World of KJ
http://worldofkj.com/forum/

Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=85261		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Shack [ Sat Jan 12, 2019 4:40 am ]
Post subject:  Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
With a new documentary coming out the MJ case is once again in the discussion. Where do you stand?

I lean guilty but I wouldn't be totally shocked with innocence, if two families who wanted fame/money saw the opportunity of Jackson's grooming-like activity if he was a normal person and pounced. None of the celebrity children he had sleepovers with noticed anything out of the ordinary I believe. I also understand the argument though that if he was just a normal person who had all these signs, nobody would doubt that's a pedo
Author:  Flava'd vs The World [ Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
He probably did some weird stuff, but in his mind it probably wasn't wrong. Does that make it better? I dunno. One thing I do know is that Jackson's legacy will never be banished like they're trying (and will fail) to do with R Kelley.
Author:  Rev [ Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Probably
Author:  Shack [ Sat Jan 12, 2019 4:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Flava'd vs The World wrote:
He probably did some weird stuff, but in his mind it probably wasn't wrong. Does that make it better? I dunno. One thing I do know is that Jackson's legacy will never be banished like they're trying (and will fail) to do with R Kelley.


I think R Kelly might legitimately get his music banished. MJ is safe because unlike Kelly, his guilt will always be a debate and he has way more insane stans than Woody Allen to prevent him from getting a raw deal. The other problem for Kelly is that if he's followed by a year of other music industry people getting exposed as predators, he'll be remembered as the breaking point and the face of it like Spacey and Weinstein
Author:  lilmac [ Sun Jan 13, 2019 12:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Misunderstood.
Naive
Immature


But not guilty.
Author:  nghtvsn [ Sun Jan 13, 2019 7:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Weird. Ultra weird yes.
Pedophile? Didn’t a jury say otherwise.
—- has to wiki that. Apparently I vaguely remember anything of that trial yet it lasted 18 months.

So no, not pedo.
Author:  Shack [ Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
After diving deeper recently, I now think innocent. The timeline of his accusers reeks of trying to profit off him. They flopped in court so they went to the media where you only need to appeal to people's emotions not brains. The Leaving Neverland documentary reportedly never contacted anyone who would be on the defending MJ side or tried any real journalism. It only had interest in convincing people MJ was guilty
Author:  Brian [ Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
The king is innocent
Author:  Algren [ Mon Mar 04, 2019 6:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Who cares, he's been dead ten years
Author:  stuffp [ Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
They haven't made a film yet about MJ, maybe never will? Because controversy probably.
Author:  Algren [ Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Well, they semi-did it already with This Is It to capitalise on his death. But you're right in that they've never made a film where another actor plays him, biopic-stylee. Surely controversy is what a biopic would want, no? Controversy is marketable. Well, it's its own marketing. Look at The Passion of the Christ. Someone will eventually play him. If Jesus and Ted Bundy can get biopics, Michael Jackson can. But there might be an issue around rights to the use of his songs. That's always a killer because an MJ flick with no/few MJ songs is nothing.
Author:  stuffp [ Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Yeah, I didn't think that deep and is more likely.
Author:  Shack [ Tue Mar 05, 2019 4:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Someone is surely trying to do it after Bohemian Rhapsody's success, but my assumption is getting the songs is annoying. Especially if the only way the Jackson Estate does it is if you make him look innocent, in which case SJWs tank the film's buzz
Author:  Algren [ Tue Mar 05, 2019 5:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Yeah, i.hope would love that.
Author:  Mister Ecks [ Fri Mar 08, 2019 2:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
I haven't watched the doc yet. It's kind of funny seeing people turn on him now after these allegations have been public for well over a decade, if not two. My take was always that he didn't have a childhood, it fucked him up, and he tried to be a kid again with other kids. I'm not saying he never molested or abused a child, but that was always my opinion. Maybe the doc will sway me otherwise.

Some radio stations are pulling his music. I think a radio station reserves the right to do that, based on advertisers and money. It's business-related. But it should be up to the individual if they want to explore someone's work, despite their personal life, without being shamed for it. To me, I can watch Bill Cosby, Kevin Spacey, Harvey Weinstein productions, etc., because there are often hundreds of other people involved in the work. That's my justification at least. I know some will STRONGLY disagree, but unless it's something that directly celebrates the individual (I'd be less likely to listen to Cosby's standup now, for example, but I wouldn't rule it out either), I don't think it's wrong to continue appreciating the work itself.
Author:  Algren [ Fri Mar 08, 2019 8:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
I don't need justification to enjoy a piece of work that I've always enjoyed. I don't give a shit if Michael Jackson raped every child he ever met. His music is great and I'll listen to it and still enjoy it. This is another example of human inability. Our brains are quite simple machines. We like easy rules. No complication. Nothing that requires too much thought. So it's much easier to hear that MJ was a paedophile and banish him from your life. Never listen to another one of his songs, and be done with. Much harder (but more indicative of someone with intelligence) to admit that MJ was a troubled person that did terrible things but at the same time a very talented person that added greatness to the world. I just cannot find a logical reason to not listen to his music. The two don't share any common ground. Isn't it punishing yourself not to enjoy something anymore when you've enjoyed it for years, just because of something that never affected you in the slightest? Fuck am I doing that just to give a pat on the back to any righteous ego that may be lurking in my psyche.
Author:  lilmac [ Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
*shrug*

He'll always be a legend in my mind. If there is a local celebration of his music and career on the 10th anniversary this June, and I can make it, I'm going. I cried when he passed away.

I can separate the man from the legend.
Author:  Jiffy [ Fri Mar 15, 2019 5:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Guilty as sin.
Author:  Algren [ Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
His actions were far too weird to brush off. He may not have inserted kids but he had an unhealthy interest in them, and that's enough for me to classify him as a paedophile.
Author:  stuffp [ Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Im not sure about the pedo classification, but I pretty much agree with everything Gamaur said.
Author:  Flava'd vs The World [ Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Barabara Streisand says “his sexual needs were his sexual needs.”

Where was this defense for Louis CK?
Author:  Shack [ Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Barbra wins worst take of this saga. Though I feel like people would be more mad if she said he's innocent
Author:  Thegun [ Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
stuffp wrote:
They haven't made a film yet about MJ, maybe never will? Because controversy probably.


They've been trying for a while, one of the biggest stalling issues was they were thinking about casting a white person to play him, which caused a major uproar. The other is his life was that of a public spectacle, and even to this day its not like there was ever really a BTS tell all book. The Jackson family also holds the majority of the rights so that has been a major hurdle as well. Mercury's story was in development for close to 15 years.

I'd recommend skipping this doc and watch the Journey from Motown to Off the Wall, a very good look.
Author:  Excel [ Sat Apr 13, 2019 1:21 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Odd everyone suddenly cares after a decade of post-moterm MJ worship when these accusations have existed this entire time;
Author:  zwackerm [ Thu Aug 25, 2022 9:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michael Jackson: guilty or not?
Of course. There's literally no explanation for his behavior otherwise. Textbook groomer.

If the families were trying to extort him, why would they let these kids hang out with Jackson for so many years before putting forth allegations?

He was clearly one sick puppy
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/