How many Michael Jackson jokes have you heard?

Originally Posted by andysutherland

I've heard a whole lot. I think that at this point, the MJ jokes are in poor taste.

To be completely honest, I normally would agree with the poor taste, but there are a few things that I find completely and utterly unforgivable, and Child Molestation is one of them. There is no excuse, even psycological problems, for that.

If you believe that he never did those things (heard a few people say this), then you are absolutely living pie in the sky with your rose colored glasses, paying a family $20 million may not convict him but it proves that the MANY claims were true.

[AD720]

Originally Posted by DougBushBC

To be completely honest, I normally would agree with the poor taste, but there are a few things that I find completely and utterly unforgivable, and Child Molestation is one of them. There is no excuse, even psycological problems, for that.

If you believe that he never did those things (heard a few people say this), then you are absolutely living pie in the sky with your rose colored glasses, paying a family $20 million may not convict him but it proves that the MANY claims were true.

So you know that to be true? For a fact?

In 1993: no criminal charges filed - lack of strong enough evidence
In 2005: found not guilty on all charges in a jury trial

Have you read anything about the accusations in 1993? About the family and their alleged motives? How about the 2005 People v Jackson case? About the contradictory testimony given by the alleged victims?

Settling out of court proves nothing but an attempt at avoiding a long drawn out trial in which much more money would have been spent in lawyers fees. I'm inclined to believe that if the alleged molestation occurred the family would simply not be satisfied with a monetary settlement and would not rest until justice was served.


But I'm not trying to convince you, you've made up your mind. As have I until the time if/when more evidence comes to light. Go ahead and believe what you want but don't tell people that they are naive just because they disagree with your assessment of the situation.

[shilala]

Originally Posted by AD720

So you know that to be true? For a fact?

In 1993: no criminal charges filed - lack of strong enough evidence
In 2005: found not guilty on all charges in a jury trial

Have you read anything about the accusations in 1993? About the family and their alleged motives? How about the 2005 People v Jackson case? About the contradictory testimony given by the alleged victims?

Settling out of court proves nothing but an attempt at avoiding a long drawn out trial in which much more money would have been spent in lawyers fees. I'm inclined to believe that if the alleged molestation occurred the family would simply not be satisfied with a monetary settlement and would not rest until justice was served.


But I'm not trying to convince you, you've made up your mind. As have I until the time if/when more evidence comes to light. Go ahead and believe what you want but don't tell people that they are naive just because they disagree with your assessment of the situation.

I'm with you, and I read very closely through the years.
What I got out of the whole deal is that he definately molested many children, but thought it was okay because he thinks he's a kid and it's natural for kids to "explore".
It all adds up. Right up to the end.

[AD720]

Originally Posted by shilala

I'm with you, and I read very closely through the years.
What I got out of the whole deal is that he definately molested many children, but thought it was okay because he thinks he's a kid and it's natural for kids to "explore".
It all adds up. Right up to the end.

That's actually not what I was saying at all. If you are are saying that he molested children but thought it was OK then you are most definitely not with me.

My point was not to start a debate on what happened but to make the point (to the member that I responded to) that it is possible for someone to believe what they want about this situation and not only not be naive but quite possibly be well informed.

[shilala]

Originally Posted by AD720

That's actually not what I was saying at all. If you are are saying that he molested children but thought it was OK then you are most definitely not with me.

My point was not to start a debate on what happened but to make the point (to the member that I responded to) that it is possible for someone to believe what they want about this situation and not only not be naive but quite possibly be well informed.

I think the second part is what I was agreeing with.
I don't think he ever molested children in the definative (legal) sense of the word, or maybe he did.
I do believe he did things he shouldn't have on many levels, on hundreds if not thousands of occasions.
In any event, I'm not his judge. I think he was a tortured soul, and he's far better off now.
So far as the jokes go, he went out of his way to make sure he earned them. Most guys just have a swingset in the back yard for the kids, ya know?

[AD720]

Originally Posted by shilala

I think the second part is what I was agreeing with.

Roger that.

Originally Posted by shilala

I don't think he ever molested children in the definative (legal) sense of the word, or maybe he did.
I do believe he did things he shouldn't have on many levels, on hundreds if not thousands of occasions.
In any event, I'm not his judge. I think he was a tortured soul, and he's far better off now.
So far as the jokes go, he went out of his way to make sure he earned them. Most guys just have a swingset in the back yard for the kids, ya know?

That's the destination I was taking a very round about route to.

[shilala]

Originally Posted by AD720

Roger that.



That's the destination I was taking a very round about route to.

See, we're in agreement.
I do wonder what will happen to his children. Whether time will forgive Michael and they'll do okay, or if time will bring even more accusations.
In my way of thinking, he went so far as to keep them anonymous to protect them from his legacy, rather than for them to benefit of it.

[Scottw]

[quote=AD720;443395]So you know that to be true? For a fact?

In 1993: no criminal charges filed - lack of strong enough evidence
In 2005: found not guilty on all charges in a jury trial

Have you read anything about the accusations in 1993? About the family and their alleged motives? How about the 2005 People v Jackson case? About the contradictory testimony given by the alleged victims?

Settling out of court proves nothing but an attempt at avoiding a long drawn out trial in which much more money would have been spent in lawyers fees. I'm inclined to believe that if the alleged molestation occurred the family would simply not be satisfied with a monetary settlement and would not rest until justice was served.

$23,000,000 is a pretty hefty "avoidance fee" if you ask me.

[Starscream]

Originally Posted by AD720

So you know that to be true? For a fact?

In 1993: no criminal charges filed - lack of strong enough evidence
In 2005: found not guilty on all charges in a jury trial

Have you read anything about the accusations in 1993? About the family and their alleged motives? How about the 2005 People v Jackson case? About the contradictory testimony given by the alleged victims?

Settling out of court proves nothing but an attempt at avoiding a long drawn out trial in which much more money would have been spent in lawyers fees. I'm inclined to believe that if the alleged molestation occurred the family would simply not be satisfied with a monetary settlement and would not rest until justice was served.


But I'm not trying to convince you, you've made up your mind. As have I until the time if/when more evidence comes to light. Go ahead and believe what you want but don't tell people that they are naive just because they disagree with your assessment of the situation.

Well said. We were'nt there, we don't know. I tend to beleive that a lot of people were out to make a lot of money off of this man.

[Starscream]

Originally Posted by andysutherland

Well said. We were'nt there, we don't know. I tend to beleive that a lot of people were out to make a lot of money off of this man.

Edit: Don't get me wrong; I've told many an MJ joke over the years, but I don't think that now is the time for them.

I also beleive that anyone who actually has done as many wierd and crazy things as MJ has been accused of would be locked up in an institution a long long time ago.

[Silound]

I'm of the opinion that since I will never know the truth, nor will anyone I know, I don't judge.

I will, however, make fun of him all day and listen to his music all night.



That being said, I've gotten no less than 30 different jokes in the last few days, almost none of which were really very funny. There was one funny one about Farrah Fawcet and her dying wish though

[jonharky]

Originally Posted by Silound

That being said, I've gotten no less than 30 different jokes in the last few days, almost none of which were really very funny. There was one funny one about Farrah Fawcet and her dying wish though

Heard that one too not bad!!