chickentikka Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 I'm sorry but I would dance on his grave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helly Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 one less kiddie fiddler in the world if he is dead. While i loved his music, I didnt love his ideas of fun pastimes with children Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redditchlady Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 I'm sorry but I would dance on his grave Me too one less kiddie fiddler in the world if he is dead. While i loved his music, I didnt love his ideas of fun pastimes with children Exactly. I do feel for his family though. We were up at the Rocklands as I was doing the quiz tonight and it came on Sky news. 1 minute he was dead next minute he was in a coma? Maybe they sent him back as he wasn't welcome. Oops Cynical me as always. Sorry I'll respect his family and friends, but I can not feel that this bloke was normal. I forsee this being moved into contro tomorrow. Why hang a baby out of a window etc??? That isn't normal is it??? Sorry will not abuse the tribute thread as I guess he may have some people here that want to pay respects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyMalc Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 It's front page news on the BBC - that he's died. Guess he won't be playing the O2 now then ..... Sorry, another one here who loved his music as a kid, but couldn't stand his antics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Rotties Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 a little boy in a mans body, the charges relating to him were never proven, I mean if I thought a man, any man, had interfered with my child I would have hounded him to the end of the world, not accepted a huge payout to go away so will never really believe it happened! A fantastic showman, saw him live last time he came to do concerts in the uk and he was mindblowing. May he rest in peace now, though I doubt he will be allowed to. Thoughts going to his children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ailsas mum Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 I was in a great sleep last night when my daughter sent me a txt at 11.30 to tell me he had snuffed it. I'm with most of you I liked his early stuff, it would be nice to think that his children might now have a chance at living a more normal life than the one he subjected them to. I don't know if any one else has heard but Farrah Fawcett has also died after her long fight with cancer. Poor woman never quite making it big and even in death she has missed top billing. Terri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helly Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 I'm really sad and shocked. Michael Jackson was the first poster I ever had on my bedroom wall and his music has played a huge part of my life. He was a beautiful person very sadly messed up by a surreal life. His life has been tragic and his death at such a young age is tragic too. Yes there was controversy but I think we should remember that he was found innocent of all charges so perhaps some respect for him, his family, and those who are genuinely affected by his death would be appropriate? he wasnt found innocent of all charges in the first case in 1995 when Jordy Chandler accused him of improper conduct. An out of court settlement of $11 million dollars was agreed and charges dropped. That is the case that concerned me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snow Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Peoples opinion on Michael Jackson are extremely polarised, due to various incidents that occurred throughout his life, it may well be that I will decide to split this into 2 threads one for those wanting to pay respects and another for those who want to comment in other ways - I haven't made my mind up yet. Whilst he was found not guilty of the charges in 2005 there were other allegations which were never tested in a court of law and which were settled out of court, not forgetting the balcony stunt, and his own statements about sleeping with children. Love him or detest him this is going to be a HUGE media circus and many things will come out now that he's dead that didn't whilst he was alive, I feel for the family yes, but I'm afraid you cannot libel the dead and they are going to have to deal with a lot of stuff over the coming weeks, months, years even - just look how long Elvis has been gone and yet theres always new stuff coming out about him. My own opinion of him is that I love his music, pitied the man and I have grave concerns about his interest in children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sproggie14 Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 he wasnt found innocent of all charges in the first case in 1995 when Jordy Chandler accused him of improper conduct. An out of court settlement of $11 million dollars was agreed and charges dropped. That is the case that concerned me. If someone abused my child no amount of money would persuade me to drop charges. I'm convinced that was simply the boys parents exploiting him for money. But innocent until proven guilty should apply even to slightly odd pop stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheryl33 Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Slating someone when they have died is sick, sorry but it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helly Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Im not slating him cheryl, i am merely giving an opinion that there were incidents in his life that were not normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snow Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 If someone abused my child no amount of money would persuade me to drop charges. I'm convinced that was simply the boys parents exploiting him for money. But innocent until proven guilty should apply even to slightly odd pop stars. Speaking as someone who has spent a great deal of my life working with children and parents of children that have been abused there is no way on this earth that had that been my child who had been abused by someone with Michael Jacksons money would I have exposed him to the court case, the lawyers and the inevitable horrific experience of being put thru a court case where every single nasty dirty trick would have been used to discredit and coerce a retraction, not to mention what the media would (and did) do. Sorry but I have always felt that the parents did the right thing in withdrawing, and frankly the money would buy a heck of a lot of top class therapy and support especially in a country like America where very little is available for free and certainly not long term ongoing counselling to deal with the effects of child abuse. Jackson had access to the very best legal advice that money can buy, if they believed the case could be won and him cleared of the charge then there's no way they'd have advised settling when the allegations were such henious and serious ones, more likely they'd have told him to sue and clear his name ... he didn't he settled. If I were accused of what he was accused of and was innocent, and I had his money and legal resources theres no way I'd have settled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snow Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 This thread is specifically to discuss all aspects of Michael Jacksons life and death, if you want to post condolaces or tributes there's another thread for that - this one is to allow people to express their opinions whether poitive or negative without fear of offending anyone. If you are likely to be offended by any negative comments concerning Michael Jackson it's probably best that you stick to the other thread. Which can be found here: http://www.therefuge.org.uk/forums/index.p...=47712&st=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sproggie14 Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Speaking as someone who has spent a great deal of my life working with children and parents of children that have been abused there is no way on this earth that had that been my child who had been abused by someone with Michael Jacksons money would I have exposed him to the court case, the lawyers and the inevitable horrific experience of being put thru a court case where every single nasty dirty trick would have been used to discredit and coerce a retraction, not to mention what the media would (and did) do. Sorry but I have always felt that the parents did the right thing in withdrawing, and frankly the money would buy a heck of a lot of top class therapy and support especially in a country like America where very little is available for free and certainly not long term ongoing counselling to deal with the effects of child abuse. Jackson had access to the very best legal advice that money can buy, if they believed the case could be won and him cleared of the charge then there's no way they'd have advised settling when the allegations were such henious and serious ones, more likely they'd have told him to sue and clear his name ... he didn't he settled. If I were accused of what he was accused of and was innocent, and I had his money and legal resources theres no way I'd have settled. But what parents would, if they KNEW someone was guilty, leave that person free to abuse another child in the future? I couldn't. You could swing it round and say if you had access to enough money to make such a horrible accusation go away, and one where it basically comes down to your word against that of a child, then surely you would save yourself months or years of that sort of stress. At the end of the day it's easy to speculate one way or the other but there are only probably 2 or 3 people in the world who know for absolute certain what went on. Unless something has been proven then I think it's horrific to label someone something as terrible as a paedophile. Either alive because of the terrible mental anguish that must cause, or dead, out of respect for him, his family and the millions of people grieving his loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carole Stitcher Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 (edited) Jackson had access to the very best legal advice that money can buy, if they believed the case could be won and him cleared of the charge then there's no way they'd have advised settling when the allegations were such henious and serious ones, more likely they'd have told him to sue and clear his name ... he didn't he settled. The very nature of what happened means that none of us will ever know the truth. Children have lied about such events, without any obvious motivation, there are many well-documented cases. False memories have been instilled, none of us know the children involved well enough to discern whether this is a possibility in their cases. Children have misinterpreted perfectly innocent expressions of love and caring, that's one of the reasons my husband won't go near an unknown child without there being other adults present and he's very careful around children we do know. We do know that Michael could be very stubborn. Has anyone considered that HE might have been the one who wanted to shield Jordy from the rigours of a very traumatic court case? That HE might have been the one who wanted to avoid him being put through the cross examination that would only heap on more trauma? That Michael may have cared for Jordy more than his parents did? That he might rather pay settlement no matter what his lawyers advised? That he made a mistake I do not question, he should have let the case go to court. What I do question is the thought that because he chose to settle, that automatically makes him guilty. Edited June 26, 2009 by Carole Stitcher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts