vainandy said:

You know it's a shame thats the only reason you bothered responding too in this thread...
that said...
it was still mildly educational, just like when i found out what skeet was

A SKEET SKEET SKEET SKEET SKEET

[Edited 10/27/07 22:03pm]
[Edited 10/27/07 22:03pm]

EmbattledWarrior said:

SKEET WIPES?!

bboy87 said:

Had a nut busted on you at work? Grab a Skeet Wipe!, and you'll be sterile and clean and without a trace of protein!
For that Head Nurse on the go

I'm done trying to defend MJ against you half-wits. I took the time to explain to you the meaning of the word "share", first grade stuff, and you failed to understand it. So I'm done. I don't have to say anything more. The courts have spoken for me. NOT GUILTY. Deal with it.

DarlingDiana said:

I like mj and i supported him during the trial. You must admit it is not normal for a man his age to have a lot of kids over to sleep in his room/bed whether he actually slept in the bed with them or not. Hopefully it will be a lesson learned for michael to not trust everyone especially parents of these kids who seek an opportunity to cash in at mj's expense.

DarlingDiana said:

Honey child, i learnt that a looooong time ago, welcome to the club
lol
Its best to just let these threads deteriorate into nothingness
n.W.o. stylie

EmbattledWarrior said:

we'll make it happen.

It's a hard job. But we shall continue to fuck up threads.....one at a time
cues Cops theme

why do people defend a 40+ man sleeping with children that ARE NOT his for a straight month.

It's clear MJ had an obsession with Jordy

DarlingDiana said:

The courts

The courts are a joke

He WOULD of been found guilty in the first case and he knew it!

You're catholic, right?

From a friend of mine:

=====

A friend of mine once told me that in all his twenty years in the business, the only time he ever felt ashamed to call himself a journalist was the day after Martin Bashir’s ‘Living With Michael Jackson’ aired in the UK. “Not just the programme,” he said, “but the way it was splashed all over the papers the next day…the way they twisted it… it was shocking. Terrible journalism.”

Given the strong reaction to Bashir’s film you would be forgiven for thinking that Jackson and his band of followers were unused to such character assassinations, but Jackson has long been a media target. The unparalleled success of ‘Thriller’ propelled him beyond the celebrity stratosphere to a level of notoriety that has never been equalled. But with that success came an unprecedented demand for media interaction.

When Jackson made himself available to the press they were more than happy to fawn over his success; his eight Grammies, his Guinness world records and his famous dance moves. However, so in demand was Jackson that he could not possibly satisfy the media’s desire for column inches and - in the absence of any real news - journalists found themselves under increasing pressure to concoct their own Jackson-related stories, which varied from the whimsical to the downright spiteful. So incensed was Jackson that in 1984 he was forced to call a press conference to deny reports that he was planning to undergo gender reassignment surgery.

As the eighties progressed Jackson found his image spiralling beyond his control as the media’s claims became ever more outrageous. One newspaper alleged that Jackson was freezing himself for fifty years, whilst another claimed that he’d married a martian. The National Enquirer ran a story that Prince had sent Jackson’s chimp, Bubbles, mad by using mind control techniques. “I don’t care how much it costs or how long it takes, I’m going to stop Prince from messing with Bubbles,” they quoted Jackson. “What kind of sicko would mess with a monkey? This is the final straw!”

The situation appeared to reach its zenith in 1988 when, unable to leave his hotel for the thousands of fans and reporters that had descended upon it, Jackson tossed an open letter to the media from his balcony. Of his treatment at the hands of the press, he wrote, “... I cry very often because it hurts. Those who criticize desire our blood, not our pain. But have mercy, for I have been bleeding a long time now.”

Almost twenty years on little appears to have changed. Last night saw the airing of controversial Channel 4 documentary ‘Michael Jackson – What Really Happened’. Originally billed as an investigation into Jackson’s life since his acquittal in 2005 on child molestation charges, as the air date drew closer the marketing campaign appeared to shift significantly in tone. An eerie musical score accompanied a slow-motion home movie clip of Jackson dancing with a small child in his arms as an unsettling voiceover told us that, “everybody has an opinion on this man.”

This proved true - and the documentary itself amounted to little more than a forum in which various commentators could air those opinions, no matter how unsubstantiated.

Presenter Jacques Peretti was described before the show began as a ‘lifelong Jackson fan’, a claim rendered almost entirely redundant by the fact that he displayed little to no knowledge of Jackson’s career for the duration of the programme. He claimed to have ‘never heard of’ Jackson’s 30th Anniversary Celebration shows in New York - two of the most successful and highly publicised concerts of all time - and described Jackson’s Guinness world record breaking music video, ‘Ghosts’, as an ‘old piece of footage he came across’.

In actuality the description of Peretti as a Jackson fan was more than likely a cynical move on the behalf of the production company. By labelling Peretti a Jackson fan they made any negative assertions perpetuated by the show or its presenter appear infinitely more logical or believable than they actually were, the idea being that if even he – a Jackson fan – believes it then it must be true.

It is much the same tactic as was employed by Martin Bashir, who schmoozed his way into Jackson’s life by gushing about how as a child he’d had Michael Jackson posters stuck all over his wall. By portraying himself as a fan he made it more difficult for anybody to believe he’d purposely constructed a negative documentary.

Peretti’s opening montage alone contained innumerable factual inaccuracies. Its wild claims ranged from reports that Jackson had been spotted in Paris last year dressed as a woman – a story which was later disproved when it emerged that Jackson was in Dublin at the time – to outlandish claims that he’d been arrested in a women’s toilet in Dubai.

Peretti claimed Jackson had been booed offstage at last year’s World Music Awards, a media myth created in mid-November and debunked one week later when the ceremony aired on television. We were told that many of the show’s contributors were speaking in public for the very first time, a claim not true of any of the interviewees; three of them have published books.

The opening montage really set the standard for the remainder of the programme; poorly research and extremely subjective. We were treated to a mish-mash of relentless psychobabble; the short film for ‘Thriller’ was not a pioneering work of audio-visual genius…oh no, it was a ‘cry for help’. “What Jackson was trying to do,” babbled Jackson biographer J Randy Taraborelli, “was to tell his friends and family…I feel like a monster. I need help.”

What followed was a grim procession of talking heads with a lot of chat but little to say; a veritable role-call of unreliable and, in one case, criminal character witnesses, many of whom have carved lucrative careers out of their obsessions with Jackson.

First to face Peretti was ex-Jackson aide Bob Jones. Incorrectly described as Jackson’s ex-manager, Jones was fired from his post by Jackson associates during a hectic period in the singer’s career, quite possibly with neither Jackson’s knowledge nor approval. Feeling slighted, Jones penned a book containing a number of salacious stories about Jackson’s private life.

During Jackson’s child molestation trial Jones was called as a prosecution witness after DA Tom Sneddon learnt that in his book Jones had detailed witnessing Jackson lick a young boy’s head. Jones insisted that he had never witnessed nor written about such an incident until it was presented to him on the stand. Jones was forced to admit under oath that the majority of the Jackson gossip in his book was not true, and had been concocted by his ghost-writer, Stacey Brown. Nonetheless, days later he was back on the chat show circuit promoting the same material he’d just denounced as fictitious. Needless to say, none of this information was communicated to Channel 4’s audience, who were left to hang on Jones’s every word.

Next up was celebrity biographer J Randy Taraborelli, who describes himself as a long time friend of Jackson’s, a claim the singer has refuted more than once. It was exposed when Taraborelli first published his Jackson biography in the early nineties that he had only met Jackson on two occasions, once in 1979 and again in 1982. Regardless of this fact, he was invited to ponder endlessly over Jackson’s psyche as though an authority on the subject.

Peretti’s third contributor came in the guise of CourtTV presenter Diane Diamond, famed for her vendetta against Jackson. During Jackson’s trial Diamond was noted for her slanderous and inaccurate reporting, consistently siding with unreliable witnesses whose testimonies were destroyed during cross examination. Diamond was happy to admit on camera that her sole aim in life is to destroy Jackson’s career and yet was treated as an unbiased and reliable source of information.

Perhaps the most shocking contributor was a man named Victor Guttierez. In 1994 Guttierez went to the media claiming he owned a videotape of Jackson molesting a child. Jackson instigated legal action against him and challenged him in court to produce such a tape. When Guttierez failed to do so he was ordered to pay Jackson’s legal fees plus compensation. Rather than do so, he fled to country. To this day he owes Jackson millions of dollars.

Again, none of this information found its way into Peretti’s film. Instead Guttierez made dozens of outlandish claims about goings on at Neverland, a place he’d never visited, and the behaviour of Jackson, a man he’d never met. Much like Diamond, at no point did he present any information to corroborate his claims.

And, more to the point, Peretti didn’t ask him to.

The list of contributors consisted of 80% Jackson detractors. The one Jackson supporter, trial lawyer Thomas Mesereau, was given less than two minutes airtime despite having a deep knowledge and wealth of information on the Jackson case. Meanwhile Diamond, a self-confessed Jackson hater, and Guttierez, a felon with a grudge, were referred to as ‘experts’ - and their testimony dominated the entire programme.

Peretti, Guttierez and Diamond repeatedly stated baseless allegations as facts. “Jackson was having a relationship with Jordan Chandler,” Peretti boldly claimed. “Evan Chandler caught Jackson molesting his son,” alleged Diamond. “Jackson was in love with Jordan Chandler,” insisted Guttierez.

Seemingly CourtTV reporter Diamond is unfamiliar with the concept of ‘the burden of proof’.

A surprising amount of weight was given to Diamond’s theory that Jackson preyed on children who wanted to break into Hollywood, especially given that none of Jackson’s alleged victims were budding actors or singers.

Diamond was a bundle of contradictions, at one moment claiming Jackson skipped the 1993 World Music Awards and locked himself in a suite with Jordan Chandler, but the next claiming that Jackson had embarrassed himself at the ceremony by perching Chandler on his knee.

Similarly, Guttierez’s claims that Jackson only met boys and not girls were met by a stoney-faced Peretti, just minutes before a montage of footage was played showing Jackson frolicking with large, mixed gender groups of children.

Perhaps most alarmingly, basic facts about the 1993 allegations against Jackson were reported extremely inaccurately. Peretti stated matter-of-factly Jordan Chandler’s description of Jackson’s genetalia had been accurate. In actuality, it had been entirely inaccurate. Chandler had claimed Jackson was circumcised, which he was not.

When questioning Bob Jones over Jackson’s behaviour with Chandler, Peretti asked him what they thought the two did at their sleepovers. “I don’t know,” replied Bob Jones, “I wasn’t there.”
”I think you do know,” Peretti probed, and Jones looked uncomfortable. It was clear that ‘Jackson fan’ Peretti was digging for a salacious answer. When Peretti pursued that line of questioning, Jones demanded that the cameras be switched off.

A negative spin was put on Jackson’s every movement. His 30th Anniversary Celebration concerts, for which he earned thousands of dollars per second, were described by Peretti as Jackson ‘dancing for pennies.’ Jackson’s Vegas residency, a large estate, was described as a ‘rented house on a suburban street’.

What is perhaps most worrying about this, is that millions of viewers will have watched this documentary with no real knowledge of the Jackson cases... They will have taken this documentary at face value, expecting its contents to be well researched and accurate. In actuality, all it has achieved is to bombard the public with factual inaccuracies and heavy insinuations of guilt.

By bringing before the public a host of biased, slighted and unreliable witnesses… criminals, liars and shoddy reporters… and by marginalising the voices of reason in favour of perpetuating baseless rumours as facts – Peretti and Channel 4 have contributed strongly to the procession of anti-Jackson media output which has been working in overdrive for over two and a half decades now.

On an almost weekly basis Jackson’s manager is still forced to issue public denials in response to ludicrous stories from that he’s appearing in a Las Vegas magic show to that he’s building a sixty foot robot of himself in the Nevada desert.

I’ve not been in the business for very long, but even amidst all of this nonsense there is only one time I have ever felt ashamed to call myself a journalist. That was last night as I realised that all over Britain there would be adults and children, who rely on their media for honest, fair reporting, watching and believing Jacques Peretti’s ‘Michael Jackson – What Really Happened’.

It seems to be a trend.

DarlingDiana said:

I hear what your saying, but fans like you are still blinded by why the allegations spiralled out of control and ended in court cases and out of court settlements. The sleepovers were the biggest problem. MJ admitted to them and even the children that defended him admitted to them. Fans are so selective about this, trying to make them seem like a one off thing when they happened again and again with different children. Why the fans continue to sweep this under the carpet and pretend it didn't contribute to anything makes me wonder. These are facts. Facts even MJ legal team couldn't deny during the trial.

Having said all that I do believe inspite of all this the fans have a much better insight into the allegations than most other people, afterall it was the fans that first saw the holes in the 2003 case and knew inspite of the 100 search warrants there was a good chance he would be found Not Guilty. Apart from those very close to Michael and his lawyers I think the fans have probably more information than most.
[Edited 10/28/07 4:41am]

whatsgoingon said:

The fanatics are in complete denial.

Ellie said:

I swear if I was MJ or somebody close to him, I'd pay one of those hard-dore south central L.A or Compton cats to whoop Diane Diamond's ass.

DarlingDiana said:

NOT GUILTY just like OJ Simpson

great!

fcukthepolice said:

And the haters refuse to hear the truth. You said that in the first trial MJ would have been found guilty. You are refusing to face the fact that there was no first trial because there was no evidence.

One more time for the special people..... 2 separate grand juries found no evidence to indict MJ. The fact that there was no trial had nothing to do with the civil case. There was no evidence to try him on. Sneddon was a fool that wasted a bunch of tax payers money twice.

I have not seen one MJ "fanatic" condone his sleepovers. I don't even consider myself a "fanatic" as I pretty much got fed up with him destsroying his African features. If this was a thread aboout MJ and his supposed vitilio, you would find me all over his ass. However, with that being said, I still do not believe that there is any evidence that he is a pedophile. None, zippo, zilch. But there are those people that refuse to see the truth and continue to hang on the words of tabloid reporters and disgruntled employees.

fcukthepolice said:

That makes no sense.

And did you bother not to read ALL THAT I HAD WROTE FROM THE FIRST PAGE?

My God.

floetcist said:

.


And did you bother not to read ALL THAT I HAD WROTE FROM THE FIRST PAGE?

My God.[/quote]

Of course he didn't. He doesn't want to hear the truth. He wants to stick to his belief that MJ is a paedo
[Edited 10/28/07 8:42am]

I see a lot of people choose to not pay attention to what I wrote that CLEARLY displays all the information, and answers everything anyone has asked for. Yet everyone ignored my post (to continue with asking the same damn shit). How ironic.

electrorock said:

Don't fucking compare Michael Jackson to OJ Simpson. I'm tired of that simple logic, weak "evidence" into how its the "samething". These are two VERY DIFFERENT cases, they couldn't have been more different. Two different prosecutions, two different subject matters, two different situations, two different backgrounds.

OJ Simpson has nothing to do with Michael Jackson. NO, just because he is a black male celebrity who was found not guilty in court -- whom a lot of people felt that was guilty -- doesn't some how presumably apply to Michael Jackson as well.

illimack said:

Uhh...

Thats ironic deposition on your part Well considering in 1993, the key point was for Jordan Chandler to describe of Michael's genitals to see an accurate match; that meant his vitiligo. They strip searched him for a reason.

I don't see how you can know so much about the case, and yet, skpetical of vitiligo (its not spelled "vitilio") when the first case was heavily revolved around and depended on that for important evidence.
[Edited 10/28/07 8:51am]

illimack said:

MJ IS A PEDO; PEDO PEDO!!
100% NO DOUBT!

floetcist said:

oh yeah that condition that changes black people to really pale white people.

MJ bleached his balls one time and burnt himself.

^^The truth! Read some bios on him

floetcist said:

OJ IS A KILLER
MJ IS A CHILD MOLESTER

MJ IS WORSE by a fraction

fcukthepolice said:

God you're pathetic. You're one of the worst I've seen thus far, and trust, that is no easy feat.

Bleaching yourself is impossible.

floetcist said:

People do bleach their skin, they rarely go from brown to white skinned but there are enough black and brown people using skin whitners/lightners on a daily basis.

Can we stick to the subject? The whole debate on his having or not having vitiligo belongs to another thread.

And another thing: Unless the people who think Michael Jackson is a pedophile read the court transcripts and come to the conclusion that he is a child molester, there is no point in having a discussion. It would be nice to have a discussion with people who cite evidence that has been discussed in a court of law, instead of People magazine.

whatsgoingon said:

There was an article on it just the other day, about how many dark skinned Asian people are using bleaches to lighten their skin. But you have to understand, Michael once said there was "no such thing as skin bleaching". Therefore MJ fans don't think it's possible.

Rodya24 said:

I have each transcript from every date. I haven't found the time to have read them all yet, but I've gone through a good number.

midnightmover said:

I'm not talking about that king of skin bleaching. People that bleach their skin to remove scars and minor discolorations use creams with only hydroquinone, which is reversible and not permanent. This is why when you buy bleaching creams at the store, it will always tell you that the pigmentation you wanted to get rid of may reappear.

floetcist said:

The earth is flat!