Its safe to let out your kids apparantely...
For what it's worth - here's my take on it; 1) The guy could simply be a genuine, naive guy who does what he does innocently and without malice. I'm not syaing it's right, but it's sad that our society has to immediately label somebody a kiddy fiddler instead of a person who has genuine affection for children. 2) If these kids weren't happy with being there, why the f@ck did they keep going round his house for tea?!?!?!? Sorry, but no amount of free CD's would make up for a sore bum in my book. 3) I don't care if the guy's Michael Jackson or Micky Mouse - would you let your kids sleep over in another person's house that wasn't a relative or personal friend that you already trusted 100%? I blame the parents.
Wacko Jacko Innocent - only in the eye's of blind people, only means there wasn,t enough clear evidance to send him down
I dont think hes innocent of being totally strange, but this family who is sueing him are just in it for the money. Anyone who lets their children out of their sight in his presence should be locked up as irresponsible parents. Wacko has been suspected of this sort of behaviour for 15 years and yet people still leave their children with him - I mean, would you?
give wacko a break dont really like him but dont dislike him either all these people have done is try to extract money from him not only the parents are to blame but the solicitors also are worse than the parents its the same over here now where there is blame there is a claim these solicitors are becoming low life conning scum bags advertising on the tv sorry to say this but there is more bent solicitors than straight ones now
Looks like Gary Glitter & co have a new holiday destination...... How long until the kids family launch a civil action?
he obviously has issues deep rooted in his own childhood and surrounds himself wid kiddies in a desperate attempt to re write his life, any one who is disfunctional around adults is surely not the safe person to leave any kid with! all the kids involved without proper help will grow up wid issues over this and that in itself is criminal
You seem to be forgetting that 12 odd years ago he gave 40 million bucks to his accusers to shut up and f off, now would an innocent man do that? I don't think so. As an innocent man now will he continue to sleep with kids because nothings changed?
I've had enough of Jacko and his antics. There was talk on the radio of him abandoning the US and relaunching his career in Europe. Can't wait...
I was in the US until yesterday and the press there were saying he's going to open a Neverland Ranch in Africa. I'm with Dem on this - I think he's undoubteldy a strange man with a very strange upbringing and what he has done is not what most pople consider acceptable, but I think he might just be a naive fool. Mores the point, this kids parents know about Jacksons questionable past, so why leave the kids in his custody if the didnt 100% trust him? Jamie
Got to admit I generally agree with this. Thing is the jury heard all the facts and we did not. They did not find him guilty of anything. If the prosecution screwed up that bad then maybe the evidence was a bit dodgy I know I would not allow my daughter to stay over!
That is to be applauded. More white people like Michael Jackson should be investing in Africa! ;-) John
Innocent or guilty. Any parent who trusts him or anyone for that matter needs their brain examined. Just because he's MJ doesnt make him a saint. Did anyone see tarrant on tv last week. They had this advert from South Africa on child rape. Very shocking advert.
with his history, provan or not, any parent that let their kids (male or female) alone with him need to be locked up! Parents have a right to have children, why dont many of them accept the responsibilty too?
Not "Innocent." "Not Guilty." Huge difference. He may not be going to prison, but if you believe in this sort of thing, he's going to hell.
I'm not sure life's so cut and dry barabus. He is, without doubt, very odd. But since when has odd been a crime (you've met me for Christ's sake ). Whilst on first thought it's easy to agree with your first statement, but who truly knows what it must be like to be a "celebrity" of the magnitude of Jackson. You have cameras in your face all the time, every move being scrutinised. And someone threatens you with legal action. Your advisors are well aware of the media circus that will ensure (witness the last few weeks), you have pots of cash (or think you do). Easy option is to settle out of court rather than be dragged through the mire (either that, or have them knee capped - and that's definitely not his style). Big companies do it all the time (and herein is the downfall of our society - it's often more economically sound to pay up than to fight for what's right). I think most of his music's ****e, and I definitely think he's far too odd to be let out on his own, but none of this makes him guilty of the stuff he was accused of. No win situation for him though. I'd counter sue the parents (though as they're worth feck all, it probably wouldn't go very far). As Steve said, the only winners are the lawyers. Rapidly becoming one of the most despised professions on Earth I think. Which is a shame for the few that are left with sound moral values (I know, since when has the law involved morals!).
I wonder how soon we get the book, then the film. I just wish I was on the jury - the insider's story should make millions.
Dont u think the guy has had enough. !!!!!! He is not guilty and thats that. I think all those people were accusing him of allegations to get his millions. Yeah he is strange but child molestor. I dont think so.
There are several things that stand out to me on this case: - What he does under the sheets with little boys will always be one account (the child) vs another (his). As an undoubted strange person whatever he does, the fact that he has the kid there is unacceptable to most people. The vast majority of people go against this norm are probably the money grabbing people who try to scrounge off celebrities. Ergo there will never be a successful conviction as the police have a catch 22 - a reasonable parent/family wouldn't let their kid into Neverland whilst MJ is there so a reasonable witness will never get to the witness stand. - As I understand it, in the UK juries can give unanimous or even majority verdicts. In the US only one juror needs to have doubt and the defendant walks. In this type of case that where there are two accounts of the same event with no witnesses prosecution must be nigh on impossible. - The prosecution called as a prime witness his wife who - on the stand she does a U-turn and tells a completely different story of his charachter. Isn't she trying to get the kids off him? This woman has as much vested interest in skewing the facts as the accusers! The guy has been exposed as a sick pervert - MJ if you disagree sue me.
A guy at work came up with an interesting point; "Maybe he isn't a kiddy fiddler. However, if I was one, I reckon a fairground in the back garden would be useful................".
