 |
HOME |
FORUM
|
CONTACT US
| |
|
#16
19th November 2003, 03:51 PM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
Maybe he paid the parents to aviod further embarassment, maybe he didnt want other aspects of his personal life dragged into public by a court case (he could have been the victim of abuse, issues regarding his own childhood, realtionships within his famly etc)- i am not saying this is right or wrong merely playing devils advocate. Also- i cannot understand what kind of parents first let their child sleep at his house, and then if the allegations were true, then take a payout. But thats my views only, i am not the parent of an abused child- so i have no real insight. I said i thought he was niave in letting young adults stay in his home as i do not think he is mentally capable of understanding the implications of such activity. I am presuming that the question of me being happy to let any of my future 14 year olds sleep in the same bed as a susspected paedophille was rhetorical? You can not be seriously expecting me to say 'yes'? And as i said, i do not think he has the cognitive ability, when declaring to the nation his sleeping habits- the insight into his own bizarre behavuior to realise what he is both saying and doing is wrong. As i said he needs help. I think anyone with mental health issues has the right- as a human- to seek help and recive interenvtion in private- this right should not be taken away due to career chioce.I agree that many celebrities use and abuse their media coverage to gain colum inchs, but i do think we should back off when there are clear mental health issues that need dealing with. I was unhappy with the comment 'no smoke without fire' in general, i was pointing out that until someone has been convicted of a crime, we should not label 'devient' until proven so. This is how stigma occurs and forces paeds into hiding. It also serves to make innocent individuals lives a misery when wrongly accused. And stories like this dont go away because everyone loves to knock someone else, the guy could be cleared and still it would be mentioned- as many belive there is no smoke without fire! I have no idea if he is innocent or not, and i was not defending his actions- which i belive are both wrong and immoral- i was merely defending an individuals right to a fair trail and pointing out that he is mentally unstable, and so should be treated as such. 
__________________       |
|
#18
19th November 2003, 05:26 PM
| |||
| |||
| Good one Lesley. Some sense and a view from another pesrspective at last. People are always looking for the worst in others these days, and those who label a person as 'freak', 'kiddyfiddler', 'menace' hot headedly in reaction to speculation and gossip without actually knowing with 100% factual evidence that something has happened make me sick. Im a strong believer in not pre judging poeple, especially when poeple dont understand a situation. No offence, but I dont think poeple here including myself can fully understand his life and mental state, for example, if he has never properly grown up mentally, and relates better with children than adults, something like these 'sleepover' things are not necessarily as sinister as you all make out. If you still behave and are mentally still 14 or 15 yourself in regards to interacting with others, a sleepover is what many of us did at that age, a bit of innocent fun like having your friends round to stay. I get sick of people ramming paedophillia down our throats at EVERY possible turn, and I reckon although ofcourse its a terrible crime, its general poeples own obsession with it and filthy minds that escalate things into the media circus farce it has become. ALL possible allegations should be investigated without doubt, dont get me wrong, its just that I still believe in innocent until proven guilty without doubt. What a society it has become where you cant even go for a walk in a public park, or to the swimming baths or starting up a cubscout group without somebody probably thinking your a kiddyfidler FIRST. Also, In my opinion just becuase he is famous and has had (some good) newspaper coverage in the past, doesnt mean you shouldnt be able to have a private life and to be able to sort things out in your life privately, especially when its such a harsh topic. Sirius. |
|
#19
19th November 2003, 05:44 PM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
On press coverage today the rumours have actually been going on since 1993 – 10 years in fact and it was $12 million dollars that he paid out to the Chandler family to prevent a civil action and a court case. Is that the actions of an innocent man? If I was innocent I would want the whole world to know about it. I would want my ‘Day in court’ so that I could clear my name once and for all – wouldn’t you? What I wouldn’t do (if I was totally innocent) would be to put my hand in my pocket and splash out $12 Million to a family who were basically blackmailing me. I would suggest the reason for him settling out of court for $12 M was because he knew he would be found guilty (or rather his legal advisors knew) and he wanted to avoid the trial at all costs. In a criminal action the level of proof needed to convict is ‘Beyond a reasonable doubt’ in a civil action it’s a lower standard of proof – its just ‘On the balance of probabilities’ – i.e. On the balance of probabilities (with all the evidence in front of you) did Michael Jackson do x, y, z to Boy A’ etc etc. If he had been found guilty – he would have paid astronomical damages – as is the precedent in the US. He is already allegedly in financial difficulty due to his vast monthly outlay – and this court action could have been the end of him – both financially and reputation wise. He would have been castigated as a paedophile and his life would have been over. As it is, with an out of court settlement – he avoided all this and his great PR machine swung into action to defend him and his actions and say how disgusted he was to be branded a paedophile – not disgusted enough to have his day in court though was he? It is certainly conceivable that he could be the victim of abuse – as the abused often becomes the abuser – as we all know, but this has always been vigorously denied by all the Jackson family – so who knows. That is press speculation/hearsay is it not???? When has he been classed as mentally incapable as well? Yeah he’s weird no doubt but mental illness? As you know, from your profession, mental illness can take many forms and have many different ways in which it manifests itself but he is not suffering to the extent that he doesn’t know the difference between right and wrong…is he? If he was, then he would be sectioned (or the equivalent in the US) as he would be a threat to himself and others wouldn’t he? Yes, it was indeed a rhetorical question – if that is the case then why then does it matter – quote – what the context was ‘Of how the invitation was made’?? and there is IMO not a lot of room for ‘Innocence’ in a 40 year old man wanting to sleep with children. I agree – everyone has the right to medical treatment (regardless of wealth/nationality, etc) and I thoroughly advocate the NHS but when was Michael Jackson declared mental or as having mental problems??? Did I miss this? Also the line for you in relation to privacy seems to be where mental illness is identified? Everything else is ok unless they are suffering from mental illness? That’s where we draw the line is it? That’s fitting your argument to the facts and not vice versa. I got the fact Lesley that you were not happy with my comment ‘No smoke without fire’ – Fine, hence my explanation! I didn’t label him ‘Deviant’ either, I merely said ‘Money can buy you freedom’ and I stand by what I said originally, the evidence as I see it points to the fact that he has been getting away with it for years. Maybe I will be proved wrong – time will tell, and in the meantime I am entitled to my opinion – just as you are yours. I don’t understand your comment about ‘How it forces Paedophiles into hiding’ – surely if they are paedophiles they are paedophiles – END OF!!?? It doesn’t have anything to do with false accusations does it? I whole heartedly agree with you that every individual has a right to a fair trial – just as everyone has the right to a defence, I have never disputed that fact but my comment about the ‘Smoke and Fire’ was based on the massive amount of evidence as I see it – the Jordy Chadler case, shelling out $12 M to avoid a trial, other children coming forward, TV interviews with Martin Bashir, cover ups here, pay off’s there etc etc – which all goes back to my one statement within that initial post – Money can buy your freedom’
__________________ Nice one Bruvver! |
|
#20
19th November 2003, 06:31 PM
| |||
| |||
| Wolfy i get the impression that no matter how many times we quote each other we will not see eye to eye on this matter, and our views will still differ- as is life And although i enjoy a good debate and the playing of devils advocate as much as you evidently do, i will agree to disagree to save long drawn out (and probably boring to most) explinations on personal and controversial topics that are not really at best placed on a public forum. So although i do not agree with you -i still respect your opinions and views on the subject Lesley
__________________ |
|
#21
19th November 2003, 06:37 PM
| |||
| |||
| No Lasley mate, it's not boring. THese are the types of posts I like. Ones with a proper content and good debate where people feel passionate about a subject. There should bemore posts like this IMO.  to you all on this posT!!!
__________________  Because as we know.......Vodka is IMPORTANT !!!!  |
|
#23
19th November 2003, 06:45 PM
| |||
| |||
| im not even guna attempt to read this thread
__________________ http://www.myspace.com/eddyosborne |
|
#24
19th November 2003, 06:54 PM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
LoL, A bit of an intense debate 4 a wednsday nite innit
__________________ "We outgrow our fondest dreams because we have changed. Life changes us, for that was the plan all along. Our priorities change, and somehow, the whole world changes as well. The solution is to grow new dreams that reflect who we have become." |
|
#25
19th November 2003, 06:57 PM
| |||
| |||
| i know lol, i have other things on my mind than micheal jackson and im sure u know what it is :p
__________________ http://www.myspace.com/eddyosborne |
|
#26
19th November 2003, 07:21 PM
| |||
| |||
| Hehe...wot time u pickin me up...lol
__________________ "We outgrow our fondest dreams because we have changed. Life changes us, for that was the plan all along. Our priorities change, and somehow, the whole world changes as well. The solution is to grow new dreams that reflect who we have become." |
|
#27
20th November 2003, 08:10 AM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
 soz babe.I'm Pixie, I have a big gob and I seem to wind people up the wrong way too so I'm sure we'll get on fine!!   When I got off here last night Butty got on and follwed my posts round the board to check I hadn't said anything I dind't ought to have done!!! lol. Welcome to the board mate and happy debating.  Maybe we ought to pretend to be American and have a debate team !! ?
__________________ Because as we know.......Vodka is IMPORTANT !!!! |
|
#30
21st November 2003, 04:27 PM
| |||
| |||
| Dont usually get involved in these debates as I have enough of them at work. I agree that an any individual has fundamental right to a fair trial, it underpins everything that makes a democracy which thankfully we live in and gives us the right to make opinions as seen on this post. Having said that, maybe its my warped sense of humour but that Jacko picture is the funniest thing Ive seen all week. Quote:
|
| Sponsored Links |
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
NK
Linear Mode
