I am back

OK, you wanna know my opinion. Honestly I don´t know.Probably to stop it, becaues ppl are STUPID and intolerant and because I love him as you know ( ) I wouldn´t want him to go through something similar ever again, But on the other hand I´d love to tell him: Screw others" you haven´t done anything, do whatever you want to (as long as oyou´re not hurtning anyone) It seems unfair to me that people have to stop doing something just because others don´t feel it´s appropriate although there is nothing wrong with it. I really hate that and would have been braver in breaking those stupid prejudices. I mean, have you seen Home movies guys? You can clearly see that Mj is very much childlike not childish, cause he can act in a very mature way sometimes and he´s very intelligent but he simply loves children´s company. He loves playing, being silly and adults are not up to that. I believe those "sleepover" were as silly yet innocent as all that footage we have seen in home movies, cause remember Gavin saying: "it was fun that night:" Do you think he´d say that if he was molested?
Most adults are too concert about what is appropriate and what is not that they end up living stereotypal boring life afraid of being different in any way - afraid of being themselves and I do understand why hé loves to be with them and in that way support his courage to "be himself, no matter what others think", yet of course I do suffer from everything that this courage also brings.


Depends in what way he was strange. This is also about circumstances. Look MJ is strange, but from what I have seem as far as his interaction with kids, it all looked innocent, so as for Mj I really wouldn´t be worried to let those kids sleep over with him.



Gavin took Mj hand and what was he supposed to do? If he backed up, ppl wouldn be wondering, what is he hiding?

My story with the diaper was just to show the twisted values of americans that I don´t understand. Just as the Clinton´s affair - right he lied under oath - as we weren´t lied to everyday by politicians about things that actually are our business. Janet Superbowl accidents. I mean MTV is full of naked women, nobody gives a damn and they make such of fuss about something so stupid as that. And I simply cannot believe what a fuss has made MJ´s one stupid sentence and one document that has been evidently fucked up incredibly, yet it makes ppl automaticaly believe that he must have or could have been guilty, although we have also seen that alleged wictim acting perfectly naturally around him looking very happy.

VoicesCarry said:

What does that mean? Do you think MJ goes across Neverland and chooses his nightly kids gang?

Please get the facts straight, will ya?

BlueNote

No, BlueNote, all I know is that he actively finds boys he can have sleepovers with. Get the facts straight, will ya?

BlueNote said:[quote]

adoreme said:

It has nothing to do with the media.

A grown man should not want to be sleeping in a bed with a pre-pubescant boy. You can witter on all you like about how the media have crucified him already (and you have a valid point - that's another matter) but it doesn't change the fact that it is not healthy for a forty year old man to be having "sleepovers" with a child.

The standards I am talking about are not "mysterious" at all. They are quite simple rules that allow us all to live in a decent society. If it was "normal" to sleep in a bed with a child, I am sure that there are a number of paedophiles around the world who would jump at the chance. That is why the standards exist, to stop shit happening.

What I said was perfectly valid. You're reply has gone slightly off subject which is fine because this is something very important to you. But seriously, you cannot blame the media for the fact that the majority of people would think something was very wrong with a man sleeping with a child. It's a matter of common decency.

And before you start throwing "facts" around, lets just remind ourselves that he is not on trial for "holding hands" with the boy.

AS FAR AS I'M AWARE...

Chris Tucker wasn't named as a co-conspirator.

Luv4oneanotha said:

VoicesCarry said:

So you're now suggesting that Michael "actively seeks out prepubescent boys"?

I'm not saying he doesn't, I don't know the guy. But I would like to think that it isn't the case. Based on his upbringing and circumstance maybe he really is having nothing more than an innocent slumber party and can't understand why the rest of the so-called "normal" world doesn't see it like he does. Or he could be a child molester.

Put it this way, my guess is that you could sleep in a bed with a child and have absolutely no sexual feelings towards them. So could I. And, hey! It's just possible that Michael could, too. However, it was a dumb move for Michael to carry on as "normal" considering he'd been accused of sexual misconduct before. But I shared beds/rooms with friends, some of whom who were grown men, and all we did was go to sleep. I really don't see what's wrong with that. Maybe it's simply that my mind doesn't run down that hysterical path. It's up to the parties concerned to decide whether it's "right" or "wrong" depending on how well the "friend" is known. What I can say for sure is that simply sleeping in a room/bed with someone older than me and of the same gender, where no sexual contact was made, did me no harm at all.

Cloudbuster said:

So,basically you're saying it's okay for a grown man to allow an underage boy to sleep in the same bed with him? Cloudy,I am very disappointed in you.I know you're a huge MJ fan (I am too) but you cannot keep on defending his actions! It's NEVER okay for a grown man to sleep with underage children.Period! Especially when this man has already beedn accused of molestation in the past.

can we start another thread, this is sooooo damn long.

Why do we keep talking about sleepovers, bedrooms and bed. Whenever I see some pedophile scandal, it´s usually about tons of child pornography (which hasn´t been found at Neverland, cause he´s not charged with it) and the molestation does not happen just in bedrooms and at night. Pedophiles and all the other sexual predators hit pretty much anywhere and anytime.

[/quote]Cloudy,I am very disappointed in you.[quote]
I am not, cause I have the same experience as you and do not consider it sick.


Let´s not use the word "normal" in connection with MJ, cause there´s NOTHING about his life from the very beginning that could be described as normal, so it is only very natural that such person canNOT be like others - "normal" - and therefore you cannot expect the same behaviour from him. I do understand MJ in his unwillingness to deal with adults, because they all measure everything about him whether it is "normal" or not. He knows that and he knows that he will NEVER fit this "mornality" (or what´s the word), that´s why he hangs around kids that do not care what is normal and what is not. You may all argue that he´s not the only one who didn´t have "normal" upbrining and that others managed to fit into sociaty later on, but MJ does not have the circumstances to even try to be normal, so let him have his sleepovers and kids company or whatever it is that makes him happy and keeps him company and saves him from going insane and let´s focus on whether he actually REALLY did molest the kid. So far, I don´t see any evidence.

I don´t care if you find me fanatical or defending him blindly. All I know is that NONE of us will ever understand him because of everything he is and everything he´s been through, but that does not give us the right to condemn him. Look at other comparable legends - Elvis, Marylin, Janis, Cobain whoever - how did they end up? MJ is still here dealing with his lonelyness that he fame brings him in his way - by surrounding himself with kids - and to me this way is much more acceptable than if he was trying to solve his problems the way all those other celebrities did.

Thanks, adoreme and DavidEye. Maybe we're the only ones here who wouldn't let our kids sleep with a grown man. If the MJ fanatics in this thread have no problem with their children sleeping with MJ, then they should also have no problem with their children sleeping with any random man on the street.

this is not fair. I wonder if it´s only the Jackson famatics´ children that are being molested in this world.

Thanks, daq, for completely missing the point.

VoicesCarry said:

don't worry VC, I'm with ya on that one

DavidEye said:

I'm saying that if two or more people, of any age, that know each other well want to share a bed or a room to "sleep" in, then I don't see a problem with that. Sleeping with someone is, believe it or not, not the same as having sex with someone.



I'll do as I please.



Says who? I didn't realise that there was a rule book that we all had to adhere to. It's NEVER okay for a paedophile to sleep with or share a bed with children.
I'll grant you that.



I think Michael was an idiot for either not recognising or ignoring the dangers of carrying on as before. Hopefully this shit storm will help him wise up.

dag said:

Dag, lovey. Voices didn't mean that MJ fans deserve to have their children molested. He was pointing out the hypocrisy of saying that it's okay for MJ to sleep with a child but not a random man on the street.

It's pretty much summed by by Cloudbuster. If it's never okay for a paedophile to sleep with a child then maybe we should just round them all up cos I think they have labels on or something to make them easy to pick out.

Then Mikey can carry on with his favourite pastime. That's much better than having a rule that we all abide by. Yep - one rule for the paedos and one rule for Michael Jackson.....

See, the problem is Cloudy, is that you don't know if someone's a pedophile, and you therefore don't take that sort of chance with your child's welfare. In a world where molestation by even the parent is commonplace, you do NOT put your child in a position of elevated risk. That is irresponsible parenting, and if the child really was molested, then the parents must share some of the blame for placing him in that position.

But Voices, then you should never let your kid alone with NOONE and NOWHERE. Child molesters don't need a bed to molest a kid(MJ is accused of licking Gavin's head on aeroplane with family there). I don't understand why it's not OK for a grown man to share a bad with a kid. People have sex in cars, in elavators, EVERYWHERE for god's sake.

There are things you can't control in the world, Light. One of them is whether or not a molester snatches your 12-year-old child off the street when he's on his way home from school, for example. But the things you can control, you do if it means saving your child an experience like that. Much as you don't let your 3-year-old be carried off by any random man, you also don't let your 11-year-old sleep over at any random man's house.

Most molestations occur in either the child's place of residence or the molester's place of residence. They need to get the child alone and they need to get control over him or her. They are not having sex in elevators and cars, Light.

I really cannot believe some of the stuff I'm reading. I've worked with people who were molested by parents or trusted relatives as children, and they would be appalled, but I suppose that's the kind of perspective you need - that or some common sense.

VoicesCarry said:

Finally, some sense

See, you're saying what I asked if that's what your saying. Never leave your kid alone with noone in no circumstance.

What I'm saying is it's alright if you let your kid stay the night at a trusted friend of yours' house if you got things to do. Yes, you can never make sure if your friend is a childmolester or not..Then you must never trust a single soul in this world.

I agree with your opinions at the same time I agree with mine too. Figure that out

Resuming his opening statement, Mesereau came out blasting this morning, aiming his fire at the accuser and his siblings, saying that while the children were initially well behaved, they became "out of control" while in residence at Jackson's Neverland Ranch. Mesereau told jurors that they:

* Broke into the estate's wine cellar

* Broke into a refrigerator

* Stole alcohol that Jackson had ordered for guests (and were found drunk by ranch employees)

* At the ranch's amusement park, they were discovered at the top of a ferris wheel, where they threw objects at elephants and people


I admit, that's kinda funny.

Everyone that met the kid said he was gangsta, but I guess you guys havent been reading roger friedman at fox news. He's no geraldo or a fan either.

Michael will never spend time in prison. If he is convicted, let the MJ Suicide Countdown Clock start running!

Whether or not he hurt kids (my best guess is still that he probably didn't), that man is this incredible living example of the worst our society can do to somebody. Rich and famous, insane and tragic.

"He also noted that forensic investigators did not discover the accuser's DNA in Jackson's bedroom, where multiple acts of molestation allegedly occurred.

Continuing his attack on the accuser's mother, Mesereau said that the woman deposited illegally obtained welfare checks into the account of her boyfriend, an Army Reserves major who earned $8000-a-month. He also said that the woman had numerous chances to alert law enforcement authorities that her family was being held against its will at Jackson's estate...but she never said a thing.

Countering Sneddon's claim that the woman was not seeking money from Jackson, Mesereau said that he will prove that her lawyer, Larry Feldman, told CNN's Larry King (during a lunch) that "she wants money." He also told jurors that Jackson's doctor (apparently Alimorad Farshchian) would rebut prosecution witnesses who claimed that Jackson served alcohol to the teenage accuser on a February 2003 flight from Miami to Santa Barbara."

Larry King, every reporter and talk show host in the country is gonna be in this thing.

Start a new thread, this thing is too long to read now.....the mac blowup pics are to blame.

dag said:

This is what is wrong with Michael Jackson all rolled up in one very neat post. Once you have kids of your own, you don't get to have fucking sleepovers like you are a thirteen year old kid. When is this guy going to grow up and take responsibility for his actions? This guy held a kid of his over the railing of a fucking hotel balcony. God, please. Someone try to make me understand this shit.

VoicesCarry said:

But then are you saying that children should never stay at anyone else's house but their own? No matter how well you know the person whose home they're staying at?

Shapeshifter said:

I would have defended myself to my last penny.

DavidEye said:

Gavin's parents need a serious foot in their asses.

dag said:

Cloudy,I am very disappointed in you.Michael's not normal. So fucking what? No excuse. And as someone who has been molested on more than one occasion, I don't think anyone defending him on the sleepover thing knows what the fuck they are talking about. I have a best friend of 22 years, a male, and NO. MY KIDS CANNOT SLEEP IN THE SAME BED WITH HIM EVER.

TheOrgerFormerlyKnownAs said:

Interesting point...

The Parents let gavin have unsupervised sleepovers with a man who has been accused before... Thats like throwing your baby in front of a hungry wolf...
Its something you don't do, its in the realm of child neglect so i believe the parents deserve some blame as well. or perhaps they where too busy with jackson taking them on shopping sprees...

The Fact of the matter is whether you want to leave your children with him or you trust him enough to do so. Sleeping in the same bed is not a crime, it will never be a crime until some right wing conservative make's it a crime. You can say its morally wrong, Whatever you wan't!
People will always have different opinions! So stop the bickering

Everybody, makes a point here, but first of all
He is not on trial for sleeping in the same bed with children
Its child intoxication, Child Molestation and Conspiracy,
No sleeping in the same bed charge...

Whether you like it or not, he did it, Thats it
You can praise him for, Condemn him, think he's moron, it doesn't matter
Its your opinion, so keep it clean guys
[Edited 3/1/05 11:00am]

BTW Cloudy, I am not disappointed in you. I was quoting Dag quoting someone else.

CNN Transcript:

O'BRIEN: CNN senior legal analyst Jeff Toobin joins us from Santa Maria, California.

Hey, Jeff. Good morning to you.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SR. LEGAL ANALYST: Good morning, ma'am.

O'BRIEN: You were in the courtroom. Give me a sense of how you thought the prosecution did off the bat.

TOOBIN: Lousy. I thought it was a terrible opening by Tom Sneddon. It was disorganized, it was rambling, it was almost incoherent at times. The prosecution obviously is betting that the alleged victim and his brother will be compelling, believable witnesses, because it sound like that's about all they've got.

O'BRIEN: At the same time, as we just heard in Rusty's piece, the details are pretty icky, don't you think to some degree, even if the prosecution doesn't carry the ball well, some of the details could really overwhelm that?

TOOBIN: I think it is true. I mean, look, the accusations in this case are horrible, and fundamentally, that is one on one. This boy, who interestingly was named throughout the court proceedings, his full name used, he will testify that Michael Jackson did these terrible things, gave him liquor, but there are not many -- there are no eyewitnesses to the sexual misconduct, and the eyewitnesses to the liquor accusations are shaky at best from what I could tell.

O'BRIEN: OK, how about the defense. How do you think they did right off the bat?

TOOBIN: It was one of the best opening statements I have ever heard in a courtroom anywhere. Tom Mesereau was fascinating, and brilliant and extremely persuasive, that this family has gone from lawsuit to lawsuit, escalating their accusations at all times, to begin with requests for money, and when that fails, accusations of sexual misconduct. It took place in a lawsuit against JC Penney. It took place in the divorce litigation, and now they claim in this case against Michael Jackson. The Jay Leno accusation was absolutely fascinating. Jay Leno apparently received a phone call from the accuser in this case. He heard the mother guiding him in the background. He said, I got a weird feeling from these people, I cut off the phone call right away. I thought they were in it for money. It was a riveting moment to start Tom Mesereau's opening statement.

O'BRIEN: Martin Bashir is going to be the first witness on the stand. Give me a sense of the role he'll play, and also the role that chronology will play in all of this.

TOOBIN: Very important, because the theory of the prosecution is that the Martin Bashir documentary, which was broadcast on February 6, 2003, set off this panic in the Jackson camp. The media descended. Law enforcement investigators descended, and that's when the conspiracy to cover this up began.

But the defense pointed out something I had not noticed, the accusations of sexual misconduct here take place after this documentary went on the air. That at the very moment that Michael Jackson is accused of misconduct with children, that is the moment he chooses to begin his sexual relationship with the boy. It's very strange chronology, which I think the prosecution will have a difficult time explaining how that happened.

O'BRIEN: Certainly be interesting to hear from Martin Bashir later today.

Jeff Toobin, as always, thanks a lot. Appreciate it -- Bill.

TOOBIN: OK, Soledad. See you.

http://transcripts.cnn.co...tm.01.html
Chaos 20004: The Michael Jackson Case



O'BRIEN: Let's get right to some insight on those explosive opening statements. CNN senior legal analyst Jeff Toobin in Santa Maria, California.

Hey, Jeff, rate for me how the prosecution and the defense did.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SR. LEGAL ANALYST: A three on a scale of 10 for the prosecution, an eight on a scale of 10 for the defense. It was really a dramatic difference. Very unusual at this stage of the case. But I thought it really was a striking difference between the two.

O'BRIEN: How about the reaction from the jurors when they're hearing all this -- this very salacious information?

TOOBIN: Well, you know, it's funny, the jury looked like a group of people at the first day of school. They were nervous, they didn't know exactly where to sit. This is often what happens in a big case.

The jurors are very conscious of being looked at by all of us in the press, by this very full courtroom. I think they were going out of their way not to react, but they were certainly very attentive, and they had a lot to listen to.

O'BRIEN: You and I, I think, from the get-go, spoke about how this case is going to focus on the mother of the alleged victim in this case. And certainly no different indications yesterday as well, right?

TOOBIN: Absolutely. One of the most memorable moments from Tom Mesereau's opening statement was, at the time the prosecution claimed that this woman was being held against her will, essentially kidnapped by Michael Jackson and his so-called conspirators, Mesereau read a list of the purchases she made and where she was shopping. And I tell you, it was hilarious.

You know, Banana Republic, bikini waxes, leg waxes, you know, bras, underwear. She was buying everything under the sun at all these different department stores at a time when she claimed she was being essentially kidnapped. It was devastating. And her testimony is really going to be -- you could sell tickets for that one.

O'BRIEN: And, in fact, the timeline I think is going to be very, very critical in this case.

TOOBIN: Timeline was really a revelation to me, because both sides agree that this period in early February 2003 when the Martin Bashir documentary was broadcast was crucial. The prosecution claims that was the time that Michael Jackson and his co-conspirators, you know, clamped down on the family, essentially kidnapped them, said, you can't talk to the authorities.

What the defense pointed out is that that time after those allegations surfaced, that was the only time Michael Jackson is accused of molesting this child, which seemed somewhat improbable. That time period is going to be crucial. And it will be very important today because Martin Bashir is the first witness we'll hear from.

O'BRIEN: And, you know, we talked a little bit the past weeks about the celebrities who have been named as potential witnesses in this case, but Jay Leno, it seems like he actually might take the stand, right?

TOOBIN: You know, we were laughing about that last week because of all these sort of celebrities. What possibly could they have to do with the trial?

But Mesereau had this very effective point of claiming -- and we'll see what the testimony is -- that Jay Leno was essentially shaken down by this family, and he, unlike Michael Jackson, said, I want nothing to do with these people. They seem like grifters to me. And if that's true, if that testimony pans out -- and it sounds like that Leno will certainly be a defense witness in this trial -- that could be very helpful for the defense because that's the claim here, that this family are not victims, they're shakedown artists.

O'BRIEN: Ooh, and that's just day one. Another day.

TOOBIN: It's a lot to listen to.

O'BRIEN: Jeff, thanks.

TOOBIN: OK, Soledad.

http://transcripts.cnn.co...tm.05.html