Queen Elizabeth II dies

Concerning that they won't show jokes about the monarchs death?

Why is that "concerning"?

While I don't agree with the arrests I do agree with the removal of of the jokes.

The arrests are not policy they were the actions of a couple of over zealous ccops. Do you think showing jokes about the queen's death would have gone down well with the British public?

Just very curious about this...Going off topic and can DM me instead of derailing the thread.

Genuine question as I've never asked this to anyone and I am honestly not trying to start a debate/argument over it. I'm honestly interested

Michael Jackson never had those rumours confirmed. He was never prosecuted and his 4 accusers have faltered at attempts to sue him due to lack of evidence, caught lying in a documentary or being caught under cross examination...Whatever people's opinions on the matter, they are the facts.

So with that being said, why is he thrown up when the topic of Paedophilia in music comes up yet, other world renowned artists are exempted from it and people sing their songs loud and proud and still wear their merchandise and still celebrate them?

Is it because he's that popular? Or because the media reported it more in relation to him than other artists? Is there something else to it?

"Never had those rumours confirmed"

Michael Jackson settled multiple lawsuits including for molestation.

They seem pretty confirmed to me.

I agree there are other big music artists that have bizarrely escaped unharmed pretty much despite sleeping with underage people - Steven Tyler, Bowie, Jimmy Page etc.

Anyway....off topic

Ill just say what everyone else seems to be afraid to, the only way that conversation happens is if those involved are quite simply racists.

On the main thread topic just watched a tiktok compiling all the things that places are doing out of "respect" the list is getting ridiculous now, how the met office can justify not issuing long range forecasts out of respect is nonsensical and as many have pointed out the woman was all about duty and service so what respect is being shown to her by not doing your job?

I mean in the same way as wondering if the baby would be a redhead or whatever... of course it comes up in conversation, and it's not racist to wonder

You ever wonder why that was...?

Is one of you ginger?

Several family members on either side are and it still was not discussed. Might want to look at re calibrating your not racism compass there as hair and skin colour are still not the same thing.

So a "heap of tweets going mad about it" is now considered to he "many British"?

Angry fùckwits on twitter don't count, it's really not a big deal, this was a decision made by sky, that's it!

It's true, Michael Jackson was never convicted of child sex offences. And neither was Jimmy Saville even though it's generally accepted that he was a scummy fcuker and did plenty of stuff that he could/should have done serious time for. Luckily for him, he died before he could be charged. And, especially of interest in this thread, Prince Andrew has never been charged or convicted of having underage sex with VG. All three are legally entitled to their good name as they haven't been convicted but there's not many of us who believe all three are innocent.

Jordy Chandler (through his father) made accusations saying Michael Jackson sexually abused him. Criminal investigations took place but hit a dead end because the Chandlers had agreed a settlement with Jackson and without their testimony, there was no case against Jackson. The settlement was for approx. $23m. I've no idea if he was guilty or not but that $23m effectively bought their silence and got rid of the criminal complaint. I suspect he was guilty based on his abnormal conduct (sleeping in bed with little boys which 100% happened) but I've no proof if it went any further than that. I suspect it did.

Similarly with Prince Andrew, he settled for £12m to avoid going to court, albeit his case was a civil matter. I've no idea if he did it either.

Not all of Jackson's accusers faltered due to lack of evidence so you claiming all of his accusers failed as being a fact isn't 100% true. Every civil case can be settled in court or settled out of court (or dropped) - the aim being to get as much compensation as possible. The Chandlers settled out of court so this wasn't a failure for them, they got their compensation. $23m worth.

As to why Jackson was a target for fraud. He was an easy target. He was rich (no point sueing a broke person) and his behaviour such as sleeping in bed with young boys (interesting that it was never young girls) isn't really the behaviour that you expect an adult to engage in. It would be easier to make an accusation of sexual assault against someone who behaves like that than it would be to make one against Mr. BattleCorp because Mr. BattleCorp doesn't sleep in bed with young boys. Many people still believe in 'no smoke without fire' and all that.

Why is Jackson continually mentioned whenever paedophilia comes up in discussion? I think because he was the biggest star on the planet at the time is a huge part of it. His lifestyle was weird so it caught people's interest. He's easy to remember - black guy turning white, plastic surgery - shrinking nose etc., sleeping in bed with little boys, world's biggest star etc. So, easy to remember and, lets be honest, he did look guilty in the minds of most rational people. I don't think there's much more to why his name is mentioned moreso than others.

I can't explain why people are giving the likes of Roman Polanski and the many many musicians who have been accused of underage sex a free ride.

he hasn't changed his story at all.

he would have been arrested for nothing and neither he or the poster claimed he was actually arrested.

fascism either way, none of it was a police matter, the police couldn't even answer the question which shows how far the service over there has fallen beyond repair.