The Chandler (alleged) assault involved a father..... a millionaire dentist, I believe. Yes, he ruined the case through his greed.... but it was a pretty solid case from reading the reams of statements.

 

And why would the kids want to play with an adult, you ask? Simple... that adult was Michael Jackson. Not some kid in an adult body..... a global, shrewd, and pretty devious superstar.... in his late 30s and early 40s at the time....

 

And we're forgetting that these 2 cases were the tip of the iceberg - there were other cases that were paid off, too.....

 

And couldn't virtually every paedophile use the 'damaged childhood' scenario? It's a fact that most paedophiles were themselves abused as children.... had traumatic childhoods, domineering, demanding parents, lack of contact with kids of their own age... ring any bells?

 

As I've said, i think the second (public) case against him was a set-up (although what on earth was Jackson thinking plying a cancer-ridden adolescent with alcohol on a plane - witnessed by several airline employees who gave statements) -is anyone's guess.

 

The Jordy Chandler case, however, is altogether more disturbing......

I was a bit young and naive at the time of the Jordy Chandler incident. What were the facts about the case?

 

I agree that the second case was a blatant attempt to get money though.

The Chandler (alleged) assault involved a father..... a millionaire dentist, I believe. Yes, he ruined the case through his greed.... but it was a pretty solid case from reading the reams of statements.

 

And why would the kids want to play with an adult, you ask? Simple... that adult was Michael Jackson. Not some kid in an adult body..... a global, shrewd, and pretty devious superstar.... in his late 30s and early 40s at the time....

 

And we're forgetting that these 2 cases were the tip of the iceberg - there were other cases that were paid off, too.....

 

And couldn't virtually every paedophile use the 'damaged childhood' scenario? It's a fact that most paedophiles were themselves abused as children.... had traumatic childhoods, domineering, demanding parents, lack of contact with kids of their own age... ring any bells?

 

As I've said, i think the second (public) case against him was a set-up (although what on earth was Jackson thinking plying a cancer-ridden adolescent with alcohol on a plane - witnessed by several airline employees who gave statements) -is anyone's guess.

 

The Jordy Chandler case, however, is altogether more disturbing......

 

I agree with what you are saying, but Michael Jackson was no ordinary paedophile like I said before... unlike Glitter for example (who was a man), in his head Jackson was still a child himself. I'm not saying its an excuse, as it's not, all i'm saying is its wrong to compare him to other padeophiles as they are completely different cases imo...

His death was a big shame. He was only 50 years old. I was looking forward to seeing him in concert. Love him or hate him - he was the talented. Shame that he started out so young missing out on his childhood.

The Chandler (alleged) assault involved a father..... a millionaire dentist, I believe. Yes, he ruined the case through his greed.... but it was a pretty solid case from reading the reams of statements.

 

And why would the kids want to play with an adult, you ask? Simple... that adult was Michael Jackson. Not some kid in an adult body..... a global, shrewd, and pretty devious superstar.... in his late 30s and early 40s at the time....

 

And we're forgetting that these 2 cases were the tip of the iceberg - there were other cases that were paid off, too.....

 

And couldn't virtually every paedophile use the 'damaged childhood' scenario? It's a fact that most paedophiles were themselves abused as children.... had traumatic childhoods, domineering, demanding parents, lack of contact with kids of their own age... ring any bells?

 

As I've said, i think the second (public) case against him was a set-up (although what on earth was Jackson thinking plying a cancer-ridden adolescent with alcohol on a plane - witnessed by several airline employees who gave statements) -is anyone's guess.

 

The Jordy Chandler case, however, is altogether more disturbing......

Maybe Jackson was attracted on some level to these kids he was hanging round with. But again, a psychological assessment during the case a few years ago showed he was on pretty much exactly the emotional level of a 10-year-old. And yes, 10-year-olds are sometimes attracted to other kids on some level, but usually, it's nothing more than just wanting to be around them. Sexual stuff that Jackson was accused of - a desire to do that just doesn't enter a 10-year-old's mind.

 

Btw, Jordan Chandler has admitted in the last couple of days that the whole thing was a lie.

You only have to watch his interviews (esp. from the 90's) to see that he's not "all there".

I'm sorry but to paraphrase Morrissey

 

"Because the music that he constantly plays

IT SAYS NOTHING TO ME ABOUT MY LIFE"

 

This man said nothing to me with his music. Yes he was incredibly popular but he was way short of a musical genius.

And music would have gone on without him without that much of a change. Unlike Elvis or Lennon.

I personally think Madonna has had a much bigger effect on popular culture myself.

And Prince's musical output in the 80s knocked Jacko's into a cocked hat.

 

I just can't see what innovations he brought to pop. Video would have happened without him. Pop would have happened without him.

Unless being a complete f*** up is an innovation.

 

I will not miss him but I do feel sorry for his family who will obviously be in a lot of pain.

 

absolutely and utterly SPOT ON!

 

It's socking news all round, you think in a weird and naive sort of way he is somewhat inflammable but losing your life in middleage is awful.

 

plenty if more talented people died younger.... lennon, hendrix, bolan, presley, joplin, moon... etc etc

 

 

Actually I do retreat from reguarding Madonna has had more effect on pop culture.

 

I just wish Jackson hadn't had so much of an effect.

 

Jacko came across as vile and arrogant with a bloody Messiah complex.

Jarvis Cocker will always be an absolute hero for what he did in 1996.

 

Deserves to be lumped in with Gary Glitter.

 

King of Pop... my arse.

 

another SPOT ON post

 

 

I thought I closed this, :unsure:

 

yeah you did <_< but i took out the jokes and re-opend it so those of us who dont want to lick HIS arse could do so.

 

Sorry Mushy but you are simply showing your ignorance with regard to this subject. To say you doubt he had much of a input in his music is quite possibly one of the most ridiculous statements I have read. He is one of the few pop superstars who actually wrote his own songs. He wrote (not co-wrote) so many of the most well-know pop songs ever written including Billie Jean, Beat It, Don’t Stop Till You Get Enough, Wanna Be Startin Something, Bad, The Way You Make Me Feel, Smooth Criminal, Dirty Diana, Black or White etc. He solely wrote every song on Bad (an album which is considered his best by so many fans) apart from two. He wrote those songs himself – he created them. Yes Quincy Jones produced them but Jackson created the songs and produced alot of his hits himself. Im not going to start listing facts of why this man was arguably the greatest pop star/performer to ever live because that should be obviously with his endless list of achievements. He was anything but a product – he was a creative genius in all aspects of his career and frankly saying otherwise is just letting your personal dislike of the man get in the way. Not only did he write his own songs but he wrote, directed and produced loads of his legendary music videos. Regardless of whether you dislike his music or not, he is clearly up there with The Beatles and Elvis in terms of being a music legend and a cultural icon. His back catalogue is one of the most well know in music history and is loved by people of all ages all over the globe. There is simply no-one else on the planet who wouldve been capable of selling out a million tickets to 50 nights in the same venue. Off The Wall, Thriller and Bad are three of the greatest albums ever made in terms of critical and commerical success, selling over 120 million between them and Dangerous to a lesser extent (although still sold 30m and lyrically it is a great album and among alot ofhis fans is considered his best). He revolutionised popular music by writing some of the best songs ever and as a performer/showman in my view (at his peak) was in a league of his own.

Craig you clearly did not follow the case very closely. The amount of utter lies the family were proved to have told was endless. He was proved innocent because the jury clearly did not believe a family who were clearly out to get money, especially the mother. Now I am not saying he definatly didnt sexually abuse other children but in this case as someone who followed the case very closely I simply do not believe he was guilty. Before you start saying im just a blind fan - I am a fan of the music, not of him as a person. Having children sleep in his room (regardless if he was on the floor or not) is simply not acceptable and just wrong on so many levels. He was a disturbed individual to say the least but I do not believe personally that he abused children and I think to be so completelly sure he did is being very black and white (excuse the pun -_- )

 

And with regard to comparing him with Madge - in terms of success he was alot more successful (despite only releasing 6 albums in the last thirty years) but in terms of talent - as far as I am aware Madonna has only written one single by herself - while Jacko has written huge volumes of his singles himself and prodced many by himself as well - and to be quite honest I am confident even Madonna would admit she wasnt on Jackson's level.

 

i dont believe it..... the bloke acted like a little kid, hardly the making of some songwriting genius... you want to find the real talent behind the 'jacko' image (at his peak), look no further then quincey jones.

 

 

Thanks for that Scotty I was about to say almost exactly that but you beat me to it! :P A disturbed individual who had his childhood stolen from him (hence why I'm so against young children being in britain's got talent) but he never abused children which has now been PROVEN.

 

oh ffs... 'had his childhood stolen from him' WHAT BOLLOX! ... he wasnt the only young jackson, he wasnt even the only 'kid' in a boygroup... try the fcukin OSMONDS the jacksons contemporaries, same age as donny, older then jimmy, how come jacko was the ONLY kid deprived of a childhood that went mad? look at his pictures from the 70's, a happy smiling black kid ... i see NO sign, no body language, nothing in his demeanour that suggests he was hard done by.

 

THIS WAS THE EXCUSE FOR HIS MADNESS THAT THE MARKETING MEN SOLD TO THE GULLABLE FANS and they duely swallowed it.... its path fcukin thetic

 

 

 

Michael Jackson was a talented Pop Star....

 

Wacko Jacko however, was a vile, disgusting excuse for a human being who stole the identity of Michael Jackson... In a sense, the real Michael Jackson actually died many, many years ago, and was replaced by this THING that used his identity like some kind of bodysnatcher.... And, it was Wacko Jacko whom, since about the early 90s, has been the one I've had the problem with.... So, I dont mourn the death of Micheal Jackson, because he died sometime after "Smooth Criminal".... Wacko Jacko was not the great Pop star whom I had admired as a kid, Micheal Jackson was dead to me.....

 

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Jacko was, at the very least, a borderline Paedophile, he almost certainly acted inappropriately where children were concerned.... The "sleepovers", sharing beds with underage kids, feeding underage kids vodka, dangling kids out of windows, etc, was, at the very BEST, incredibly suspicious and completely inappropriate.... It's irrelevant if the molestation accusations were actually true or not, there are plenty of other extremely questionable actions that Jacko almost certainly actully DID do..... Put it this way, if Michael Jackson had been a teacher, would any of us find it acceptable for him to invite a few underachieving kids round to his house after school for "extra tuition" so they could catch up....? Even if nothing was going on, it would still be totally inappropriate, and as a teacher, he would be disciplined and almost certainly lose his job, in my own job as a support worker with disabled students, I have to think twice even if I'm invited by one of them for a drink in the pub, is that appropriate...? Am I crossing the line if I accept the invitation? I've had to have a bloody CRB check for my job because the people I work with are classed as "vulnerable adults" because of their varying disabilities.... No such safety nets seem to exist for Pop stars who want to hang around kids for whatever strange, nebulous motivations they may have.... I really think it's about time we started asking ourselves as a society, what is and what isn't acceptable where children are concerned..... And we should ask the parents of these kids who let their kids sleep over in Neverland, would they have done so if it had been that teacher organising extra classes at their place to raise their kids' grades...? Why should the standards be any different for Jacko the popstar or Jacko the teacher.....? Frankly, I think that stinks..... NO ONE is somehow "better" or "superior" just because they sell a few records and write a few decent songs.....

 

Unfortunately, we cant exactly "sack" Popstars when they act inappropriately, the best we can do is stop buying their records..... The facts are, he was fukked-up individual who almost certainly had the means at his disposal to sort his life out, he should have taken the Jordy episode as a warning shot across the boughs that his behaviour was unacceptable to most of wider society and he should have addressed this issue.... Unfortunataly he was surrounded with a bunch of sychophantic bottom feeders and enablers such as Uri fukkin' Gellar who just continued to indulge his increasingly bizarre behaviour and didn't pull him back and tell him to "get a grip".... Naah, Jacko was too big a "cash cow" to some people, so they just let him continue to disintegrate... All of these sychophants, these enablers, the media, and certain members of his family, should feel utterly ashamed of themselves, and guilty as hell, because they are.... They enabled this increasingly fukked up behaviour....

 

At the end of the day, I'm sick of all this sycophantic bullsh!t that's been doing the rounds about Jacko.... Yes, we can celebrate the music, but the man needs to be looked at with a very critical eye......

 

spot on as ever scott

 

totally agree with craig too on all counts

 

as for madonna..... she might have the demeanour of an old slag nowdays, but her material over the last 25 years has been constant.

The bottom line is surely that the families involved wouldn't have accepted a pay-off had they been telling the truth. What sort of person decides that they'll accept twenty million from their son's sexual abuser? It's quite clear that Jacko didn't want his reputation tarnished by a public trial and didn't want the exhaustion and stress of it, hence the pay-off. If YOUR son was abused would you accept a pay-off? I sure as hell wouldn't. I'd want justice in the way of a criminal sentence, and as you said, the families involved were already well-off; it's not like they couldn't afford decent lawyers for the duration of any potential trial. Shameless, manipulative gold-digging is all it was.

The bottom line is surely that the families involved wouldn't have accepted a pay-off had they been telling the truth. What sort of person decides that they'll accept twenty million from their son's sexual abuser? It's quite clear that Jacko didn't want his reputation tarnished by a public trial and didn't want the exhaustion and stress of it, hence the pay-off. If YOUR son was abused would you accept a pay-off? I sure as hell wouldn't. I'd want justice in the way of a criminal sentence, and as you said, the families involved were already well-off; it's not like they couldn't afford decent lawyers for the duration of any potential trial. Shameless, manipulative gold-digging is all it was.

 

Paying off Chandler family was the worst thing Jacko did then, his reputation would have been far better having the facts debated in open court but by paying off the Chandler family makes the public at large aside from his fanbase think he must have had something to hide or that he knew he was guilty so Jacko's reputation suffered more through paying off Chandler than would have happened had the facts been debated in court, unless of course he was guilty but we will never know for sure now

Certainly the pay off was always going to look dodgy on his part, but a trial would've been on going and stressful and I guess he thought "I've got the cash which is what they're after".

Certainly the pay off was always going to look dodgy on his part, but a trial would've been on going and stressful and I guess he thought "I've got the cash which is what they're after".

Exactly. And it's not like miscarriages of justice never happen. A fair trial with the whole media circus would've been impossible.

Edited June 28, 200916 yr by Danny

Paying off Chandler family was the worst thing Jacko did then, his reputation would have been far better having the facts debated in open court but by paying off the Chandler family makes the public at large aside from his fanbase think he must have had something to hide or that he knew he was guilty so Jacko's reputation suffered more through paying off Chandler than would have happened had the facts been debated in court, unless of course he was guilty but we will never know for sure now

With the money he had, I think he found it easier to just pay them of, rather than go through the stress of a court trial. It's been reported lately that at the time he was addicted to pain killers, anorexic, stressed, taking drugs and drinking excess amounts of alcohol. Back then it would've just been the tip of the ice burg, pretty much like in '05 when shown innocent, he emerged looking like a ghost. Mentally and physically, he had been shocked, hard.

In a brilliant piece of timing, Jarvis Cocker is due to be one of the guests on Question Time on Thursday. Let's hope for a Michael Jackson question :D

The bottom line is surely that the families involved wouldn't have accepted a pay-off had they been telling the truth. What sort of person decides that they'll accept twenty million from their son's sexual abuser? It's quite clear that Jacko didn't want his reputation tarnished by a public trial and didn't want the exhaustion and stress of it, hence the pay-off. If YOUR son was abused would you accept a pay-off? I sure as hell wouldn't. I'd want justice in the way of a criminal sentence, and as you said, the families involved were already well-off; it's not like they couldn't afford decent lawyers for the duration of any potential trial. Shameless, manipulative gold-digging is all it was.

 

...but paying him off DIDNT stop his reputation being tarnished, it dramatically increased it! of course these poorer families would accept the money, this is america.

 

. as for tips mathematics (cheaper to pay off then the expense of going to court) if jacko WAS innocent then he WOULD have won and costs would have been recovered from the losers! it would have cost fcuk all...

 

nope i wouldnt accept any pay off.... but im not a gold digger. if they were so well off as you suggest, why do it in the first place?

massive house, loads of play toys, ferris wheel - it's every small kids dream, and not only that, it was Jacko's dream.

 

And surely that's the whole problem - it was HIS dream... The pretty twisted dream of a pretty fukked-up, over-indulged Celeb who turned his home basically into a "kiddie magnet"..... Or should that read "spider's web"? Whichever way you cut it mate, it's just sick and depraved...... And like Russ said, every p****, every molestor, every serial killer you can think of has had a seriously bad or abusive upbringing, it's the whole Nature/Nurture debate...... It's a reason for their behaviour, but it sure as hell aint an excuse.......

 

If Jacko wasn't using these kids in a sexual way, he was using them almost certainly as a crutch to make up for his own mental or emotional deficiencies at the very least...... Whatever way you cut it, it's still a form of abuse, just a different type......

And surely that's the whole problem - it was HIS dream... The pretty twisted dream of a pretty fukked-up, over-indulged Celeb who turned his home basically into a "kiddie magnet"..... Or should that read "spider's web"? Whichever way you cut it mate, it's just sick and depraved...... And like Russ said, every p****, every molestor, every serial killer you can think of has had a seriously bad or abusive upbringing, it's the whole Nature/Nurture debate...... It's a reason for their behaviour, but it sure as hell aint an excuse.......

 

If Jacko wasn't using these kids in a sexual way, he was using them almost certainly as a crutch to make up for his own mental or emotional deficiencies at the very least...... Whatever way you cut it, it's still a form of abuse, just a different type......

 

... but i dont buy the whole 'he was abused as a kid' thing, thats pr spin put on by his business managers to excuse his depraved habits. IF he was abused so bad as a kid, wtf is his dad still doing in the family group? and find me 1, just 1 picture of a young jacko that looks like he was a troubled child... he was a happy smiling pin up kid along with donny (osmond) and david (cassidy). there was NOTHING at all about his demeanour that even suggested that he was being treated badly. ok, i know many dont like programmes like jeremy kyle, but when such programmes interview REAL victims of abuse its fcukin CLEAR as hell that they are troubled...even years after the event.

 

anyway... a paedophile doesnt have to be an active paedophile, you can be a p**** without actually acting upon it... and yes i agree, either way his relationship with kiddies is totally inappropriate.

 

oh yeah...he DIDNT INVENT THE MOONWALK either...

anyway... a paedophile doesnt have to be an active paedophile, you can be a p**** without actually acting upon it... and yes i agree, either way his relationship with kiddies is totally inappropriate.

 

Absolutely... Many paedophiles, ahem, content themselves by downloading pictures of naked children... They dont commit the act itself, but they sure as hell are getting off on the idea of it..... And, basically, I believe that Jacko was, at the very least, using kids as an emotional crutch to make up for his own emotional or sexual inadequacies..... Well, sorry, BUT YOU DONT FUKKIN' DO THAT...... <_<

... but i dont buy the whole 'he was abused as a kid' thing, thats pr spin put on by his business managers to excuse his depraved habits. IF he was abused so bad as a kid, wtf is his dad still doing in the family group?

 

That's a very, very valid point actually... And all the fukkin' Jacko apologists out there need to consider this - You slag off me, Rob and Craig for saying this stuff about Jacko, but YOU make EXACTLY THE SAME assumptions about Jacko's parents and his childhood.... Yeah, Jacko wasn't convicted of child abuse, fair enough, well, by that same token NEITHER WAS HIS DAD, so where's HIS "presumption of innocence" then.....? So, fukk you all and stop using it as an excuse for the sh!t we KNOW Jacko actually DID do with kids..... <_<

i dont believe it..... the bloke acted like a little kid, hardly the making of some songwriting genius... you want to find the real talent behind the 'jacko' image (at his peak), look no further then quincey jones.

 

To be honest Mushy what you believe is irrelevant in this case, because it is simply not a matter for opinion - it is a FACT that he wrote most of his hits by himself - he also produced many of his singles by himself and constantly using the Quincy Jones card is frankly pathetic. Yes Quincy Jones had a big part in the songs as any producer does – but it is the songwriter who created the song. Your argument in this case is bordering on laughable - what are you going to suggest next? That Lennon/McCartney had little input in the Beatles songs, and it was George Martin who was mainly responsible for the Beatles success? :lol:

 

To be honest Mushy what you believe is irrelevant in this case, because it is simply not a matter for opinion - it is a FACT that he wrote most of his hits by himself - he also produced many of his singles by himself and constantly using the Quincy Jones card is frankly pathetic. Yes Quincy Jones had a big part in the songs as any producer does – but it is the songwriter who created the song. Your argument in this case is bordering on laughable - what are you going to suggest next? That Lennon/McCartney had little input in the Beatles songs, and it was George Martin who was mainly responsible for the Beatles success? :lol:

+

 

So, it's just a complete coincidence that the most successful and most critically acclaimed of MJ's albums were the ones he did with Quincy Jones...... :lol: :lol:

 

I'm sorry Scotty, but he was a JOKE for most of the 90s and 00s, whereas Madonna went from strength to strength in the 90s, producing some of the greatest Pop of that era.... Jackson never even came close to anything as groundbreaking as "Like A Prayer", "Erotica", etc..... Madonna re-wrote the rule books for Women in Music and broke apart perceptions, Jackson didn't do even half for Black artists, the mid-80s Rap/Hip Hop revolution was far more important for American Black Music in the 80s/90s, the likes of Chuck D, Ice Cube and Ice T certainly had much more edge to them, and they regarded Jackson as a joke by that point..... And I would argue that Prince's "Sign O' The Times" was a vastly more revolutionary pop record.....