phasers wrote: » Since when did "sleeping with someone" = sex? I believe he meant it in a slumber party sort of way which, although unconventional , is not harmful. Why on EARTH would parents accept a financial settlement if they for one second believed that he behaved inappropriately with their children? Would you put money before seeing a pedophile being brought to justice?
walshb wrote: » I didn't know that. Jade is a white woman. I wonder was he black himself or a half caste? Jackson is African American. A black man. Not half caste. So, a half caste with a white person could produce a very lightly tanned child (like Jade), but with Jacko's case, there is no darkness or tan, they are white.
WesternNight wrote: » +1 I don't believe for a second that he ever harmed a child. A grown man sleeping in the same bed as a child he wasn't related to seems compeltely inappropriate because you assume he was a fully developed, sexual man. This wasn't the case here. The man was aesexual. He was a child in a man's body. And we simply can't comprehend that. So therefore there must be something inappropriate going on. How easy would it be for a kid to go home and mention anything about being in the same bed with Michael Jackson and the parents to freak out because they've been conditioned to believe that if that happens it's automatically abuse? And my god, imagine the dollar signs. As someone said recently, they may as well have just asked him for money - as he's probably have given it to them.
Fink Goddie wrote: » Have you inside information to prove he wasnt a fully developed sexual man???
WesternNight wrote: » Have you inside information to prove he was? Has any of us inside information to prove anything at all? Of course we don't. Doesn't stop speculation.
General Zod wrote: » And while they may not share any biological link to Jackson, the kids have a very visible and very real link to the man who might not be their father, but definitely was their Dad. That's all that's really important.
General Zod wrote: » I've read the deposition of Jordi Chandler before the case was settled. Grim reading...
General Zod wrote: » And as for all who say they wouldn't take money to prevent someone who messed with their kids recieving justice, well, unfortunately money talks. always has done, always will do..
General Zod wrote: » And while they may not share any biological link to Jackson, the kids have a very visible and very real link to the man who might not be their father, but definitely was their Dad. That's all that's really important. The media circus surrounding all this hopefully will disappear now the memorial service is done with..
General Zod wrote: » Although, the sureallity of Sky News interviewing The Incredible Hulk last night about Michael Jackson will long live in my memory.
aDeener wrote: » i could call you dad, doesn't make you my father:rolleyes:
latenia wrote: » Can you show me some links to medical/psychiatric journals that show that this a recognised condition with other recorded cases (I mean an adult compulsively sleeping with children in a non-sexual way, not asexuality) or is this a unique illness only he suffered from? (Michael Jackson Syndrome if you will.) He was undoubtably a paedophile-the notion that he was a misunderstood innocent is the best possible scenario that the PR people could come up with. While the majority of people will review the evidence and see him for what he is, there will always be naive starstruck people out of his millions of fans whose judgment has been clouded by the legalistic mumbo jumbo and PR doublespeak and who can be rinsed for cash. I bet if videos emerged of him caught in the act (and who knows, maybe they do exist somewhere) there would still be naysayers who want to believe his innocence no matter what.
My name is URL wrote: » Maybe I am your father. /mindfcuk
WesternNight wrote: » See, you saying that with such certainty is no different from someone saying the opposite with such certainty. Show me proof that what you say is true and I'll gladly retract what I said. For the record I'm not in any way starstruck. And I'm sure as hell not naive. That doesn't mean I have to join in with those who wish to believe the worst when they really know no better than those who wish to believe that people are innocent until proven otherwise.
Irishcrx wrote: » "Blanket" is not the kids real name it's Micheal Jackson JR it's a name the prss gave him when Jacko covered him with a blanket to avoid photos when he was young, I don't know if they were his kids or not or if he was able to biologicaly father a child, but he was their guardian, he raised them and by the sounds of them speaking at his memorial they are extremely upset after his death that's all that matters.
He was undoubtably a paedophile
pipelaser wrote: » Oh, on the subject of "Half Caste", my grlfriend is arguing that its a racist/derogatory expression! I dont think so? Is it?
walshb wrote: No disrespect to your lady, but she is so wrong. It is a legitimate phrase and accepted phrase and has zero to do with racism. And if it was, to which colour would it be offensive? Well, just reading over its entry in wiki, maybe it could be deemed offensive, but really, you would have to be very sensitive to be offended by it
Silcocky wrote: » My Tuppence: I believe he was their Dad, and they loved him - but as to whether he was their biological father or not...? According to Debbie Rowe (in two of the cases) she may not have even been their biological mother...more of a surrogate (to who's sperm/egg, it will most probably never be known). I believe that his sleeping with kids was highly inappropriate and I never liked the man following the accusations and his unusual admissions (though would never take away from him what he did, musically) I believe, that while he may be a victim of his own childhood/father/fame, he abused those kids though perhaps due to diminished responsibility. I believe the parents who let their kids hang out with him are as much abusers as he was (if he indeed did it - I don't think we will ever know the truth).
On the black/white/half-caste debate- Ryan Giggs dad was black (as was Jade Goodys as mentioned previously), so if he WAS their biological father, it is possible for them to be as light-skinned as they are, but all three?
annabellee77 wrote: » Jordan Chandler case is a bad example to be honest. A lot came out in recent years about that whole thing and his family
moneyman wrote: » I'm not sure if it's possible, but perhaps Jacksons vitiligo played a part?
eth0_ wrote: » Exactly. He's a liar and his dad is pure scum. He gave completely inaccurate information about Jackson's body - said he was circumsized but in fact he wasn't - and his father was secretly recorded laughing about how rich he was going to be and how he was going to enjoy destroying Jackson's career! Jordy will have to live with destroying this man for the rest of his life. Hope all those millions were worth it.
annabellee77 wrote: » They are his real kids. He was 100% their father. It's who raises you, and who you call "Daddy" (or Dad or whatever) is what counts. Doubt very much they're his biological kids obviously. Any fool can create a child. It takes a father to raise one.
latenia wrote: » Wow-the exact opposite is true. Chandler gave a detailed description of Jackson's genitalia, including the fact that he was circumcised. An examination of Jackson proved this. How much money did the employees mentioned here receive?http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article378615.ece