What was the story with Michael Jackson?

Tasden · 28-01-2014 08:32PM

Its sickening how his family have pushed his kids into the limelight since he died. He did everything in his power, even when the media ridiculed him for it, to keep their faces out of the papers and stuff by making them wear masks so that when they were with minders without him they could have a normal life. I know they would've eventually been recognised and whatnot but the family instantly shoved them in front of cameras the minute he died. He seemed like a great dad regardless of how troubled he was. (Putting aside the balcony incident :pac: )

Lou.m · 28-01-2014 08:34PM

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

I was never a fan of his so don't know too much about him but he seems like an enigma.

Was his home built Funderland there to attract kids to him and feed his dark side or was he fulfilling the childhood he lost by building it, why did he buy the Beatles back catalogue, why are there conspiracies about him now???

Reading YouTube comments under his videos is a complete mind****.

I read some of the FBI files on him.

In them were some letters of correspondence between himself and a member of the Jehovah's witnesses.

I think he got involved with a few of them.

They were quite odd.

It seemed to me he was a magnet for every sleazy cult money sucker out there. And they ****ed with his sense of realty.

It is a mixture of having extreme privilege and no privilege at the same time.

He was subjected to a lot of abuse from his dad growing up.

There is no doubt he grew up into a very dysfunctional adult who may have abused children.

Jackson's music and videos, such as Thriller, fostered racial diversity in MTV's roster.

Artists such as him helped open up the industry for visible minorities.

It is absolutely silly to think we can know whether he was or was not an abuser now.

Jimmy Saville was also a big charity donator. It does not make you a good person.

It is unfair to suggest we can know if MJ was good or bad.

GalwayGuy2 · 28-01-2014 08:50PM

Didn't they find child porn on his computer?

ALiasEX · 28-01-2014 08:54PM

They found books/a book, that happened to have pictures of naked children, in his room (I don't know what the book was about). He didn't know what book they were talking about and suggested it was one of the many things fans sent.

ALiasEX · 28-01-2014 09:06PM

Lou.m wrote: »

I read some of the FBI files on him.

In them were some letters of correspondence between himself and a member of the Jehovah's witnesses.

I think he got involved with a few of them.

They were quite odd.

His mother was/is a Jehovah's Witness and for a while he did gravitate towards it.

Lou.m wrote: »

Jimmy Saville was also a big charity donator. It does not make you a good person.

The sad part is the media tend to completely ignore that and other sides of MJ.

weldoninhio · 28-01-2014 11:03PM

Tasden wrote: »

Its sickening how his family have pushed his kids into the limelight since he died. He did everything in his power, even when the media ridiculed him for it, to keep their faces out of the papers and stuff by making them wear masks so that when they were with minders without him they could have a normal life. I know they would've eventually been recognised and whatnot but the family instantly shoved them in front of cameras the minute he died. He seemed like a great dad regardless of how troubled he was. (Putting aside the balcony incident :pac: )

I don't think he's really the kids dad. He just paid others for the kids.

The Black Oil · 28-01-2014 11:05PM

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

My main man...:cool:

ALiasEX · 28-01-2014 11:16PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

I don't think he's really the kids dad. He just paid others for the kids.

That doesn't make them not his kids.

Another thing we will never know. But don't forget he had white blood and genetics don't always work the way people seem to expect. Just ask the Roma gypsies.

ALiasEX · 28-01-2014 11:17PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

I don't think he's really the kids dad. He just paid others for the kids.

That doesn't make them not his kids.

Another thing we will never know. But don't forget he had white blood and genetics don't always work the way people seem to expect. Just ask the Roma gypsies.

Galwayguy35 · 29-01-2014 12:12AM

ALiasEX wrote: »

They found books/a book, that happened to have pictures of naked children, in his room (I don't know what the book was about). He didn't know what book they were talking about and suggested it was one of the many things fans sent.

I didn't know this, it just puts more suspicion on him IMO.

Pics of naked kids in a book, sleeping with kids in his bed, none of these things are normal for an adult man.

GerB40 · 29-01-2014 12:36AM

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I didn't know this, it just puts more suspicion on him IMO.

Pics of naked kids in a book, sleeping with kids in his bed, none of these things are normal for an adult man.

He wasn't normal though, that's the point. Most non-celebrity adults he knew were only there to take advantage of his wealth. His whole perspective on life was skewed because of those who leeched off him so he didn't know normality. Then again if he really had a book with naked kids in it then perhaps he was too irresponsible to be "friends" with them... Unfortunately we may never know the real MJ.

chakademus · 29-01-2014 01:30AM

http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/archive/1994/01/orth199401#

Here is a link to the Vanity Fair articles written by Maureen orth over the years. I have always felt reading these that no child could make up these details.. although I could be wrong of course. The details are very disturbing. The articles are long but if you have the time they are well worth the read.

I love Jackson's music but I have to separate the artist from the man.

CrazyRabbit · 29-01-2014 01:35AM

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Why did he give the boy in the first case $20 million to never speak about what happened if he was innocent of all charges?

I would have thought most people would fight tooth and nail to prove their innocence.

Child sexual abuse is one of the rare crimes where no actual evidence is required for conviction. It is simply the word of the accused against the word of the alleged victim. Now, in the vast majority of cases, this is fine as children are unlikely to make up such claims.
But, it's very easy to see how greedy low-income parents could coach their child into making false allegations in the hope of a multi-million dollar settlement.

So...if you have $100 million in the bank, and were facing a 10-20 year prison sentence, settling out of court for $20 million would be a bargain....regardless of negative publicity.

Stained Class · 29-01-2014 01:40AM

Never a fan of his really myself.

However, he had a God-given talent to entertain people & he did it well for a long number of years.

Unfortunately, he was badly served by the people closest to him.

Aaaaaaaaaaaand that is the truth of the matter really.

No big mystery to it really.

BillyMitchel · 29-01-2014 01:45AM

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Child sexual abuse is one of the rare crimes where no actual evidence is required for conviction. It is simply the word of the accused against the word of the alleged victim. Now, in the vast majority of cases, this is fine as children are unlikely to make up such claims.
But, it's very easy to see how greedy low-income parents could coach their child into making false allegations in the hope of a multi-million dollar settlement.

So...if you have $100 million in the bank, and were facing a 10-20 year prison sentence, settling out of court for $20 million would be a bargain....regardless of negative publicity.

Erm was Kevin Webster found not guilty because lack of evidence? Even the first time he was charged it was dropped because of lack of evidence.

Michael Jakson was an oddball, I don't think that can be disputed but I honestly never believed that he molested kids.

Wild I have letting my son stay with hi though? Not a focking hope.

Fresh Pots · 29-01-2014 02:49AM

Dr Robotnik wrote: »

He was off the wall.

Not to mention dangerous.

BillyMitchel · 29-01-2014 02:56AM

TheTechGuy wrote: »

Not to mention dangerous.

Because he's a smooth criminal?

kumate_champ07 · 29-01-2014 03:34AM

he was genuinely gifted(as in 'god like' talents), and an abusive slave driver of a father brought out the best performer in him, but made him into a flawed person.

TrueIt · 29-01-2014 03:45AM

Was it not his problem with Vitiligo that made him become a recluse?

Nerdlingr · 29-01-2014 03:53AM

What do you mean what was the story with him?
He was/is the King of Pop. We know this for a fact. There is no-one to compare.

kumate_champ07 · 29-01-2014 04:11AM

TrueIt wrote: »

Was it not his problem with Vitiligo that made him become a recluse?

no, it took a few years for it to develop. he had to wear make up to cover the patches of skin that had turned white. he still went out

It was more than likely the constant media attention that made him a recluse

kumate_champ07 · 29-01-2014 04:13AM

Nerdlingr wrote: »

What do you mean what was the story with him?
He was/is the King of Pop. We know this for a fact. There is no-one to compare.

closest to him was Elvis followed by Freddie Mercury. I would say Mercury had more talent than Elvis tho, Elvis was better looking!

ALiasEX · 29-01-2014 05:44AM

GerB40 wrote: »

He wasn't normal though, that's the point. Most non-celebrity adults he knew were only there to take advantage of his wealth. His whole perspective on life was skewed because of those who leeched off him so he didn't know normality. Then again if he really had a book with naked kids in it then perhaps he was too irresponsible to be "friends" with them... Unfortunately we may never know the real MJ.

How is that irresponsible?

speedboatchase · 29-01-2014 06:48AM

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

I was never a fan of his so don't know too much about him but he seems like an enigma.

Was his home built Funderland there to attract kids to him and feed his dark side or was he fulfilling the childhood he lost by building it, why did he buy the Beatles back catalogue, why are there conspiracies about him now???

Reading YouTube comments under his videos is a complete mind****.

1. I think Neverland was genuinely an attempt to fulfill his childhood. It sounds strange but when you were as huge as he was, no one in your immediate circle is going to stop you or point out how odd it was. Whether anything sexual happened is debatable because he was obviously an easy target for people who want to make allegations and get paid off (rich, strange guy who hangs out with children but needs to protect image from allegations) but at the same time, it's possible that the lack of a person to say "MJ, this is really weird" might have manifested itself in horrible ways.

2. He bought the Beatles back catalogue because he was told it was a good investment by Paul McCartney. He bought the rights for £31m in 1983 and sold 50% of the rights to Sony in 2005 for £62 million, so it certainly turned out to be the case.

3. Avoid YouTube comments in general. Only the most crazed fans and trolls of artists hang around there.

speedboatchase · 29-01-2014 06:57AM

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

closest to him was Elvis followed by Freddie Mercury. I would say Mercury had more talent than Elvis tho, Elvis was better looking!

I love Queen and Freddie but to be honest the 'King of Pop' mantle should only be given to solo artists and Elvis and MJ are beyond compare with anyone else in terms of influence, legacy, back catalogue of hits, record sales etc.

With record sales practically dead and music videos unimportant these days, it's difficult to quantify what whoever the next King of Pop would have to do to be able to challenge those two.

Whether you think Elvis or Jackson is the King of Pop is a generational thing mainly though. I prefer Jackson myself, but I'm sure most of my generation's parents would say Elvis.

GerB40 · 29-01-2014 09:34AM

ALiasEX wrote: »

How is that irresponsible?

It was irresponsible of the parents to let their kids hang around with someone so much older than them. MJ was just too naive to realise that such behavior would lead to rumours.

weldoninhio · 29-01-2014 06:07PM

GerB40 wrote: »

It was irresponsible of the parents to let their kids hang around with someone so much older than them. MJ was just too naive to realise that such behavior would lead to rumours.

The naivety thing was all an act in my eyes. He acted "child-like" as a ruse. How naive is it to buy up the beatles back catalogue?? He was naive in front of the cameras, but you don't get that rich being naive all the time.

Tasden · 29-01-2014 06:20PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

The naivety thing was all an act in my eyes. He acted "child-like" as a ruse. How naive is it to buy up the beatles back catalogue?? He was naive in front of the cameras, but you don't get that rich being naive all the time.

You do if other people are going to make money from you being rich, they will be the ones controlling you in order to make more money from you.

burnhardlanger · 29-01-2014 06:22PM

Lou.m wrote: »

It is unfair to suggest we can know if MJ was good or bad.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/76/Michael_jackson_bad_cd_cover_1987_cdda.jpg

kumate_champ07 · 29-01-2014 06:35PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

The naivety thing was all an act in my eyes. He acted "child-like" as a ruse. How naive is it to buy up the beatles back catalogue?? He was naive in front of the cameras, but you don't get that rich being naive all the time.

I disagree, basically he was a commodity. he was literally worked to death. no childhood, with insecurities that were left to develop later on, a horrible disease that made him disliked by fellow African Americans and thought of as a weirdo by the general public. yes the nose surgery was OTT, he was fed up with wearing black make up and the surgeon probably gave bad advice.

he had no way of knowing if someone was genuinely interested in being his friend or just in it to be part of the entourage. this guy had a team around him ready to use him for financial gain, and of course the 'yes men'.

he wasnt completely naive but I dont think he put on an act

What was the story with Michael Jackson?

Comments