children.
A man who lost his job after being falsely accused of a horrific sex crime has been found hanged in a shed.Ian Adams, 51, was suspended and then sacked from his job at a local IKEA store after his employers received a letter saying he had raped a woman and her two children. The writer claimed to be a journalist on a local newspaper, but the name and address in the letter were false and the author has never been traced.
Police confirmed that Mr Adams, from Highams Park East, London, had never been arrested or convicted of a sexual offence or had any complaints made against him.
Mr Adams' life went downhill as he struggled to recover from the accusations. He failed to get his job back after being sacked in January. His drinking led to problems with his partner and he spent the last few nights of his life sleeping in a storage shed at the bottom of the block of flats in which he lived.
A neighbour, who did not wish to be named, said: "If it wasn't for that letter he would still be here, I am sure of it. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-541189/Man-hangs-falsely-accused-raping-women-children.html
and
A frail grandfather killed himself after a woman he refused to lend money to accused him of rape in revenge, an inquest heard. James Bamber, who was 82 and had prostate cancer, was "highly unlikely" to have been physically capable of having sex or attacking the woman. But after she complained he raped her, Mr Bamber was interviewed by the police and complained of receiving threats by her friends. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-508637/Cancer-sufferer-commits-suicide-Blackpool-beach-falsely-accused-rape.html
Kinda like how one of MJ's housekeepers gave a statement about something she supposedly saw which it was later realised, if it happened, would have happened in a year after she was no longer working there. She had been sacked...wanted revenge, so lied.
Also, Roger Rabbit was framed, as I heard it. | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/2/2009 10:19:40 PM | | He was an innocent , not an 'idiot savant' , that's different . He was aman who chose not to be that good old srereotype a 'grown up' . I think I might change my name to Peta Pan . Does anybody know about J.M.Barrie and the little children he tutored ? You say that where there's smoke ther's fire , well there was a little puff of smoke there too . And just for interest's sake , the name Wendy never existed in the English language or any derivative of the language before Barrie coined it . I have said and I eay it again , I would let my kids sleep over if they knew Michael and I did too . BED !!!! What a terrible place to snuggle in . But one can 'have sex' anywhere , is this not so . It's a comfortable place bed , not just a place to have sexual relations in . Humbly yours nevaagin . | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/3/2009 12:36:37 AM |
Do you believe you have some insight into his strangeness????
Of course. Spending too much time with chimps, zombies and Uri Geller will do that to you.
I blame the parents (seriously). | |
|
| |
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/3/2009 5:30:32 AM | I am going to have a rant because, I can...... The word "Schema" has been brought up in this forum and I believe that this is a contributing factor as to why many people find it difficult to believe that MJ was innocent. Naamah used an example that describes how we use Schemas and how they can be used against us.
Extortion 101 you learn that you gotta pick something you can sell to the public, because our blind belief and propensity to be shocked and outraged by the claims, and the famous person's inclination to avoid the palaver, is the leverage that gets them the money. So it's gotta seem to 'fit' for it to work.
I wonder what some of us think and feel when we see a teenager dressed as a punk and/or bogan, a bikie gang, a man sitting on the street with long hair and dirty clothes, a man in a business suit, an overweight woman eating Maccas, a gorgeous looking woman. And then throw into those thoughts environment factors like, late at night, early in the morning, in a bar, at university, on the other side of town, etc. All of these thoughts and the feelings that go with them, are created by what is called 'personal schemas'. WE all have them....
A schema is a mental structure we use to organize and simplify our knowledge of the world around us. We have schemas about ourselves, other people, mechanical devices, food, and in fact almost everything.
Schemas can be related to one another, sometimes in a hierarchy .... simple example(so a salesman is a man is a human).
Schemas affect what we notice, how we interpret things and how we make decisions and act. They act like filters, accentuating and downplaying various elements. We use them to classify things, such as when we ‘pigeon-hole’ people. They also help us forecast, predicting what will happen. We even remember and recall things via schemas, using them to ‘encode’ memories.
Schemas appear very often in the attribution of cause. The multiple necessary cause schema is one where we require at least two causes before a ‘fit’ to the schema is declared.
Schemas are often shared within cultures, allowing short-cut communications. Every word is, in effect, a schema, as when you read it you receive a package of additional inferred information.
We tend to have favorite schema which we use often. When interpreting the world, we will try to use these first, going on to others if they do not sufficiently fit.
Schemas are also self-sustaining, and will persist even in the face of dis-confirming evidence. This is because if something does not match the schema, such as evidence against it, it is ignored. Some schema are easier to change than others, and some people are more open about changing any of their schemas than other people.
Ok... so now I wonder if we can set aside our personal schemas of a man who changes his outward appearance to something that we are not familiar with. A man that looks different to that of what we class as a "man", and a man who openly confesses his love for children. Can we move our personal schema out of our own way to allow someone elses (very different) schema to have free reign? Furthermore, can we allow another individual the space to create a Neverland in order to entertain and share the love he has for terminally ill and healthy children. After all "his" personal schema says its ok. What is yours saying right now? Is it possible to accept that this man knows how to and can have fun with kids ... real kid fun. He doesn't care if they make a mess, stay up late, spill popcorn on and in the bed, have pillow fights, watch movies all night long and as for sleep... well, when ever it happens we'll just all fall asleep together... who cares??!!
And now here's the bit that for some their schemas will persist regardless. This man not only does it but actually enjoys cuddling these children!!!! heaven forbid!!!. Here we have a man who does not act superior around children or even grown up, in fact on the contrary he acts like a kid, and loves to give cuddles.
Q. Who says that your schema is right and his is wrong?
A. Your schema!
Worth noting is that this may not of always been his schema, and considering his childhood I would imagine that it wasn't. But, to change his schema of a negative view on childhood seems like a very smart move to me.
The twist .... He also has plenty of money, and as we now know how all people 'think' ( yes, we all have schemas) I wonder if you think that this man could be a very easy target for extortioners. After all many of you have condemed him with your own personal schemas, why not the rest of the world??!! | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/3/2009 6:16:07 AM |
**shakes head slowly at faux pa**
Yeah, Caves . . I knew you'd take it hard. 
But I did try and put myself in that situation you suggested . . the one where I consider allowing my son to spend the night with MJ.
I couldn't really get into that character so I looked at it the other way.
I tried to imagine what it would be like to be an innocent person . . . maybe a mega-star with a huge world wide fan base and to have some low life suggest I was a kiddie fiddler. Just how might one escape that?
why hasn't mick jagger, steven tyler, paul mc cartney, the wiggles,farwcett, james packer, pink and every other high profile actor muso been extorted by money hungry parents!!! Dunno how James Packer got on that list, and the Wiggles . . . pffftt . . probably more danger to the mothers than the children . . hehe.
Tom Cruise
Extortion - David Hans Schmidt, 47, was nabbed Tuesday by FBI agents and is currently being held at the federal detention center in L.A.. He allegedly tried to sell Cruise a large cache of private photos from the actor's November 2006 wedding to Katie Holmes. Schmidt sought more than $1 million for the wedding photos, which were stolen from the actor, said Bert Fields, a Cruise lawyer.
John Travolta
Extortion - A paramedic has been charged over an alleged plot to extort £25 million from John Travolta after his son died of a seizure.
Tarino Lightbourne has pleaded not guilty on charges of attempting to extort and conspiracy to extort from the Pulp Fiction star.
Madonna
Extortion - (OK, not Madonna per se, but maybe she was next) America's "Material Girl," singer Madonna, may have to search for a new Kabbalah guru soon, unless she plans to make pilgrimages to an Israeli prison on visiting day to visit her rabbi. According to reports coming out of Israel, Shaul Youdkevitch and other Kabbalah rabbis are accused of bilking a terminally ill woman out of over $30,000. Many believe this is merely the tip of the iceberg.
Jennifer Lopez
Extortion - A convicted murderer was arrested yesterday for attempting to extort $1 million from celebrity couple Marc Anthony and Jennifer Lopez in exchange for their 2004 wedding video.
OK, none of these guys can sing unless you count Madonna or Travolta (and I don't) . . Extortion? . . sure . . happens all the time.
Does anyone remember that 90's article in New Idea(?) about one of Elton John's jilted lovers? The jilted lover was pissed off and tried to make a point about his predicament in the magazine.
OK, it wasn't extortion as such, but it gives a clue as to what drives some people.
Oh . . yeah . . I used to work with that jilted lover at the time! 
And another thing . . why are these modern Iced VoVo biscuits so much smaller than when I was a kid.  | |
|
| The Final Curtain for Jacko!!!!!
Posted: 7/3/2009 6:52:34 AM | You don't come in here for a couple of days and see what you miss......
Sorry to keep you waiting Naamah, re post 95. Yes. Just because someone walks free from court does not mean they are innocent. In fact I'll guarantee you that 98% are guilty and either had a better legal team, friends to lie for them or got off on a minor technicality of law. Thank god we don't have the same level of technicality as the USA with their search procedures etc. I mean if you watch tv shows you will know you can find a body while looking through a house on a drug warrant and can't admit the body as evidence because the warrant says you only had the right to search for drugs!
I was in the Vic Police for 11 yrs and watched many a crook walk away free. I've even had them admit the crime outside of the interview but you can't say that in court.
As for Lindy Chamberlain that was totally different. The main evidence against her was flawed. It was based on a test for blood that was done incorrectly by a forensic scientist and then a chain of NT Police who lied to cover up an error of judgement by one of their own. This came to light after the 3rd enquiry which was done by us in VIC. Once these two things were taken into consideration there was no evidence left against her. Had this been done the first time she would never have gone to court. The press of course are never as quick to report there is no evidence and they are to build their own case. (I worked close to the case if anybody wants the details) Long after my contact with the case I found that Lindy is a friend of someone I have been friends with for 25 years.
As for extortion, well you don't have to be a Packer or a Jackson to have that happen. As a magazine photographer for many years I photographed models in all manner of dress and undress. Over 20 years you build a reputation and make a name. Then one day I get some very strange enquiries from a girl that wants a nude shoot for herself. I was getting sus when this evolved over several calls and many days and just some of the things she said. I checked with some friends and was warned about a girl they had heard stories about but I couldn't confirm she was the same girl. I set up a borrowed video cam to cover the shoot and afterwards put the tape away with the aim of destroying it within a few weeks. Within 2 days of the shoot she began asking for free photos, then money. When I refused the Police came around 2 weeks after the shoot with a report of a sexual assault during the shoot. I gave them the tape to take away and she was shortly thereafter charged with making a false report to police and blackbanned across the industry. I was open about the allegation to all of my regular models and every one of them offered to give evidence for me. Nice to have friends sometime. Interestingly it is not against the law to video someone in VIC without their consent but is against the law in NSW and QLD. | |
|
| |
|
| Page 6 of 7
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 |
|
Home
login 
