Without wanting to interfere in this private binfest (I've just drawn up the deckchair, Pringles and six pack), what about the $20million out of court settlement to a 13 year old?
*lights taper and walks back 10 metres*
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
This is the skill that Michel Jackson truly had...AWESOME!!!!
- Thread starter Northstander
- Start date
Without wanting to interfere in this private binfest (I've just drawn up the deckchair, Pringles and six pack), what about the $20million out of court settlement to a 13 year old?
*lights taper and walks back 10 metres*
NMH
Banned
Dangling his baby outside a window in front of the World's media??
Dodgy with kids. FACT.
Building a playground, calling it Neverland and himself 'Peter Pan'. Whitening his skin and plasticized his face.
Weirdo. FACT.
Sleeping in the same bed as children, and at least one of them could identify his knob.
Nonce. FACT
Getting told a snippet of information in confidence that Macca was going to buy The Beatles publishing rights, and then going and outbidding him.
Two faced twat. FACT.
But don't let these things get in the way of his 'great talent'. As long as he's an entertainer, it's all good.
Dodgy with kids. FACT.
Building a playground, calling it Neverland and himself 'Peter Pan'. Whitening his skin and plasticized his face.
Weirdo. FACT.
Sleeping in the same bed as children, and at least one of them could identify his knob.
Nonce. FACT
Getting told a snippet of information in confidence that Macca was going to buy The Beatles publishing rights, and then going and outbidding him.
Two faced twat. FACT.
But don't let these things get in the way of his 'great talent'. As long as he's an entertainer, it's all good.
Jam The Man
Well-known member
I refer back to the old argument.. if YOUR son had been fiddled with, wouldn't you want to take it to a criminal court?
In my opinion, having read books galore stating both sides of the case (because as a Jackson fan i wanted to find out as much as i could) I felt it was extortion, because that's what my extensive research has informed me to believe.... but if your own extensive research informs you to believe it wasn't, then it's your right to say that, and there's nothing i can do to affect your view.
Last edited:
Jam The Man
Well-known member
I'd like to know where you got all these FACTS from...
The first is a fact, we all saw it
The second about the skin whitening is your ignorance to FACTS
The third is (for want of a better phrase) cobblers... not one of his 'victims' identified marks..and were forced to apologise for lying about it FACT
The fourth is bollocks.. Macca suggested he should by record rights, and did in fact buy several artists rights BEFORE the Beatles catalogue went on sale
...and finally, the fact that you don't want to consider that you believe all you read is true! Have you actually stepped back and for a second considered that maybe possibly these things / allegations aren't true?
No.. because you WANT them to be true. And wouldn't want the actual truth to get in the way of your opinion. Nobody actually cares that maybe he didn't do some of the things he's accused of...
A bit like many posts on NSC really!
u go man some people just dont wanna see what's infront of them and to NHM the same kid who 'identified' the markings was actually jordan chandler who actaully only described what a penis lookd like and the police said that this was unreliable to use. and for those saying OJ was found not guilty he was later found guilty in a civil court where as michael was found not guilty in a civil court which means he would have never been found guilty in a criminal court because of the beyond reasonable doubt rule
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,882
Technically, two of the Jury thought they made the wrong decision subsequently.
Obviously, doesn't prove anything mind and personally felt the charge looked a bit suspect.
Does till come back to fact that two familes were apparently paid off (second family coming to light during the trial)
If anyone is responsible for the innuendo and doubt, it's Jackson (or his advisors) alone.
Which civil court was that ?
Last edited:
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
f*** me did Michael Jackson spill your pint in a pub one day ?. Why are you still banging on about it. You think Jackson was a kiddy fiddler. WE GET IT. Enough already 
Dick Knights Mumm
Take me Home Falmer Road
A 40-year-old bloke shares his bed with a teenage boy.
Carry on. Clearly nothing going on here.
Carry on. Clearly nothing going on here.
even if they did it would have been a 10-2 to mj making him innocent and it wasn't him that payed off the families it was his insurance company soo that argument is a failure here read this article Michael Jackson is Innocent: A Non-Fan's Conversion this from someone whowas at the court and this time i mean it when i say im not gonaa argue this anymo its pointless
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,882
f*** me did Michael Jackson spill your pint in a pub one day ?. Why are you still banging on about it. You think Jackson was a kiddy fiddler. WE GET IT. Enough already
I have no reason to believe that. Just wanting to point out that his actions and behaivour were at least responsible for the allegations.
If you start paying people off in out of court settlements, as far as innuendo and allegations go you've made your bed.
Quite how anyone can defend that kind of behaivour is beyond me.
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
Why the f*** do you give a shit.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,882
As for McCartney being pissed off, a bit hypocritical.
If for nothing else that McCartney has made his fortune by doing just that, buying up other people's song rights and "renting" them out for advertising etc...
A recent interview with him suggests that is was himself that gave Jackson the idea to invest in song rights, and was subsquently pissed off that he decided to buy his.
If for nothing else that McCartney has made his fortune by doing just that, buying up other people's song rights and "renting" them out for advertising etc...
A recent interview with him suggests that is was himself that gave Jackson the idea to invest in song rights, and was subsquently pissed off that he decided to buy his.
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,882
Well it's not so much Jackson it's more his fans I find intriguing and their reaction to the slightest criticism.
Like yours for instance, you seem to get terribly terribly upset almost - as if I'm offending your religion....
Jam The Man
Well-known member
Even as the biggest MJJ fan i know, i can't argue that the vast majority of the issues he found himself in were of his own making. He rode the media bandwagon and they crucified him when he fell off it. He, along with Elvis Presley, was arguably the most poorly advised entertainer in history. Too many 'yes' men i would imagine...
Dick Knights Mumm
Take me Home Falmer Road
Because why should different rules apply because of who he is. Are you a similar age ? It would be at best odd if you slept in the same bed as teenage boys. However your reputation would be in tatters.
He is an an abusive position - and as a powerful figure - he should not take advantage of that. And why people think that is ok - I have no idea.
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
I am not a Jackson fan just think a guy who has cleared his name in a court of law should be allowed to live his life ( or not ) afterwards without wankers still bringing up the same shit that was gone through in minute details and rejected in Court.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,882
Well that's exactly the point isn't it and we come back to rather stupid practice of paying people off...
I've already stated the trial looked a but suspect, but as for the previous allegations we'll never know because he simply got his wallet out.
Rather stupid don't you think ?
Jam The Man
Well-known member
No-one thinks it's ok.. the point being made is that many wont even consider that maybe NOTHING untoward happened at all...i can't prove it as much as you can't either.