Riverpoet31 said:

well michael is dead now so if he was a monster then all the children and victims are safe from him now. And if michael was set up, then the truth is gonna come out sooner or later.

The only reason any person entertained any of his antics with the kids is because he is Michael Jackson. Any average joe who engaged in the same behavior would have been met with pitcforks and fire.

Michael hasnt been 'set up'. He had his own issues as a person.

BoOTyLiCioUs said:

so what? where are your sources? you can't just discount other peoples point of views and ignore the sources and expect people to take your point of view instead. you may as well stick your fingers in your ears and shout "la la la i can't hear you"

if you aren't going to accept what people say, even in the light of the evidence provided, what's the point of joining such a conversation? it's like people are talking to you and you just ignore what they say if you don't agree with it

the guy we are talking about is a drug addict who was dependant on drums for about 25 years, half of his life, who lied about many aspects of his life, such as his plastic surgery, the parentage of his kids, and the relationships with his relatives, so why on earth would anyone think that a 40 year old male adult who openly admits to sleeping with young boys on a regular basis is doing nothing wrong? regardless of whatever you want to call it, abuse or not, there is nothing normal, natural, or right about an adult sharing a bed with children they are not related to in any way

whilst he wasn't proven guilty in a court of law, that does not mean he is innocent of the alleged crimes, and does not mean that he didn't abuse children. we simply don't have definitive proof, but there is mounting evidence that points towards his guilt

what i find it hard to understand is why on earth someone would want to protect another individual who may be guilty of crimes like these, especially when they don't know the individuals and have never met them. you are essentially supporting someone who may be guilty of an awful crime. the person in question was a criminal drug addict. why take the word of a junkie over that of a child?

Thats right, any other person talking about how he liked to sleeps in one bed with little kids, giving them 'jesus juice', dangling his baby from a balcony, bottle-feeding his kid like some drugged lunatic, making a home-video about his kids reacting with staged, studied answers would be villified.

MJ-fans are a creepy, pathetic bunch of people, lacking selfrespect.

Riverpoet31 said:

Yeah, this is the most ridiculous consipracy theory I can understand why the fans need denial, it's a coping mechanism for them but if any of them thinks Michael didn't have a drug problem then they need to move to Egypt to be close to that river!

Riverpoet31 said:

exactly. the man was a criminal. he broke the law by abusing drugs he was addicted to for half his life. he abused his position by circumventing the law by paying off jordy chandler and family instead of going to court. he further abused his position by allowing children to sleep in his bed on numerous occasions

the guy was a singer and dancer, not a saint, he doesn't deserve the crazy adulation and defensive comments

Sad thread.

Purplestar88 said:

in what way?

Just a touch of reality towards the ones living in Disney / fairytale lives.

Fiona01 said:

Of all the post I read on this thread, this makes the most sense to me. I always felt that when he said "share your bed" or "sleep in the bed w/ children", it depends on how you interpet it. Michael himself said it's not sexual, you're just going to sleep. That should have been the end of the story. But people have sick/gutter minds.

thatruth said:

IT's not up to interpretation. The only kids that should ever be sleeping in your bed are your own. It's simply not appropriate for any man to be having kids in their bed even in the face of complete innocence. even if MJ is completely innocent of sexually abusing these kids, he opened the door for the accusations to be made against him!

This was the one area that he found out he could not do as he pleased without repurcussions. Against better judgement, he found himself in the same situation again. Michael Jackson was his own worst enemy. At the very least his people, whoever they were, should have forced him to see that regardless of his intentions it wasn't going to be viewed positively and after having to pay off one family that he should never be in that position again FOR THAT EXACT REASON!

So we are left with the following question. Why was Michael Jackson compelled to still engage with children in this manner? Egomania, delusions or worse....

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

..and there it is.

thatruth said:

if it was any other 40 something male in the entire world would you think it was fine and normal for him to sleep with kids that weren't his own?

i can't think of any situation at any time ever when it would be acceptable or normal to do so. the only time i've heard of that situation was when kids were being abused. it seems like you are the one with the unrealistic viewpoint here

how many times do criminals say they didn't do anything wrong? just because he said he didn't do it doesn't mean he wasn't lying again. he lied about his face but no-one was convinced about that either. phil spector says he didn't shoot someone, but he's in jail right now. if you believe what anyone says, why don't you believe the people who said he abused kids, as there are more of them than there are of MJ saying he didn't do it

Just because MJ said it wasnt 'sexual' doesnt mean it was.

He did marry Lisa Marie Presley for whatever reason, and i can imagine they bumped together.

MJ wasnt some innocent, 9 yo kid without sexual desires or something, He was a grown up men with natural urges.

To say that sexuality doesnt count, even for a 40 yo man with a twisted sexual history, is nonsense.

In his own mind he might have been the protector of little kids sleeping in his bed, but judging the pornographic magazines they found in his bedroom, he wasnt that 'innocent' in the first place.

thatruth said:

I wouldn't want my son laying in the bed with a grown ass man. I don't give a damn it if was Michael Jackson. You can pimp your ride but not your kids!

His music was great but his actions was suspect!

Riverpoet31 said:

don't generalize plus there are mj fans out there that thought he was guilty.

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

good point.

in the documentary, 'Living With MJ,' mike specifically said he 'shared' his bed meaning 'gave' it to his guest. He specifically said that he himself slept on the floor. He NEVER slept in the bed with that criminal,Gavin n his brother. Of course the media IGNORED that fact. It's horrible how Mike was framed with the help of the media.

Hey RIVERPOST 31 you spend so much time blasting Michael Jackson who was never proven to be a paedophile, yet there's another musical icon who EVERYONE knows was a paedophile but NEVER gets trashed for it. That was Elvis, who brought a 14 year old Priscilla to America from Germany and moved her into his home. Started having "sex"(oral) with her but supposedly waited until she was of age to have intercourse (yeah riiiiight). What are your thought on this situation? How do you feel about Elvis, the child molester? Why don't you give him grief? In your rants, at times you seem like a children's advocate. What do you think about the media ignoring Elvis' trangressions? PLEASE RESPOND I really am trying to understand if you're reeeeally angry because you feel Mike's a pervert or if it's something else.

All i know is that as a young african american child growing up in the 60's we didn't see many black kids on tv.Growing up in the 80's we were not even on mtv he broke alot of barriers down for us.And in doing so he became the biggest entertainer in the world.Did he do what he was accused of?I wasn't there but,i know he was never convicted of it so people can go on and on speculating instead of just enjoying the man known as the king of pop.There is nothing wrong with questioning things but,many of you are dangerously close to having to prove your words be carefull.Over the past two months what have we seen.twitter and myspace crashing.Every news channel with mj news,15 people committed suicide over mj's death.ucla packed to the rim news reporters from around the world reporting.bloggers blogging,how many people watched the memorial it was record breaking.look at the people comming out now speaking out.what we need to remember is that many of these people were his true so called friends so he thought.Imagine a life where you can trust no one.imagine people only wanting your money.imagine being sued over and over.imagine not being able to walk out your house.none of us will ever know.dont get me wrong if he touched any kids he will be judged by his maker.let him rest people...

destiny, as an african american, aren't you suspicious that Mike, who was NOT proved of any wrongdoing is vilified, yet ELVIS' child molestation act is ignored completely. That tells me somthing. Do they care about the children or do they just want to villify MJ? Anyone who followed that case knows Mike is innocent. besides, a child molester does not strike once every 10 years.

mrsnet said:

Your so right and don't forget R.KELLY, he just got busted for having a 17 year old girlfriend staying at his house while he was on tour. I read that Prince met Mayte at a age under 18 as well, so I guess we can assume he just lusted for her until she became of age? Russell Simmons met Kimora Simmons at what 16 years of age? This type of shit goes on all the time. I guess people don't frown so much on it because it's just a older man younger woman. In Michael's case it was a grown man with little boys....

Reading material for those who have the time:

http://www.vanityfair.com...emain.html

But Priscilla was 14!! Not 16 or 17. She was still a little girl.

How low can you go, for godsake?

Its not about Elvis vs Michael Jackson. Should i feel sorry because 'white' Elvis Presley did get spared, and 'black' Michael Jackson did get pissed on? You are a a very pathetic person, trying to turn it into some racial issue.

funkteer said:

hmmmmm I would read court transcripts and testimoties of psychologists and information of psychology books before I read or believe some "journalist's" facts.

Riverpoet31 said:

read what she wrote riverpoet. She was pointing out a double standard that how elvis started dating prisicilla when she was 14 and he was 24 and this is a proven fact...no one talks about this yet Michael's case is rehashed over and over again when he was found not guilty. Why does Elvis get a pass?

Presley might have gone after a 14 yo girl, Michael Jackson was more fond of underaged boys not even reaching their puberty.

Its on the edge, i agree: a girl age 14, and a guy age 24.

But what about a 40 yo guy like Jackson saying its normal to sleep with 8 and 9 yo boys?

Riverpoet31 said:

Jordan Chandler and Gavin Arizo were 13 when the alleged abuse happened. That's not much younger than Prisicilla being 14. Are you condoning Elvis's actions with Priscilla?