»

[Bigsby]

Yeah, I think if Jacko had actually been convicted that would have made a big difference.

More tellingly, Pete Townshend got away with downloading child porn. Bill Wyman was up to stuff with a 13 year old, ditto Jimmy Page, started an affair with a 14 year old that lasted for a couple of years but he's a national hero.

[Iomega]

Originally Posted by neepheid

And yes, I'm guessing that the official-ness of Gary Glitter's indiscretions will make a difference. Without the indelible rubber stamp from the relevant authorities, all the stories about Michael Jackson remain simply that - stories.

Even if he was found guilty I reckon it would be nowhere near the witch hunt of Gary glitter.I would imagine plenty of folk protesting his innosence.

No-one stuck up for glitter

[Lucky Rathen]

Originally Posted by jf9tp2wd40

how the fuck did i get upto 2 rep points and not know about it, i was into the minus 30's last time i looked... when did people stop pro-activley hating me?

Don't worry, I'm sure you'll be back in the minuses soon enough.

Originally Posted by Godzilla Blues

Why do people happily decide to remember Michael Jackson for his music rather than his alleged paedo inclinations whilst Gary Glitter is the complete opposite? Actual conviction make all the difference?

EDIT: For clarity, although I really like the tune 'Rock and Roll Part 2' I have no real support for Gary Glitter, I'm just interested.

The difference there is that Gary Glitter actually is a paedophile, the allegations against MJ were never founded. The first case was settled out of court, and the second one he was found not guilty of. I've read a lot about both cases, there were so many holes in that second kids story you could drive a bus through them. I firmly believe he was innocent on both counts, obviously I'm biased being a fan, but it made him an easy target for jokes and sensational stories, everybody trying to make cash off selling their stories etc. I don't think we'll ever find out the truth about what happened but I would estimate 90% of the stories out there from "reliable witnesses" wre made up wither by the witnesses or the papers.

[Ouroboros is Broken]

Originally Posted by Lucky Rathen

Don't worry, I'm sure you'll be back in the minuses soon enough.



The difference there is that Gary Glitter actually is a paedophile, the allegations against MJ were never founded. The first case was settled out of court, and the second one he was found not guilty of. I've read a lot about both cases, there were so many holes in that second kids story you could drive a bus through them. I firmly believe he was innocent on both counts, obviously I'm biased being a fan, but it made him an easy target for jokes and sensational stories, everybody trying to make cash off selling their stories etc. I don't think we'll ever find out the truth about what happened but I would estimate 90% of the stories out there from "reliable witnesses" wre made up wither by the witnesses or the papers.

I suspect that MJ wasn't 100% innocent. You don't make huge cash pay-offs if you are confident of innocence. But as you say we may never know.

I just find it interesting how people are willing to give some folk the benefit of the doubt but condemn others. Jerry Lee Lewis there's another one. Married his 13 year old cousin for fecks sake....

[Bigsby]

Originally Posted by Godzilla Blues

I suspect that MJ wasn't 100% innocent. You don't make huge cash pay-offs if you are confident of innocence. But as you say we may never know.

I just find it interesting how people are willing to give some folk the benefit of the doubt but condemn others. Jerry Lee Lewis there's another one. Married his 13 year old cousin for fecks sake....

To be fair to Jerry Lee Lewis though, that was legal at the time. On the MJ payoff thing, look at it this way.

If somebody was saying all these terrible things about you, and you had lots of money, if you were him wouldn't you consider spending just a bit of that money to make it all go away? Personally I would want to fight to prove my innocence, but when you put yourself in his shoes you can see why it's an appealing option.

Having watched the Martin Bashir thing (whatever happened to him?) I'm of the opinion that the stuff he was doing, ie sleeping with kids, but not necessarily in a sexual way, seemed normal to him, but not to us. And after having the life he had, how could he possibly have had a normal life?

[Ouroboros is Broken]

Originally Posted by Bigsby

To be fair to Jerry Lee Lewis though, that was legal at the time. On the MJ payoff thing, look at it this way.

If somebody was saying all these terrible things about you, and you had lots of money, if you were him wouldn't you consider spending just a bit of that money to make it all go away? Personally I would want to fight to prove my innocence, but when you put yourself in his shoes you can see why it's an appealing option.

Having watched the Martin Bashir thing (whatever happened to him?) I'm of the opinion that the stuff he was doing, ie sleeping with kids, but not necessarily in a sexual way, seemed normal to him, but not to us. And after having the life he had, how could he possibly have had a normal life?

Legal maybe but weird all the same. As for MJ and the cash payoffs, I get your point totally but to me it just LOOKS bad. Completely.

[Lucky Rathen]

Originally Posted by Godzilla Blues

I suspect that MJ wasn't 100% innocent. You don't make huge cash pay-offs if you are confident of innocence. But as you say we may never know.

I just find it interesting how people are willing to give some folk the benefit of the doubt but condemn others. Jerry Lee Lewis there's another one. Married his 13 year old cousin for fecks sake....

There is that, but then if you were innocent and you had enough money to make the whole thing go away without having your name dragged through the courts, wouldn't you consider it? There was an awful lot of that story that wasn't reported in the papers, most of the allegations came from Jordy Chandler's dad, who was by all accounts a bit of a wrong un. Have a read through this if you ever get a chance:

Michael Jackson: The Magic and the Madness: J.Randy Taraborrelli: Amazon.co.uk: Books

[Ouroboros is Broken]

Originally Posted by Lucky Rathen

There is that, but then if you were innocent and you had enough money to make the whole thing go away without having your name dragged through the courts, wouldn't you consider it? There was an awful lot of that story that wasn't reported in the papers, most of the allegations came from Jordy Chandler's dad, who was by all accounts a bit of a wrong un. Have a read through this if you ever get a chance:

Michael Jackson: The Magic and the Madness: J.Randy Taraborrelli: Amazon.co.uk: Books

Totally understand that viewpoint but by making the payoff it cast doubt whereas true innocence could have been proven and the results through evidence would have made things more clear cut.

I may buy that book actually would be an interesting read...

[Bigsby]

Originally Posted by Godzilla Blues

Totally understand that viewpoint but by making the payoff it cast doubt whereas true innocence could have been proven and the results through evidence would have made things more clear cut.

I may buy that book actually would be an interesting read...

At the end of the day though when you're in a situation where it's your word against somebody else's, it could go either way...

[Lucky Rathen]

Originally Posted by Godzilla Blues

Totally understand that viewpoint but by making the payoff it cast doubt whereas true innocence could have been proven and the results through evidence would have made things more clear cut.

I may buy that book actually would be an interesting read...

It's a really good book, it goes into great detail about his childhood, his plastic surgery and the abuse charges, his relationships etc. A very interesting read. I would give you my copy when we meet up to swap those CDs but I think I want to read it again.