Micky Jackson in trouble again

RederthanRed

Stacksofwacks wrote: »

I dont know anything about what his advisers said or didnt say but by paying out like this was basically an admission of guilt and if he was totally innocent a crazy thing to do

Yeah but thats how insane this guy's life was.

And that's how naive he was.

He was living in a bubble.

You cant apply common logic to his life

RederthanRed

his advisors paid out. He didnt.

sligeach

Stacksofwacks wrote: »

Ok put them 2 aside. Why did MJ pay out 22mllion in 1993, surely if you or I in that situation were innocent we would fight to the end to clear our name?

Surely if your son was molested, you'd want justice and no amount of money could compensate. You'd want to expose Michael and send him to jail. Settling let's him walk free and free to do it again to other children.

https://turningthetableonthechandlerallegations.wordpress.com

It was never about justice, it was always about money and a shakedown. Evan Chandler was more concerned about the civil case than the criminal case. The civil case was settled first and a few months later, 2 grand juries decided there was no case to answer to. State law was changed following what happened, so that a criminal case would have to be concluded before a civil case could proceed.

RederthanRed wrote: »

his advisors paid out. He didnt.

It was his insurance company that paid the money.

RederthanRed

Flying Fox wrote: »

I hope you're not this gullable in real life..

This is real life. I'm doing ok thanks.

Mongfinder General

RederthanRed wrote: »

This is real life. I'm doing ok thanks.

Given the chance, Mickey j would probably get up you in an act if he thought he could get away with it.

Stacksofwacks

RederthanRed wrote: »

Yeah but thats how insane this guy's life was.

And that's how naive he was.

He was living in a bubble.

You cant apply common logic to his life

No I dont accept that. He may have deluded himself to think that his relations with children was somehow ok and and whatever went on normal(if thats the case it is a bit sad) but bottom line if you look at the bigger picture the guy was a pedophile and a very manipulative one

RederthanRed

RederthanRed wrote: »

Yeah but thats how insane this guy's life was.

And that's how naive he was.

He was living in a bubble.

You cant apply common logic to his life

You have bought his crap hook, line and sinker. The Wacko Jacko image was part of it, he wanted people to think normal standards can't apply to him because he's 'special.'

Is there any other person in the world who would be excused to this extent for such horrific actions?

paleoperson

Stacksofwacks wrote: »

I dont know anything about what his advisers said or didnt say but by paying out like this was basically an admission of guilt and if he was totally innocent a crazy thing to do

It really wasn't, it happens all the time and there is no admission of guilt. Cowardly? Sure. Stupid? Very possibly. Admission of guilt and crazy? No.

I get what you're saying and I don't think I would ever do it myself. However you have to acknowledge other people have ways of doing things as well. Like I said rightly or wrongly it happens all the time that people are paid off like that and it works out for the accused.

sligeach

Flying Fox wrote: »

I hope you're not this gullable in real life.

Even if it would have cost more to defend in legal fees (which I doubt), surely when you're as wealthy and famous as Michael Jackson, clearing your name is worth the money?

He paid up because it became apparent that Jordan Chandler could accurately describe marks on Jackson's penis. The pay off was to avoid getting banged up. Of course he spun it and came up with flimsy excuses as to why he settled, which his gullable fans believed.

Lies. Lies. Lies.

RederthanRed

RederthanRed wrote: »

This is real life. I'm doing ok thanks.

You know full well what I mean. Outside of an internet forum discussion about a man you (presumably) never knew.

If you found out your own child had slept in a bed with a strange man, would you accept the excuse that he was a bit weird, lives in a bubble and normal standards don't apply?

RederthanRed

Stacksofwacks wrote: »

No I dont accept that. He may have deluded himself to think that his relations with children was somehow ok and and whatever went on normal(if thats the case it is a bit sad) but bottom line if you look at the bigger picture the guy was a pedophile and a very manipulative one

Not how I see it. He was a damaged person who just wanted to give kids the fun childhood he missed out on.
Loads of kids who stayed with him said nothing happened.

Its a sad world we live in where the FBI and countless kids testimonies count for less than a couple lads on HBO

sligeach

sligeach wrote: »

Lies. Lies. Lies.

Are you going to dig up yet another article from MJFanzz4Eva to school me?

Your rabid defence of a child abuser sickens me. Even if you believe no sexual stuff took place, the behaviour Jackson himself admitted to is abusive.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

RederthanRed wrote: »

Yeah I know. But apparently his insurance co and advisors weighed it up and they stood to lose a fortune.
So he was told to sit back and what happened happened.

It's hardly a stretch. This is a troubled fella

No?

You know, I think I’d take the chance of a bigger loss at trial if I knew I was innocent and the settlement was going to cost €22,000,000. Did he stand to lose more than €22,000,000 if he lost the trial?

RederthanRed

RederthanRed wrote: »

Not how I see it. He was a damaged person who just wanted to give kids the fun childhood he missed out on.
Loads of kids who stayed with him said nothing happened.

Its a sad world we live in where the FBI and countless kids testimonies count for less than a couple lads on HBO

So he either abused every child he came into contact with or none, is that it?

Also it's not just about this documentary, it's the cumulative evidence going back to the 80s. This seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back as far as public opinion is concerned.

Stacksofwacks

RederthanRed wrote: »

Not how I see it. He was a damaged person who just wanted to give kids the fun childhood he missed out on.
Loads of kids who stayed with him said nothing happened.

Its a sad world we live in where the FBI and countless kids testimonies count for less than a couple lads on HBO

He surrounded himself with kids for one reason and one reason only.. I assume not every kid got abused and he picked out the ones carefully who he knew he would get away with abusing, got to know the parents etc. he even had a funfair at neverland.if you look at the case of Barry Bennell the football coach who abused kids his house was like a mini neverland with arcades, monkeys etc its a modus operande of child abusers

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

RederthanRed wrote: »

Not how I see it. He was a damaged person who just wanted to give kids the fun childhood he missed out on.
Loads of kids who stayed with him said nothing happened.

Its a sad world we live in where the FBI and countless kids testimonies count for less than a couple lads on HBO

Why do their testimonials count for less than others? (and remember, Safechuck never testified in MJ’s favour as an adult) What difference does the channel make? In fact, HBO is synonymous with quality usually.

RederthanRed

Flying Fox wrote: »

You know full well what I mean. Outside of an internet forum discussion about a man you (presumably) never knew.

If you found out your own child had slept in a bed with a strange man, would you accept the excuse that he was a bit weird, lives in a bubble and normal standards don't apply?

WTF? You need to calm down there. I dont mind debating with you but I won't be drawn into something that's obviously personal to you.
I'm out now

RederthanRed

RederthanRed wrote: »

WTF? You need to calm down there. I dont mind debating with you but I won't be drawn into something that's obviously personal to you.
I'm out now

I think it's a valid question to ask, and one that none of Jackson's defenders ever want to answer.

Making this about me is deflection.

ceadaoin.

sligeach wrote: »

Lies. Lies. Lies.

I'll post again what one of his lawyers had to say about the settlement

There had been an occasion where Michael Jackson was examined, and his genitalia was recorded, which was part of an investigation. And that was part of the 300 pound gorilla in the mediation room. We wanted to do all that we could to avoid the possibility that there would be a criminal filing against Michael Jackson, and the reality was we were hopeful that if we were able to “silence” the accuser, that would obviate the need for any concern about the criminal side

It certainly seems to suggest that the photos and the child's description of his penis were a close enough match for them to be very worried.

Also Jackson said in interviews that HE decided to make the payout. No mention of insurance companies.

RederthanRed

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Why do their testimonials count for less than others? (and remember, Safechuck never testified in MJ’s favour as an adult) What difference does the channel make? In fact, HBO is synonymous with quality usually.

I was being ironic.

sligeach

Flying Fox wrote: »

Are you going to dig up yet another article from MJFanzz4Eva to school me?

Your rabid defence of a child abuser sickens me. Even if you believe no sexual stuff took place, the behaviour Jackson himself admitted to is abusive.

ceadaoin. wrote: »

I'll post again what one of his lawyers had to say about the settlement



It certainly seems to suggest that the photos and the child's description of his penis were a close enough match for them to be very worried.

Also Jackson said in interviews that HE decided to make the payout. No mention of insurance companies.

I've been over this and told you on Friday:

"You clearly have no clue what you're talking about. He didn't describe them accurately. This is the sort of BS that clueless people spout on the internet. Watch from about 50 minutes to 53:30, he'll explain it to you."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDa27x6mTWs

https://youtube.com/watch?v=pDa27x6mTWs

And yet you continue to lie.

Here's more proof. Jordan's description was way off and a crucial detail description gave this away.

https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/jordan-chandler-lied/

It's a FACT that Michael's insurance company paid the compensation.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

RederthanRed wrote: »

I was being ironic.

No you weren’t.

Sligeach, I am not a liar simply because I don't agree with you. For every source supporting your view, I can find a different source refuting it. I posted some on this thread previously and so did other posters.

Stacksofwacks

Mods maybe its time to pull this thread, MJ supporters are like Trump or Brexit supporters, dont want to debate matters honestly only deflect to their agenda and facts are irrelevant

joe40

RederthanRed wrote: »

Stacksofwacks wrote: »

I dont know anything about what his advisers said or didnt say but by paying out like this was basically an admission of guilt and if he was totally innocent a crazy thing to do

Yeah but thats how insane this guy's life was.

And that's how naive he was.

He was living in a bubble.

You cant apply common logic to his life

What do you know about his life.
You know nothing about his life, you do not know Michael Jackson.
The fans need to realise that

RederthanRed

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

No you weren’t.

Ok, I wasn't. You're quite right.

Seeing as you know what I'm thinking, care to get off the fence and venture an opinion?

brooke 2

ceadaoin. wrote: »

MJ fans are brigading everywhere and trying to bring the ratings for it down. I wouldn't be surprised if the Jackson's have hired a social media team to do it also. Pathetic.

They even have 'MJ Innocent' plastered on the sides of buses in London and San Francisco.....and other places, no doubt! :mad:

joe40

The way jackson manipulated children and the way fans are defending him is almost like a cult.

The sophisticated websites/blogs whatever dedicated to undermining all allegations is extremely well organised.
I haven't actually seen anything remotely like this for any artist.
It certainly goes beyond enjoying his music ( which I do by the way)

RederthanRed

End game, It's either he's a kiddy fiddler or he isn't.

If this was a family member for any of us we'd demand concrete proof.

Same standards should apply here. And there's no proof.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

RederthanRed wrote: »

Ok, I wasn't. You're quite right.

Seeing as you know what I'm thinking, care to get off the fence and venture an opinion?

You... you haven’t read the whole thread, have you? I don’t know how anyone who has read my posts would think I was sitting on the fence.