Foo - So what really happened?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/West/11/18/jackson.ranch/index.html

Crash and burn time, I'm sure.. The death of a Pop star!

What happened you asked?

Well, I'll tell you.

If he is the freak he is made out to be I hope he dies a painfull death. However, the King of Pop will be in the news.....forever.....and I'm sick of it.

Who knows what really happened, but if there is smoke, there is fire.

As a Man, I would not and do not put myself in postions that will lend itself to allegations of abuse. He (MJ) should know better by now. I think he did it!

But who really cares?

But who really cares?

It's like a car wreck on a free way. Some people can not resist.
I find it amusing because in grade school, so many people idolized him.
Now.. now look.

Why anyone would idolize this freakshow is beyond me.

His music was good in my opinion but the person is a nutcase. Why I do not really know, but a nutcase never the less.

at some point everyone needs to take full responsibility for their lives, destiny, etc. no matter how screwed up their childhood was, sorry Mikey, grow up.

Irrespective of what's going on over there now, the reporting was up to it's usual sewer level standard. Without any actual information other than a search was taking place, a fact that could be reported in a single paragraph, in order to pad it out to a certain number of column inches the 'reporter' drags up a ten year old case without any evidence that it is in any way connected to the current investigation.

Sam, I'm surprised . You think good music is this mutant shrieking like he had his nads in a visegrip?

While I'm not usually interested in this type of trash
journalism I couldn't avoid the story on the evening news. My understanding (as limited as that may be)
is this is a new allegation, not the 10+ year old case.
Not a fan of his music nor a fan of his lifestyle (if you
could call it that).
Marty

It looks like new allegations, big surprise there. A 12 year old boy is claiming MJ molested him. :rolleyes:

Sam, I'm surprised . You think good music is this mutant shrieking like he had his nads in a visegrip?

I am talking about some of his really OLD stuff. Before his voice went totally shreik and he turned white. During the days of Thriller, and stuff.

I am talking about some of his really OLD stuff. Before his voice went totally shreik and he turned white. During the days of Thriller, and stuff.
I liked that stuff and before too. Sad it seems he's turned into such a nut case.

A Medley haiku for Jacko:
It's after midnight,
don't stop til you get enough,
took me by surprise

I have nothing better to do than this...and that is remind myself that he is super freaky.

He is being set up so they can con him out of money. The first time it happened, the accusors claimed that he had splotches from his skin pigment disease. LIE! Michael Jackson never had that disease, he just lied about having it. That is why he let the cops photo his stuff. He only settled out of court to keep the proceedings from going on. Now, someone else is after his money. I am willing to bet that they find NOTHING! If Michael did anything wrong, it was trusting people. Unfortunately, he can never trust anyone again, not even his mother. Unfortunately, no matter what kind of proof that Michael comes out with, no one will believe him (just like last time).

He is being set up so they can con him out of money. The first time it happened, the accusors claimed that he had splotches from his skin pigment disease. LIE! Michael Jackson never had that disease, he just lied about having it. That is why he let the cops photo his stuff. He only settled out of court to keep the proceedings from going on. Now, someone else is after his money. I am willing to bet that they find NOTHING! If Michael did anything wrong, it was trusting people. Unfortunately, he can never trust anyone again, not even his mother. Unfortunately, no matter what kind of proof that Michael comes out with, no one will believe him (just like last time).

Agreed. I wouldn't call myself a massive Michael Jackson fan (a couple of songs maybe), but he is an easy target, particularly in view of the 10 year old case mentioned earlier. He'll probably pay the guy off only because he finds it easier to simply shell out $5million to some lunatic than to drag it through court and go through the hassles of a few small-time redneck jurors trying to cut down a tall-poppy.

I think it was tax evasion. After all, he was taking advantage of a tax exemption law for the Neverland ranch that was there for farmers and not paying a penny in real estate taxes for years. He owes California big time. No wonder California is in debt! The loopholes the rich go through to avoid paying a few lousy bucks (in their eyes, but in our eyes, is plenty of money).

Koffee

I liked the Jackson 5 a little, but this whole pop stuff I would rather have replaced by something else, like better music. Also, less hype would be better.

Jacob

What really happened?
"The nature of the investigation -- or what they were searching for -- was not disclosed."

I swear, people live off this kind of drama with such a bloodlust just to fill the void in their own boring little lives. Are those the glowing torches of a lynch mob i see on the horizon?

I think it was tax evasion. After all, he was taking advantage of a tax exemption law for the Neverland ranch that was there for farmers and not paying a penny in real estate taxes for years. He owes California big time. No wonder California is in debt! The loopholes the rich go through to avoid paying a few lousy bucks (in their eyes, but in our eyes, is plenty of money).

Koffee

I can tell you're from Chicago, "The Windy City. ;) " I never thought of it that way. Great twist.

Oh Dan!

You know me so well! We pay some of the highest taxes in the nation, AND our state is nowhere close to being broke. That should be a hint to California and their tired economy.

Hey, I downloaded some Bryan Adams the other day- good stuff. Actually, it was Chicane featuring Bryan Adams. Does that still count? ;)

Koffee

It will be interesting who the kid's lawyer turns out to be.

As a Man, I would not and do not put myself in postions that will lend itself to allegations of abuse. He (MJ) should know better by now. I think he did it!

Absolutely. When he already had allegations made against him 10 years ago, why would he continue to sleep with 12 year old boys in his bed? I can't believe that he not only does that but admitted it quite plainly in his interview some time back.

Even if he's innocent, surely common sense would tell him to avoid instances that could be seen as compromising.

I think it was tax evasion. After all, he was taking advantage of a tax exemption law for the Neverland ranch that was there for farmers and not paying a penny in real estate taxes for years. He owes California big time. No wonder California is in debt! The loopholes the rich go through to avoid paying a few lousy bucks (in their eyes, but in our eyes, is plenty of money).

Koffee

We should start a Mickey Segal thread

All things considered, the parents should be held responsible for sending their child to Michael Jackson's house to "play".

Imagine as a parent, your child says "by-by, Mommy, I'm going to Michael Jackson's house to play. See you tomorrow". The correct response might be, "OK, darling. Be home before your 'swimming with sharks lessons' in the morning".

How can the police arrest Michael Jackson and not arrest the parents of the child as well?

By the 1990's, being sent to Michael Jackson's house for a sleep-over was a threat parents could use to get their children to clean the house and do their chores.

This must be a set-up. Whether Michael Jackson was ever actually guilty in the past is not an issue. What loving parent would take the risk?

hey mike, while i pretty much agree with you, the fact is that there are a heck of a lot of kids with parents who don't give a rat's @ss what the kids does... sad but true

unfortunately the legal system is probably not the proper way to change that (not sure what else is, but i am in general against "legislating morality" which is pretty what that would be --- you can punish really bad things like beating a kid or locking a kid in the cellar, but legally punishing a parent for not loving his kid or emotionally neglecting just won't cut it)

i personally have yet to have kids myself (plan to some time here) but i think you should only if you REALLY want to, but most people don't seem to use this philosophy... which is sad for the kids.


All things considered, the parents should be held responsible for sending their child to Michael Jackson's house to "play".
and we don't know the particulars... it is possible the kid had good caring loving parents but the kid secretly did these things or lied or ran away... can't say w/o knowing the details.