I was listening to the radio today and Chris Evans played The Way You Make Me Feel on his drivetime show.

Anyway, after the song he says "Happy 50th birthday Michael... thinking about it, should we really be wishing him a happy birthday?"

What the heck is this? Why is he being treated as if he wasn't vindicated in 2005?

Yeah me too. they treat this man worst then OJ simpson.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY "MY BABY MICHAEL JACKSON"

I'm so sick of always being treated like a smooth criminal.


Fuck all of y'all.

I agree, I dont get why we cant just focus on his bday!

MattyJam said:

R. Kelly and OJ Simpson were also "vindicated".

midnightmover said:

The charges against MJ were a lot less substantial than OJ or Kelly. The DA made a worldwide public call for anyone who ever had been abused by MJ to come forward and he would prosecute. No one came. To me that proved MJ didn't do anything. The problem is the general public would never look closely at the accusations made against Michael. If you do you will realize that it's not likely that he did the things he was accused of.

I get mad at him for being a moron during the interview but when people say shit my stomach churns without me being able to stop and I realize I still care for him. It's creepy but it's almost like still having feelings for an ex partner, even though I'm still a fan.

funksterr said:

Very good point! You can think all you want about his lifestyle and the way he looks, and whatever but I studied the case very closely and there's no doubt in my mind, that case was a waste of time and shouldn't have never mind it to a court. It's one thing to be found not guilty because there was reasonable doubt with the case of R Kelly (the bitch never showed up to testify, the jury had no choice) and OJ (glove didn't fit), but the story of what supposedly happened at Neverland, was not only unbelievable but I laughed my ass off.

Here we go again

MattyJam said:

Perhaps he was just alluding to the fact Mike is (or atleast was) a JW, and JW's don't celebrate birthdays

MattyJam said:

okej, i agree this time....

luv4u said:

haha....it was inevitable

I don't know if I'm being naive here but I tend to think if he's an adult child like people say (and like he seems in interviews) how would he be capable of those crimes?

Or if he did do it, would he understand the full extent of what he was doing?

Because he does seem SO SO young when he talks...it always got me wondering...how far does the "young" go?

I do somehow believe he's innocent, I don't really know why but for some reason I just don't think he'd be capable of it...

That might be wishful thinking...

Still, I agree, there's no reason people can't be a fan of his music and celebrate that...

midnightmover said:

I can't believe R Kelly was acquitted on the same day. It made my blood boil. I knew people would throw that in the face of people who believe Michael is innocent, you are not the first and you sure as hell won't be the last. What can we do... people believe what they want to, I guess.

I'd fed up of the way Michael's treated by the media as a criminal. The way the treat him is vile, no human should have to but up the that kind of sick bullying.

FuNkeNsteiN said:

No he's not. He gave up on that boogie man BS back in 1986 or thereabouts.

DarlingDiana said:

Ah yes, I do remember reading that at some point, but I wasn't sure
Thanks

funksterr said:

Actually, by far the most illuminating testimony about Michael wasn't heard in court. It came from an English boy who knew Michael from 1979-1983. He's almost middle aged now and is generally complimentary to Michael. But he did describe quite convincingly (and with no bitterness) an incident at the end of their relationship where Michael was talking dirty down the phone and appeared to be masturbating. Seeing him talk so naturally about it, and even rationalise it on Michael's behalf, was extremely revealing. It's one of many pieces of evidence that MJ fans like to ignore.

You have to understand that these kind of sex trials are always slanted in favor of the defendant. The prosecution have strict guidelines which prevent them talking about other similar allegations and circumstantial evidence. Also, the fact that the defendant is never questioned in court but the accuser always is. A skilled lawyer can always make mincemeat of a witness under cross examination. They did it to the Arvizos (spelling?) and it would have happened to Michael if he'd been questioned too, but of course he never was.

Fact of the matter is wether he was found guilty or not people will have there opinions on if he did it or not and that will follow him round for the rest of his life even till after hes dead, cause the truth is only he knows if he did it or not

Facts...
Hes been accused twice,
He Paid out a lot of money to his first Accuser
he admitted to sharing his bed with Children that was not his own
Hes been found NOT Guilty.

If this would of been your Neighbour doing this you would want him out of your area preferebly in a body bag, its called trial by media, but cause its your idol he can do no wrong.

midnightmover said:

That i have to agree with why the hell did they bring up the accusers past of shoplifting etc, no one knows the truth except Mj fans cause they think they know him and wouldnt do that.

cream72 said:

Or is it a case of because he's an idol he can do nothing right?

I agree he shouldn't be sharing his bed with children but why are parents letting their young kids stay at a strange man's house in the first place? It works both ways.

purplesweat said:

That's a diversion tactic. It doesn't make it okay to sleep with children just because the parents were slack.

midnightmover said:

I'm familiar with the story of the phone sex boy. I think your time frame (79-82) is a bit off and that in fact MJ was a child/teen himself when he met the boy. I don't think it is unusual for boys to talk about playing with themselves. It happens.

As for the trial, the prosecutor himself, and even MJ's harshest critics in the media didn't believe the boy. They brought the charges only as a way to try one last time to clarify, is MJ a pedo or not? The case always hinged upon additional people coming forward, and none came. All the boys being whispered about in the press over the years denied MJ did anything to them. They could have become very rich, if they'd said MJ had bothered them, yet none of them took the bait. That says to me that MJ is innocent. Yet there is a lot of money being made by certain people in the press, to keep stirring this thing up.

I have a funny story about this too. I started a thread on LMP forum just wishim MJ happy b-day and got immediately attacked for being disrespectful to LMP for bringing up her past that she´s trying to distance herself from by contantly talking about him dissing him and by dragging LMP into it, by posting that little thread where there was not a single negative thing about him, her or their marriage. Anyway, this happy b-day thread was deleted. Does anyone get this? I´d really love to know your opinions.

cream72 said:

uPtoWnNY said:

How predictable from you.

cream72 said:

They brought up the shop lifting because Janet Arvizo (now Janet Jackson), got her two sons to lie and say she was beat up for compensation.

funksterr said:

Wow! Yet again we see how devious MJ fans are. MJ met the boy on the Destiny Tour when he was 20. He was certainly not a child at the time. And he was 24 when the masturbation incident took place. If you think it's normal for a 24 year old to talk dirty to a 13 year old boy whilst masturbating then you are not only crazy, but quite possibly dangerous.


They rarely do in these kinds of cases. In the R Kelly trial even the girl in the video refused to testify. And by the way, one of Michael's previous victims did actually tell his story in court. He broke down in tears while he related what happened. Funny how this seems to have completely slipped your memory.

midnightmover said:

That boy was a deranged, and later a deranged gay, not used pejoratively, but more so as a statement of face. He was a gay fan, who continued to dress like Michael, and wished for involvement in Michael's life...

That's a classic case of obsession stiming from only one encounter, which the person fantasized into what they wish it were....

As far as anyone "breaking down in tears", proof? Or are you as usual simply talking out of your ass?

midnightmover said:

DID u see him cry?

i´m not defending MJ. But U Can´t trust the media/news nowdays.... or can U?
Maybe all this about Mj is true. maybe not...